[StBernard] Jacob Drive and Open Meeting Laws

[Westley Annis]

{{Was anyone able to corner a councilperson to ask why they had to go into 
Executive Session to discuss this before coming back to the public meeting? 

(sigh) Is it the same old, same old, starting up already? Hidden behind 
closed doors? 

2401 }}

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
St Bernard Parish Council Meeting 
Tuesday March 18, 2008 

Amended Agenda 

29. Motion to go into Executive Session to discuss Fire Department 
matters. 

In my opinion, the Council Meeting Agenda was lacking sufficient notice of the executive session {42:7.A.(1)(b) (iii) } and the meeting itself didnot qualify as an executive session { 42:6.1.A(2) }because there is no further litigation for the crude oil spill.  The parish has already agreed to the federal court settlement, accepted the damages portion, and is now participating in discussions regarding the voluntary buyout.  Had the residents of St Bernard Parish known these discussions would take place at that council meeting, perhaps more would have attended to make public comments regarding the sale of the Jacob Drive Firestation.  Even if the amended agenda properly noted the matters to be discussed in the executive session, the fact that it was also done as an amended agenda item only gave residents notice as they attended the council meeting and not prior. 

At the Planning Commission Public Hearing March 25th the Murphy representative stated that Murphy was meeting with the council to answer questions after the public hearing.  Why wasnt this meeting public noticed and open to the residents?

As it is now, the recent T/P article about Murphy's lab on Jacob Drive reports that the sale of the Jacob Drive Firestation includes donated land for a replacement firestation.  Again, residents have little or no information nor means for input into these decisions.  The donated land is presumably the rumored Lena Drive site which is also in the oil spill and in the "buffer zone" and is an inferior size and location.  This sweet political deal is to accommodate the refinery expansion and even meeting behind closed doors wont change the lack of public trust in our parish government.  With decisions this important to our safety health and welfare there needs to be more open discussions and the residents who will be living with the consequences of this refinery's expansion should be represented and their voices echoed in the council votes.  They are clearly saying NO to any use of the buyout properties except for a nonused buffer zone.
 
based on  §4.1. Public policy for open meetings; liberal construction

A. It is essential to the maintenance of a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner and that the citizens be advised of and aware of the performance of public officials and the deliberations and decisions that go into the making of public policy. Toward this end, the provisions of R.S. 42:4.1 through 10 shall be construed liberally.

§6. Executive Sessions
§6.1. Exceptions to open meetings
A. A public body may hold an executive session pursuant to R.S. 42:6 for one or more of the following reasons:
2) Strategy sessions or negotiations with respect to collective bargaining, prospective litigation after formal written demand, or litigation when an open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the bargaining or litigating position of the public body.



§7. Notice of meetings
iii) Following the above information there shall also be attached to the written public notice of the meeting, whether or not such matters will be discussed in an executive session held pursuant to R.S. 42:6.1(A)(2):
(aa) A statement identifying the court, case number, and the parties relative to any pending litigation to be considered at the meeting.
(bb) A statement identifying the parties involved and reasonably identifying the subject matter of any prospective litigation for which formal written demand has been made that is to be considered at the meeting.

http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/la/adlaw/la-openmeetings.htm <http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/la/adlaw/la-openmeetings.htm> 

SJK