The civil penalties could be up to $1,000 for the first offense and up to $10,000 for a third offense. Even if the board chooses not to impose the fines, the members of any public body violating the act would have to personally sign an acknowledgement that the Open Meetings board had ruled against them. The findings of the three-member board could also be admitted as evidence in a lawsuit.
“Currently their opinions are only advisory and tend to be ignored,” Morhaim said. He pointed out there is a new, online course on the workings of Open Meetings Act “so excuses of not knowing the act are less convincing.”
More
1 comment:
Sooooo, the "fine" would be paid from the monies collected from us taxpayers, and go to... Who? Redistributed back to us? How much yearly salary would we have to pay the Department of Refunding Tax Monies Through Fines From Violations Of The Open Meetings Act? Well, there would have to be a couple of lawyers and their secretaries there, and of course, the Accounting Firm to keep track of these $1,000 to $10,000 fines, and then all that postage to individual taxpayers (Boosting the Post Office economy) not to mention the printing and envelope costs for all State residents.
I have probably been much less imaginative that the actual politicians who would finally organize such a program, but I hope everyone here gets my drift that enforcing the existing law is simply to negate any decisions made during an illegal meeting, thus forcing sunshine on the lawmaking and having them do it all over again in public?
This Fool's idea would save us nothing, and create a useless Government Agency that would cost us MILLIONS!
Post a Comment