![]() ![]() 663-95-0524.Ī telephone meeting must be conducted in accordance with the FOIA. August 21, 1995, Attorney General Opinion No. The Attorney General had since advised public agencies that the Hickel ruling does not authorize members of a body who are participating in meetings by telephone to do so anywhere except at publicly noticed teleconferencing facilities, unless attendance at a teleconferencing facility would cause undue hardship. Implicit in the holding is that all phones used to participate in a meeting are not "teleconferencing facilities" within the meaning of the act. We therefore hold that the Board's procedure, however imperfect, did not violate the Open Meetings Act. Nevertheless, the Board was only required to hold open meetings - it was not required to allow citizens to call in or to set up teleconferencing centers. The participation of the public would have been more meaningful had the individual callers been provided with reapportionment materials. In the Board's view, this approach expanded public access to the reapportionment process, and was consistent with the provisions of the Open Meetings Act. However, the Board allowed any citizen to call in and provide testimony by telephone, without necessarily traveling to an official teleconference site. In this case, the Board usually had only one meeting site. The court observed that while teleconferencing is not mandatory, the act requires certain procedures if it is used, including making materials available at teleconference locations, taking votes by roll call, and providing reasonable public notice as to the time, date and location of the teleconference location to be used. may be by teleconferencing." AS 44.62.310(a). The Supreme Court noted that the OMA allows, but does not require, the use of teleconferencing "for the convenience of the parties, the public, and the governmental units conducting the meetings," AS 44.62.312(a)(6), and that "attendance and participation at meetings. ![]() Southeast Conference, 868 P.2d 919, 928-929 (Alaska 1994), the Supreme Court reversed a superior court finding that the Reapportionment Board had committed a violation of the OMA by failing to give notice of teleconference sites, failing to make materials available for teleconferences, and failing to take roll call votes during teleconferences, when it allowed public participation by phone without giving public notice of every location from which citizens might call in. Agency materials that are to be considered at the meeting shall be made available at teleconference locations "if practicable," and votes at a meeting held by teleconference must be taken by roll call. If the meeting is to be by teleconference, the location of any teleconferencing facilities that will be used must be included in the public notice given for the meeting. A superior court judge in one such case voided the resulting action on the grounds that the failure to have all members able to simultaneously participate was improper, and rendered the resulting decision defective. Compare with a situation where one member of a body makes a sequential series of phone calls to other individuals in the body to obtain their concurrence in an action to be taken. Implicit in this is the requirement that any such conference call meeting be conducted in a fashion that all participating members of the body can simultaneously listen to the debate or discussion of all others, and be heard by all others. Members of a governmental body may meet by teleconference. ![]() Id. Otherwise the use of electronic communications to circumvent the Act are prohibited. Electronic meetings permitted by specific statute must still meet the requirements of public access and notice under Ala. Code § 34-19-12(e) (permitting the State Board of Midwifery to conduct business electronically) Ala. In addition, specific bodies may conduct open meetings electronically if expressly permitted by statute. ![]() Bodies in counties or municipalities may meet electronically as long as a quorum is physically present, those participating electronically are unable to be physically present due to illness, and the body has adopted a electronic meeting policy detailing procedures. Utilization of electronic communication is allowed for bodies made up of members from two or more counties as long as the communication is done in a manner that complies with the Act, the public is allowed to be present at a physical location and hear all persons participating remotely unless authorized elsewhere, and three members (or a majority of quorum) are physically present. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |