As the TV commercial says, "I'm not really a lawyer, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night!"
I wish I had pursued an education in studying law. I find it fascinating. As a Waterkeeper I absolutely believe in enforcing the law. A wise friend once said, "If there's a law that is not enforced, then there is no law."
I served on Worcester County's Ethics Board in the 90's. This Board was advised by a former county attorney and I learned a lot from him. I didn't always agree with him but I respected his knowledge of the law, of the county laws, and admired his sense of what was right and what was wrong.
In my previous life (before Waterkeepers) and in this life, I've worked with and have been advised by lawyers regarding all sorts of issues - corporate law, environmental law, non-profit law, tax law, civil laws, ethical laws. All boards I've ever served on included attorneys certified in many different areas of law, always there to give us sage advice.
As a result I feel I have a fairly solid sense of understanding when something is right and when something is just plain wrong.
And so in May 2009 when the County Commissioners held their now infamous closed door meeting and four Commissioners voted behind closed doors to dismantle a nationally admired Planning Department and emasculate one of the most educated and talented planners this county had ever had the privilege to employ, and humiliate one of the most knowledgeable zoning administrators in county history, just because one south county commissioner desired to help his buddies get their permits faster, easier and without as much scrutiny, I clearly knew something was WRONG. So did three other Commissioners. So did the public who were in attendance at that May meeting.
Yet four Commissioners and one County attorney had no qualms putting lipstick on this pig and contemptuously tried to dupe the citizens into believing this was being done for the good of the citizens and the county, as a cost cutting effort and nothing more.
Assateague Coastal Trust questioned the County Attorney, who arrogantly replied we didn't know what we were talking about. ACT could not stand by without some attempt to substantiate our outrage. Under guidance of our capable attorneys, ACT drafted an appeal to the Maryland Open Meetings Act Compliance Board to right this wrong.
I was scoffed at by the County's attorney as being an 'arm chair lawyer'. He advised the Commissioners not to worry. He wrote a lengthy rebuttal to the Compliance Board and defended his advice to the Commissioners.
On October 27, 2009 the Maryland Open Meetings Act Compliance Board, advised by the State Attorney General's Office, agreed what had happened was wrong. And not just a little bit wrong, on October 27, 2009 the Compliance Board issued a finding that the County violated the Open Meetings Act on every single count.
I found it most satisfying that the AG's office used the County Attorney's legal argument, in which he states the County's actions were an 'Administrative' prerogative versus a 'Legislative' responsibility, to substantiate their opinion that indeed the action of consolidating the government departments was 'legislative' and therefore in violation of the Act.
The Compliance Board, in their ruling, stated: "The County Commissioners’ focused on the executive nature of the consolidation and that no county services were changed. The complaint, however, focused on the potential impact of the consolidation on land use decisions and environmental consequences that flow from such decisions, and argued that the decision was a policy matter subject to the Act. We accept as a truism that a consolidation or reorganization of departments at any level of government may well impact the manner that decisions are made and what priorities might be established.....Based on the information offered by the Council, we find that the Council’s action failed to qualify as an administrative function."
What I find less satisfying is that our County Attorney continues to publicly use his excuse about "protecting the privacy of our 'soon to be fired' employees," when within hours desks were being packed up and these folks were out on the street, and everyone knew about it.
Indeed, the Open Meetings Act Compliance Board stated the following: " In response to our request, the County Commissioners provided us with a copy of its minutes for the closed session. In fact, part of the closed session qualified as a personnel matter in that it concerned the ability of a particular employee to retire. However, other matters were discussed, such as a suggested severance package, when the decision affecting the employees should be implemented, available alternatives such as furloughs, and the merits of reorganization in general. To the extent discussion extended beyond the status of a single identifiable employee, we find that the Commissioners exceeded the permissible bounds of the personnel exception, thus, violating the Act."
While none of this will bring back an independent Planning Department to our County Government until hopefully after the next election, for a few hours this weekend I plan to sink down into my overstuffed armchair and soak up some of the warm sunshine.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment