At least 8 likely violations of Kansas law stemming from just one county commission meeting.... priceless! :o
The Elk County Board of Commissioners seems to have a limited knowledge of the Kansas Open Meetings Act (KOMA)... or do they know and just don't think the law applies to them.
Your county commission, on the afternoon of January 9, 2012, appears to have (once again) violated the KOMA regarding Executive Sessions as follows:
1. Recessed into an executive session without a proper motion, second & affirmative vote in public session as required by KSA 75-4319(a)
2. Did not re-convene in public meeting after the executive session as provided for in KSA 75-4319(a)(3)
3. Continued into a second executive session without a proper motion, second & affirmative vote in public session as required by KSA 75-4319(a)
4. Did not re-convene in public meeting after the executive session as provided for in KSA 75-4319(a)(3)
5. Continued into a third executive session entered into without a proper motion, second & affirmative vote in public session as required by KSA 75-4319(a)
I expect there will be three more violations when the minutes of the meeting fail to properly record the non-existent executive session motions & statements as required by KSA 75-4319(a)(3) as they have for many, many previous sessions.
It has been said that ignorance of the law is no excuse. So, Chairman Hendricks, Commissioners Liebau & Ritz... what's your excuse? "We've always done it that way" is not the answer.
For more info: http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_75/Article_43/75-4319.html (http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_75/Article_43/75-4319.html)
Since you have this knowledge, Patriot, you should call the Kansas Attorney General's Office and file a complaint.
Quote from: Janet Harrington on January 10, 2012, 07:08:57 PM
Since you have this knowledge, Patriot, you should call the Kansas Attorney General's Office and file a complaint.
Such complaints are, according to AG policy, routinely referred to the local county attorney. Other remedies include lawsuit by citizens seeking an injunction or mandamus. Given current issues between the commission and the county attorney, I suspect avenue 1 would be fruitless and I'm not inclined to subject the county to the cost of a lawsuit. Public attention would be a better solution, IMO.
Isn't awareness better than a lawsuit that could cost taxpayers more taxes. Good job.
I really don't know the laws and such. But as to how a meeting is ran, do you actually know how to run a meeting a real meeting? I am not stating this to start anything, just to praise our youth in running meetings. I am a volunteer 4-H leader and have helped some of the younger groups of kids in our club with learning proper parlimentary procedure. Man, if you don't use it regularly it is hard to remember which motions require a second and such. But my point is this, not all meetings are ran so proper all the time. Maybe this was a meeting where they forgot to reconvine. I know our kids will forget things, and even us adults helping lead the meetings do, too. Now, has this happened before, or several times? Just wondering!
Quote from: Lookatmeknow!! on January 11, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
I really don't know the laws and such. But as to how a meeting is ran, do you actually know how to run a meeting a real meeting?
Yes, I do. As for unreal meetings... no, I'm not familiar with the format for unreal meetings.
Quote from: Lookatmeknow!! on January 11, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
I am not stating this to start anything, just to praise our youth in running meetings. I am a volunteer 4-H leader and have helped some of the younger groups of kids in our club with learning proper parlimentary procedure. Man, if you don't use it regularly it is hard to remember which motions require a second and such. But my point is this, not all meetings are ran so proper all the time. Maybe this was a meeting where they forgot to reconvine. I know our kids will forget things, and even us adults helping lead the meetings do, too. Now, has this happened before, or several times? Just wondering!
We aren't discussing a group of kids learning parliamentary procedure. We aren't even discussing parliamentary procedure. We're talking about a group of elected government officials running a meeting contrary to state laws governing public access to government information and action. Big difference. It's not about 'Gee, I forgot', it's about 'There are laws involved, follow em.'
Quote from: Lookatmeknow!! on January 11, 2012, 08:47:28 PM
Now, has this happened before, or several times? Just wondering!
I've attended every county commission meeting (except one) since April 2011, and there have been numerous executive sessions conducted by the county commission. I've seen only
ONE that was entered into lawfully and one attempt by Mr Liebau to go into executive session that was stopped by Mr Ritz because the subject to be discussed would have been in clear violation of the KOMA. I'm also aware of at least three where the subjects discussed were required to be in public session and were therefore additional violations of the Kansas Open Meetings Act. I believe one of those improper discussions resulted in the board making a binding decision, which would be yet another violation of the Act. Finally, the county clerk, to my best recollection did not once properly record the executive session recesses in the minutes as required by Kansas law.
Since this is about statutory requirements governing elected bodies and not parliamentary procedure, the 4H comparison is really irrelevant.
Now, my question to you would be: With all that background, is this about simple forgetfulness, or willful neglect of the law?
Of course, there still remains the recent wage agreement waiving overtime for certain employees entered into by the commission with those employees that violates the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
At what point do simple 'mistakes' become the willful acts of scofflaws?
Does the commission have an official parliamentarian who watches over the proceedings as many organizations do?
It happens to be that Al is the parliamentarian for our fire company. It is his responsibility to know the details and advise if something is about to be missed or answer questions. It sounds like "usual and customary" won't work for them even though it is commonly used in less formal situations.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on January 12, 2012, 09:31:35 AM
Does the commission have an official parliamentarian who watches over the proceedings as many organizations do?
Careful, your east coast elitist perceptions of the world of are showing. What is it about past discussions regarding our 2882 population, highest mill levies and poorest county in Kansas status that you missed? What was it about this matter reaching beyond simple parliamentary procedure that escaped your one good eye?
::)
And being flip with me helps how? One would think your commission would have a lawyer to keep track of such things so there wouldn't be any legal issues as to how the meetings are run....as we "big city" folks do here n the real world. ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Diane Amberg on January 12, 2012, 10:49:26 PM
And being flip with me helps how? One would think your commission would have a lawyer to keep track of such things so there wouldn't be any legal issues as to how the meetings are run....as we "big city" folks do here n the real world. ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D
I want to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy belated birthday Diane, sorry I missed it.
We just don't have the money base that you big city folks in the real world have. We also don't live the same life style as big city folks. And I believe it is a lot cheaper for a citizen of the county to point out a problem to our elected officials so they can then correct the problem. And it makes a lot more sense financially to do that then to take legal action as someone suggested. After all we are all neighbors in the same boat --- er --- county. Even though some think they are on a yacht.
You know it may just be me but it seems during these poor economic times that people just want to spend, spend and ask government's (county government's as well) for handouts while others want to sue.
It's like the money from the wind farm that we may the county taxpayers may recieve. There are those out their hoping to get their hands on that money. That money could be put to good use
for all the citizens of Elk County instead of individuals that have formed groups. For instance pay down the county debt and reduce property taxes for everyone.
Why would the county commisssion have the desire to go by the rules?
Delaware sent Joe Biden to Washington. And Washington DC is no better than the local county commission.
Very useful Red...we all learned a lot from that smarty pants comment. Everybody is a crook but you?
I'm not sure how being knowledgeable about how things work here makes me elitist, but that's one person's snotty opinion. Boo-hoo and play victim if you must.
Ross thank you for the birthday wishes. I was trying to back into this, but apparently head on is better. No, a law suit shouldn't be necessary. Someone find out the duties of your county lawyer, who I assume is paid and attends all the meetings. Those duties should include being sure the meetings are run legally, according to your KOMA and Roberts Rules, assuming they use them. Lean on him to do his Job!
Yes, our county council here is bigger than your commission because of the population... The President of County Council, 12 council members, each with a staff person, a Clerk of Council and the county lawyer. It shouldn't be any different legally than what you have, except in size.The costs should be proportionally less too. As for money- we don't have any more either! :'( Services are being downsized, projects postponed and belts tightened.
Perhaps a letter of concern to the county lawyer would be in order and might be enough to get them to shape up and stop being sloppy with the meeting proceedings. That's all I'll say on the matter.....you'll do what you can or you won't.
Austerity has arrived hasn't it?
Diane (belated Happy Birthday!!!):
It would be hard pressed to find ANY County Attorney who attends the Commisioner's meetings, especially in SE Kansas. Perhaps, there are a few.
In my Opinion, it's a matter of:
We know what is 'the right thing to do', and we could do it, but for time's sake, let's just speed this up.
I really doubt some County Clerks even know what the ruling for closed meetings are that the motions that precluded it!
ready
Thanks for the birthday greeting. :) I didn't mean any county lawyer, I meant THE lawyer who represents the county. Surely there is one. If not, then never mind. But small shouldn't be an excuse for not following the rules. Every one of them has a reason. What's the big hurry?
QuoteI meant THE lawyer who represents the county
...that would be the County Attorney that I mentioned.
Our meetings last 3-4 hours. It gets to be a long day and somethings get left out, I', sure.
ready
So, just how does making the public aware that there have been violations committed by our commissioners solve the problem? Don't you think that the commissioners will keep doing the same things wrong over and over and over? I don't know if the county attorney makes any of the meetings or not. I thought I read somewhere that the county was seeking legal advice outside of the county. If it is apparent to people who are in the county commissioners meetings that violations are being committed then why don't those same folks take the next step and report these violations to the Attorney General's office who handles these matters? Writing about these things on this forum is fine. This reaches a few citizens and voters. This reaches the county commissioners even if certain ones say they don't have time to read this forum. That's just bull hockey. Letting everyone know about these violations is okay, but it doesn't take care of the problem. Do something, those of you who are witnesses to the violations.
I know one retired county attorney who went to every county commission meeting while he was in office. Too bad he is going the same way the rest of us and reached the age of retirement. I'll bet a lot of Elk County citizens wish he would come out of retirement.
I read in the commissioners minutes in the paper that the commissioners needed to talk about the tax sale that they had on Dec. 28th or something like that and that they had to wait for the county attorney to get out of court. Then Mr. Brace brought up some kind of an issue about a piece of property and the county attorney said she would address that issue the day of the sale. Don't know what that was all about. Never heard if the sale happened or not, so I don't know if Elk County had a successful tax sale.
Whats wrong with replacing the tax money that was spent getting the wind farm here,with that "extra money"?
Read the minutes of the Elk County Commission meetings in this weeks Fallen Star and then read KSA 75-4319(a)(3) & 75-4319(c) below. Any discrepancies? If they can't get something this simple right (especially when it's a legal requirement), how in the hell can they 'manage' the county fairly, effectively & lawfully? Or are they? Subterfuge... now there's an interesting concept.
K.S.A 75-4319: Closed or executive meetings; conditions; authorized subjects for discussion; binding action prohibited; certain documents identified in meetings not subject to disclosure. (a) Upon formal motion made, seconded and carried, all bodies and agencies subject to the open meetings act may recess, but not adjourn, open meetings for closed or executive meetings. Any motion to recess for a closed or executive meeting shall include a statement of (1) the justification for closing the meeting, (2) the subjects to be discussed during the closed or executive meeting and (3) the time and place at which the open meeting shall resume. Such motion, including the required statement, shall be recorded in the minutes of the meeting and shall be maintained as a part of the permanent records of the body or agency. Discussion during the closed or executive meeting shall be limited to those subjects stated in the motion.
K.S.A 75-4319(c) No binding action shall be taken during closed or executive recesses, and such recesses shall not be used as a subterfuge to defeat the purposes of this act.
(Emphasis added)