From the great
www.marylandreporter.com whose reporters are busy covering the session in Annapolis. Thanks to reporter
Ilana Kowarski for this story. Please email our
Montgomery County delegation telling them to
support this bill. To email the House, go
here. And for the Senate,
here. And, thanks to co-sponsor Montgomery County rep
Kumar Barve for signing on.
And here is the excerpt from the story:
Del. Dan Morhaim, D-Baltimore County, introduced a bill Thursday that grants additional enforcement powers to the Open Meetings Compliance Board, allowing it to levy fines and provide court testimony against government bodies that illegally deny people access to public events.
This bipartisan legislation, HB331, has 18 co-sponsors, including House Majority Leader Kumar Barve and 10 other Democrats and Minority Leader Tony O’Donnell and six other Republicans.
Barve said that Morhaim’s bill was a no-brainer. “Why wouldn’t you support it?” he said, adding that government transparency was an “important issue” to address in this legislative session.
Penalties called necessary
Morhaim has said that
financial penalties were necessary to increase compliance with the board’s rulings, which “tend to be ignored” by government officials since the board does not have the power to punish anyone.
When the board discovers the closure of a public meeting, the only thing it can do is to censure those responsible and write letters asking them to reform. If that does not work, then the burden of enforcement rests on citizens excluded from public meetings, who must sue if they wish to challenge the legitimacy of policies created behind closed doors.
Read more:
http://marylandreporter.com/2013/01/24/penalties-for-closed-meetings-have-bipartisan-support/#ixzz2JEYikdhr
Under Creative Commons License:
Attribution
The Maryland Reporter article cited contains incorrect information that needs to be retracted about HB 331. Read the bill. HB 331 would NOT give the State Open Meetings Law Compliance Board the power to "levy fines." Basically, HB 331 merely would require that a public body take specified actions if the Compliance Board determines that a violation of the Open Meetings Act has occurred; repeal a prohibition on the introduction of opinions issued by the Board as evidence in specified proceedings; and increase the penalties for violations of the Act.
ReplyDeleteSo a comlainant would still have to go to court to get an increased penalty levied against alleged OMA scofflaws. (Good luck trying to get the court to find an OMA violation a "willful" one under the Act. Writing or emailing our lawmakers to amend HB 331 to mandate the completion of the OMA Online Training Course might help concerning willful violations.)
Thanks for the correction. I guess it was too much to ask to expect our elected officials to obey the law. A good start, though and kudos to the members of the Compliance Board for pushing this. I still think it is very important to write to our delegation to make sure this bill passes into law.
ReplyDeleteLet's not kid ourselves. Even if fines were levied, who do you think would pay them? The violators, or the public they supposedly serve?
ReplyDeleteMaybe voters would start electing people that respected the law! Oh, sorry. We know that's not going to happen in Maryland. Never mind.
DeleteThe more appropriate question is why was HB331 modified to exclude the provision giving power to the Compliance Board to levy a fine? Not a peep on this matter in the newspaper.
DeleteFacts weren't checked. Who got to Morhaim? Someone dropped the ball.
ReplyDeleteDon't like HB 331? Contact the sponsor/cosponsors ASAP. When HB 331 gets assigned to a hearing committee, write in opposition to its members.
@Anonymous, you sound like you know quite a bit about the process. Could you walk us through it, thanks.
ReplyDeleteHB 331 will be before the Health & Government Operations (HGO) committee on Thursday, February 7, 2013 at 1PM. It will then probably be reassigned to the Government Operations (GO) subcommittee. Please send your letters in support, in support with amendment(s), in opposition, or in comment to the HGO committee. (I support HB 331 as it's currently written. I'm one of more than one anonymous poster here. )
ReplyDeleteGuidelines are pasted below from the General Assembly web site:
HEALTH AND GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Delegate Peter A. Hammen, Chair
Delegate Shane E. Pendergrass, Vice Chair
Room 240, House Office Building, Annapolis, MD 21401-1991
(410-841-3770 | 301-858-3770 )
Anyone wishing to testify for committee briefings or bill hearings must sign the witness sheet no later than 15 minutes prior to the hearing. Oral testimony will be limited to 3 minutes per person. People wishing to testify are encouraged to testify in panels. ***If you would like to submit written testimony for a briefing or bill hearing, please submit 35 copies to the committee staff no later than one hour prior to the hearing. The briefing topic or bill number must be clearly indicated on the written testimony. Any late testimony will be distributed at a later date.*** The order that the bills are listed on the hearing schedule is not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. The Chairman will announce the bill order at the beginning of the hearing. Bills coming from Rules or Cross-filed bills from the Senate will be Sponsor-Only testimony.