Jackson County Commission and Open Government

Jackson County Commission Chairman Mr. Jame Tidmore at table chair position in the Jackson County Commission Board Room.

Criteria for Judging Governance and Open Government cartoon from: http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/human-rights-facts-53-good-governance/
>

Once again the issue of Open Government concerning the Jackson County Commission rises to the surface. The Commission has been consistent in its lapses and failures to adhere to the laws concerning Open Government. From previous secret meetings of the Jackson County Commission to the current state of affairs, which concerns its failures to post meetings minutes in a timely fashion, its failures to post notices of its Special and Holiday Meetings and its disregard for Records Disclosure laws of Alabama.

>>

On the surface it appears all is well, it is not. The administrative functioning of the Commission in relationship to requirements of the Open Meetings Laws and Records Disclosure Laws are seriously deficient. The Commission's official representatives in their application of Records Disclosure actively and openly discriminates on the basis of political status and possibly sex. The Commission's representatives have refused disclosure of public records, then to complicate matters they have intentional misinformed (some would say lie) those who have requested public writings from the Jackson County Commission, following state and local Commission policy. This situation was discussed previously within, http://arklite.blogspot.com/2008/09/jackson-county-commission-and-open.html .

>>>

The latest issue of failing to post notices on the Courthouse bulletin board of changes in the routine meetings reflects disregard for the requirements of the Open Meetings Laws. Along with those failures, which are numerous, their disregard for administrative requirements of a proper functioning County Commission is further reflected in the fact the County Commission meetings minutes are not posted in a timely fashion. I inspected the Commission Meetings minutes book last week, the last posting was July 9, 2008, over 3 months behind. I believe this failure is intentional, pointed at individuals who are attempting to gain access and view the Commission minutes. It is a citizens right to be able to view public records and meetings minutes. The conduct of the Jackson County Commission in relationship to this matter is erroneous and wantonly violates our state's laws.

>>>>

In our Republic it is necessary to have Open Meetings Laws and Public Records Disclosure Laws. These Laws are part of a system that insures openness of government. Both of these issues have been problems for several governmental entities in Alabama, to include Federal, such as the failure of the TVA to disclose its true construction costs of a Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant. It is incumbent on citizens and the press to be ever so diligent in their oversight of our governmental agencies. Unfortunately many seem to be apathetic and even the press is failing in their responsibilities concerning these issues. Only 3 years ago this issue was on the pages of most every newspaper in the state. Not any more, as if the situation has improved to such an extent it has went away. It has not only not gone away it is increasingly difficult to prosecute such cases and it is extremely expensive to prosecute under the new open meetings laws. Local prosecutors thru the District Attorney may handle such cases but apparently open government issues are not a high priority. The new Open Meetings Law provides improved definitions but was moved from the criminal code to a civil matter. One must have money and lots of it if one is to hire an attorney to prosecute Open Meetings violations. The alternative is to gain the support of the local DA's Office or the States Attorney General, which at this point has not been productive. This leaves the other option of filing a legal action pro se, representing ones self, then wade through the bureaucracy of 21st Century Civil Law. This is not advised, however there may be little choice if one is to attempt enforcement of our Open Meetings laws.

>>>>>

In the matter of Garry L. Morgan, for the Citizens of Jackson County vs. The Jackson County Commission, commissioners named individually as the law requires. The Jackson County Commission had a reaction to the alleged illegal meeting held on October the 14th, 2008, an after holiday meeting in which the notice was not posted on the bulletin board of the Jackson County Commission as required by law. In the Commission Meeting held on October the 27th the Commission reaffirmed the minutes and votes taken at the Oct 14 meeting by passing a resolution to reaffirm the meeting. Unfortunately this is a questionable act, the act of a blanket reaffirming of the minutes of an allegedly illegal meeting in another meeting is a legal act? The Commission seems to admit there was a problem with the previous meeting. The Jackson County Commission has been given 3 opportunities to correct the problem of this alleged illegal meeting. #1) Each Commissioner and the Commission's Attorney were given notice prior to the meeting, along with the specific law concerning meeting notice requirements, concerning the meeting notice was not posted properly, it was suggested that the meeting be postponed and rescheduled in 5 days in order that the meeting notice be posted properly and the meeting held in accordance with the laws of our state. Although this matter was brought up in the meeting the County Commission's Attorney stated that he felt the meeting notice was given but did not know if the meeting notice was posted on the bulletin board. (The Code of Alabama, Section 11-3-8, http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeofAlabama/1975/coatoc.htm , establishes the requirements for County Commissions following the Open Meetings Laws. When a Commission fails to meet those requirements the 2005 Open Meetings Law specifies remedial action, http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeofAlabama/1975/coatoc.htm , in Section 36-25A-3 and 36-25A-9. ) #2) Within the law suit, CV2008-242, filed on Oct 15, 2008, there was a segment which stated if the County Commission would hold a Special Call meeting, with correct notice to correct their error, I would consider the problem resolved. They failed to accomplish this requested task. #3) On October the 24th, 2008 I hand delivered a letter to Mr. Tidmore and Mr. Porter's offices stating I would consider the matter resolved if they would "...resolve in the open meeting their support of the Open Meetings Law requirements." I also requested they appoint someone to insure the proper notice is posted as required by law. They failed to accomplish my request to resolve this issue. I stated that I would dismiss my suit if the Commission would affirm its support of the Open Meetings Law. They did not affirm their support of the law, the suit will continue, it will be expanded and amended.

>>>>>>

Update: On Monday, Nov. 3rd, 2008 I filed a motion to dismiss my case against the Jackson County Commission. The commission has met the requirements of relief which were simple. They demonstrated their support of the open meetings laws by posting the required notice of the meetings. The commission also affirmed the meeting minutes of the illegal meeting in a subsequent meeting. My only hope is that the new Jackson County Commission will follow the the law instead of thumbing its nose at legal requirements of the Open Meetings Law. Costs, $450.00, there were no costs to the citizens of Jackson County for this enforcement action of the Open Meetings Law. If the suit had continued the costs would have exceeded $10,000.00, the citizens would have been forced to pay for the errant commissioners legal fees if the Commission so voted. I bore the full expense of this case up to the point of dismissal. Unfortunately the Open Meetings laws of this state seem to have been changed not to protect the citizenry and its requirements for open meetings but to protect the various legislative bodies of this state, to enrich private attorneys and give power to the media in decisions to prosecute open government cases. The Open Meetings Law was changed in 2005 from a criminal code violation to a civil tort. Your state government working to maintain the status quo toward non-accountable legislative actions. The Open Meetings Law should have followed the course of Florida in their legislative actions in support of Open Meetings. It is a Felony in Florida to violate Florida's Open Meetings Law.