Oral Argument in Kaplan v. Teaneck Board of Education will take place on Friday, April 5th at 2pm before Judge Catuogno
Link to Argument
What is the case about?:
Is there evidence the Board violated the OPMA?
[Link to answer: Answer]
Is technical non-compliance something important?
The thrust of defendants’ argument is that the Court should uphold the Commission’s recommendation on the basis of its substantial compliance with the Sunshine Law. They assert (1) that there was no attempt “to meet secretly or without some notice to the public,” as found by the Appellate Division, and (2) that any meeting at which formal votes were taken complied with the Act, thereby satisfying the requirements of the law. Although, on these facts, we impute to the Commission no wrongful motivation for choosing to conduct its business as it did, lack of wrongful intent cannot excuse noncompliance with the Act. Such a reading of the statute would invite abuse and would contravene the legislative intent in enacting the provision.
Rather than providing a new exception to the rule, we believe that defendants’ suggestion would swallow the rule. Accordingly we reject this argument completely and hold that strict adherence to the letter of the law is required in considering whether a violation of the Act has occurred.
Polillo v. Deane 74 N.J. 562 (1977)
What will happen if the Plaintiff wins?
-
Void actions that were done not in accordance with the OPMA [NJSA 10:4-15]
-
Issue an injunction [NJSA 10:4-16] that the Board must follow the rules of OPMA going forward (which can be enforced if they do not follow the rules)
What can the Board do if the actions are voided?
How does the Board Re-Do the Votes they took improperly?
-
Properly Notice a meeting
-
Send out an Agenda stating the action(s) they wish to take
-
Abide by the requirements of the Open Public Meetings Act and any other applicable laws (e.g. RICE notices to affected employees)
-
Mention the information or testimony/reports from the previous discussion(s) they intend to use to form the basis for a vote
-
Since there are new members of the Board who didn’t attend the closed sessions in December, they will likely need to re-do the closed session discussion for the new members
-
Have public input (from those who did not know about the previous meeting at a minimum, but hopefully anyone who wishes to speak)