Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges Sunshine Act violation after agenda not posted; board discusses process changes
Summary
A resident said the agenda was not posted 24 hours prior and labeled it the fourth possible Sunshine Act violation; the board discussed the timing problem, a mistaken date on the agenda, and improving posting practices to avoid future noncompliance.
A member of the public (identified in the transcript as Unidentified Speaker 8) told the planning board that the meeting agenda had not been posted 24 hours in advance and called it "the fourth violation of the Sunshine Act in this township since April." He asked that any perceived violation be noted in the minutes as required by the Sunshine Act.
Unidentified Speaker 1 (identified in the discussion as Gus) responded that he had submitted the agenda with the wrong date and that the county website operator ("Shane") did not post it in time because of a timing mismatch over the weekend. "The problem was that I sent the thing in and I had the wrong date on it," Gus said.
Board members discussed practical steps to avoid recurrence, including moving the internal process earlier in the week so the secretary and website operator have time to post, and the possibility of hosting the agenda on a township‑controlled website. The board noted the difference in roles between the planning board (which makes recommendations) and supervisors (who take votes), but agreed that posting is required and important to avoid legal exposure.
Unidentified Speaker 8 also raised concern that the township solicitor (Todd King) should be familiar with the Sunshine Act and advise appropriately; speakers agreed improved procedures and clearer responsibility for posting and agenda review would help reduce future complaints.
