Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics And Foa topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City solicitor gives new Saco councilors extended training on FOA, conflicts and ethics
Summary
City Solicitor Leah Racine led an in-depth Freedom of Access Act (FOA) and ethics training at the Dec. 1 Saco City Council meeting, covering public-records responsibilities, executive-session limits, conflicts of interest and conduct guidelines; she urged officials to favor city email over personal texts and said penalties are modest but reputational and legal costs can be substantial.
City Solicitor Leah Racine delivered a focused training on the Freedom of Access Act (FOA), conflicts of interest and codes of ethics at the Saco City Council meeting on Dec. 1, addressing new and returning council members and the school board.
Racine summarized FOA’s twin pillars — public records and public proceedings — and emphasized that municipal communications with counsel are not automatically privileged unless active litigation is ongoing or imminent. She said the statute is generally construed liberally in favor of disclosure and that common exceptions include executive sessions, juvenile and certain employee records. “When in doubt, most likely… the court will be on the side of disclosure,” Racine told the assembly.
She warned that casual communications can become public records and that gatherings of three or more members discussing public business must be noticed as public proceedings. Racine advised officials to prefer city email over personal text messages because email records are easier to archive; "Use your city email addresses for communications. Don't text," she said.
Racine walked through practical issues for records requests and retention, including examples of scope and fees: copies are charged 10¢ a page and the city may charge $25 per hour for staff time after the first two free hours. She also reviewed executive session rules and reiterated that boards cannot take final action in executive session — decisions must be made in public.
On conflicts of interest and bias, Racine explained the statutory threshold for a financial conflict (a stated pecuniary interest) but urged broader caution: "If you have any financial interest in the matter before you, step off," she said, encouraging disclosure and recusal when appropriate. She also noted statutory incompatibility rules that, for example, bar school board members (or their spouses) from being district employees.
Racine described the city’s ethics policy as aspirational and practical, offering examples such as avoiding the use of official position for personal political advantage and limiting acceptance of gifts that create the appearance of influence. She counseled officials to disclose perceived conflicts early so the board and the public can assess them.
Councilors asked questions throughout the session, including whether quasi‑public entities (the so‑called “60/40” schools) fall under FOA; Racine said she would follow up with a concrete answer. The training concluded with Racine reminding members that FOA violations are commonly unintentional but still carry financial penalties ($500–$1,000 in some cases) and potentially costly legal fees and reputational harm.
Racine left materials and links with attendees and invited follow‑up questions; she said she would provide a written response on the FOA status of 60/40 schools at a later date.
