John Baker purchased Gaffney’s Restaurant on Caroline Street back in 1982. It was reported in the Albany Business Review that he has sold the restaurant to Ryan Venezia and his partner Gary Elfont for $3.4 million. Venezia is a real estate investor from Westchester. He already owns Mrs. London’s Bakery, Max London’s, and the Stadium Café.
I received these renderings from Sonny Bonacio of the proposed condominiums for the Moore Hall site.
Saratoga Springs is the best small city to live in New York, according to a study from financial advice site WalletHub.
The study, which examined cities with populations between 25,000 to 100,000, ranked Saratoga No. 11 out of 1,268 cities nationally. The ranking was calculated by looking at the affordability, economic health, education and health, safety and quality of life in each city.
Since its inception, Mark Baker has been the President and CEO of the Saratoga Springs City Center. After thirty-three years he has announced that he will be retiring at the end of December. He will be staying on in his current position until the Center hires his replacement. He will also continue in some capacity to assist in the building of the proposed parking facility.
This city has been tremendously fortunate to have had Mark’s services. It has been my pleasure to know Mark. He is a quiet spoken and thoughtful man. During the recent controversy over the parking project I have spoken and corresponded with him on many occasions. His grasp of the smallest detail of the project is consistent with the excellent management of the Center. My interactions with the staff simply reaffirm the positive atmosphere that his leadership has brought.
I know I speak for many when I wish Mark the best for his retirement.
The popular analysis by the usual suspects is to blame the triumph of Donald Trump on anti-immigrant feelings, racism, authoritarianism, provincialism, misogyny, et al. There is also the more strategic approach which involves blaming wikileaks and/or FBI Director Comey for the eleventh hour reintroduction of Hillary Clinton’s email server.
I studied to be an historian and these kinds of critiques ignore the underlying issues. It is the usual ahistorical moralism that provides easy answers. While the above may have been contributing factors to Clinton’s defeat they do not fully explain how this country that elected Barack Obama twice now has Donald Trump as its President-elect albeit it seems by way of the electoral college. Indeed it does not provide any insight into why, for instance two counties in Ohio that Obama had carried twice went for Trump on Tuesday.
I would argue that the anger, maybe rage would be a better term, has been building for the last decade. We, in Saratoga Springs, are fortunate to live in something of a bubble. One does not have to drive far, though, to pass through the small towns that are decaying shells. The inflation adjusted wages of most Americans have been declining for decades. The once thriving industries that provided people willing to work hard with good wages have been vanishing. The epidemic of opiod addiction and rural meth labs are an expression of the despair that is eroding this country. Good, well paying jobs that provide futures for those currently employed and their children are vanishing at an alarming rate.
In the meantime, people have not only had to endure the 2008 crash in terms of their loss of jobs and homes, they have had to suffer through the knowledge that the bankers who brought this all on and were bailed out by these same struggling people’s tax dollars are enjoying huge bonuses and golden parachutes.
They also must suffer through a culture that touts “smart” people who are making out handsomely as deserving of their great success while ordinary people working two and three jobs worry about their own future and that of their families. The “smart people” are the winners in the globalization game. You see them on TV in shows about lawyers and doctors, and young professionals.
In spite of all the retraining programs, without good paying jobs for modestly skilled and educated people, the vast majority of people must suffer the sense of being losers and the even deeper indignity that no one really cares.
The reality is that in Washington, with a few exceptions, no one really does care. The Republicans promise that with tax cuts for corporations and the shredding of regulations (the basic agenda of all the lobbyists who shower money on them) the jobs will flourish. The Democrats claim that with education and retraining programs along with more tax incentives for the same corporations, the jobs will come. Well, for the people living in Gloversvile, Malone, and Amsterdam, nothing has changed. There is, in fact, no significant sign of even a government presence doing anything in places like these across the country.
It does not take a degree in political science for many of the trapped Americans to see that the road they have been traveling is one that involves diminishing resources and hopelessness.
I do not share the same demonization of Hillary Clinton that many of my conservative friends do. I do see her as someone who had and probably still has, no real sense of just how bad things are in America. Donald Trump’s zinger asking her what she has been doing for the last thirty years has been dismissed by my friends who strongly supported her candidacy from the beginning. The fact is that the needs of all of these Americans have been very low on the priority list. Every four years the “promise machine” goes into high gear and some vapid slogan with the word “change” in it is trotted out for the campaigns.
Hillary Clinton would have lost even if there had never been an issue with her server. It was seized on as a symbol to be exploited. The real issue was that she was the poster child for “more of the same.”
I kind of enjoy using this metaphor. In 1968 people marveled that black Americans, burned down their own neighborhoods when Martin Luther King was assassinated. People wondered as to how they could do something that was so self destructive. On Tuesday, angry Americans burned down their country when they elected a narcissistic conman because in their rage they wanted to send a message to Washington.
This brings me finally to a local issue which is what my blog is really about. The Democratic Party in this city is cut from the same cloth as the leadership of the National Democratic Party. They see their responsibility as electing Democrats period, rather than as speaking as a party to some of the major issues facing this city. The threat to the greenbelt posed by Saratoga National Golf Course’s plan to build a huge resort? The Democratic Party has no position. The threat to the neighborhoods posed by our hospital’s expansion? The Democratic Party has no position. The threat to neighborhoods from the Witt Project “Downton Walk?” The Democratic Committee has no position. The pathetic ethics code of this city and the Ethics Board’s violation of open meetings law? The Democratic Party has no position. The attempt by Sonny Bonacio to convert Moore Hall into micro apartments with all the issues of parking and the exorbitant rents he wanted? The Democratic Committee had no position. The on going abuse of the Zoning Board of Appeals decisions to grant variances? The Democratic Committee has no postion.
Is it any wonder how angry people are at the traditional political parties? Is it any wonder that this country could elect Donald Trump? The answer is no and no.
After writing this I came on Glenn Greenwald’s piece on the Intercept web site. Readers will note many of the same points but I am no Glenn Greenwald. I highly recommend his piece.
Commissioner Chris Mathiesen has sent a draft of proposed changes to the city’s ethics code to the Ethics Board seeking their comments. Much of our current code is more an honor system than a serious standard that properly protects our city. Here are two simple examples. As a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, if your immediate boss were to come before you there is nothing in the code that would require you to recues yourself. Similarly, if your next door neighbor came before you seeking a variance to build a garage on your property line, you would not be required to recues yourself.
Geoff Bornemann, Jerry Luhn, and I worked with the Commissioner on the document.
Below is the text of the document.
PROPOSED ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND USE BOARD MEMBERS
with foreword
The standards proposed in this draft are somewhat more exacting than the present guidelines and rules applicable to Ethics Board functions. Notably, they would prompt more recusals by sitting members than current practices anticipate. One of the realities animating this change is the fact that the City has grown, and continues to do so: we are not the insular, small town of just twenty years ago. Growth and prosperity bring with them a number of challenges to governing, even while foundational concerns, such as integrity and accountability, remain constant.
In this vein, recusals as appropriate — an admittedly indefinite concept influenced by individual judgments — are a valuable tool, a complement if you will, to governing the City in ways that inspire confidence and trust. That said, it is necessary to plan for recusals to avert undue burdens and delays in the functions of land use boards so as not to jeopardize their critical and timely functions, such as having quorums allowing them to proceed with their mandated tasks.
_____________
The current standards set out in the City Code (Chapter 13, Code of Ethics) do not assure the strong and consistent ethical expectations that govern the conduct of various City land use board members. In particular, for example, standards which guide the Ethics Board’s actions should be grounded in common experience, explicit and easily understood by its members as well as by the public. They should, at a minimum, aim to reduce ambiguities and thus the opportunities for inconsistency in the Board’s issuance of opinions intended for guidance of public officials in matters affecting land use in the City of Saratoga Springs.
Upon the assumption that the Ethics Board has inherent authority to recommend standards stronger than those presented in the existing City Code, it is proposed that the Board adopt and propose to the City Council standards that reflect the following principles.
REQUIRED RECUSAL
The board member of a City land use agency or board must publicly disclose and recuse him/herself from acting in a particular matter if:
NOTE: Personal gifts of any kind are likely to raise questions and suspicions among the public, other officials, competing applicants, etc. Worst of all, gift-giving risks establishing a de facto pay-to-play threshold, however unintended. By way of comparison, the NYS JCOPE rules allow for some token gifts in limited circumstances, but the City’s Ethics Board may advance stronger expectations, by enactment of codes of conduct. If we know that arsenic is not good for our health, why allow even a drop to be added to the pitcher we intend to drink from?
During anytime in the past twenty-four (24) months preceding the filing of an application before that member’s board, the board member has been employed directly or indirectly (as by subcontract, for example) by any firm, architect, engineer, surveyor, landscape architect or attorney who represents the applicantor property owner with business before the member’s board.
NOTE: This proposal is admittedly challenging. The courts in New York have wrestled with small-town/small community relationships and interpersonal familiarities where, in a manner of speaking, or literally in some cases, everybody knows everybody and one can’t hope to categorically avoid some intersections between civic business and broader social exchanges. The focus of this standard may have to be inherently flexible, erring on the side of no-reasonable-suspicions or the like. The courts tend to support each other up on the “know it when I see it” judgment calls but they too err on the side of standards that pass the straight-face test where latent conflict issues present themselves.
REQUIRED DISCLOSURES
The board member must publicly disclose, for the public record, at the most proximate board meeting:
RECOMMENDED BEHAVIOR STANDARDS
The board member should scrupulously avoid the following kinds of actions:
NOTE: Even while enforcement of this is likely to pose challenges in select instances, it may serve as a vehicle for communicating the City’s expectation of openness and integrity in all realms of board functions. Waivers may be sought through an established procedure that preseves the integrity of exceptions drawn in compelling cases.
Commissioner Michele Madigan should not expect an apology from the Times Union in spite of the 5-0 vote last night to accept her proposed budget.
An earlier post on this blog published the Times Union Sunday editorial taking Commissioner of Finance Madigan to task for not including money for the Greenbelt Trail in the city’s capital budget. Commissioner Madigan had proposed postponing this funding until the city secures grant money for the project. The TU editors rejected this reasoning out of hand and instead accused Commissioner Madigan of postponing this funding because of animus towards the Mayor for whom this was a priority. This was, they claimed, “petty politics at their worst” and they accused Madigan of having “an ax to grind.” The editorial announced that the Mayor was suggesting a separate vote on the capital budget something they endorsed so the Council could “tell Ms. Madigan to get her priorities straight.”
Well, at the City Council meeting last night the Mayor did not suggest a separate vote on the capital budget. Instead the Mayor joined in the enthusiastic love fest of praise for Commissioner Madigan’s budget which passed unanimously. All this can be seen on the city’s website.
One has to wonder again where the TU is getting its disinformation on Saratoga politics.
The Times Union’s apparent obsession with Michele Madigan has reached a new level of craziness.
Commissioner Madigan has put off appropriating money in the capital budget for the greenbelt trail until the grants that the city has applied for are awarded. Ms. Madigan has made it clear that she is in support of the project but as the chief financial officer of the city she believes that the city should not commit its own funds until there is a viable fiscal basis for going forward. Given the costs and scope of this important project, Ms. Madigan’s deferral seems wholly reasonable. I expect that she will be supported in her budgeting at Tuesday night’s meeting by a majority of the Council. The Mayor has indicated that in spite of the fact that the grants remain an unknown she wants the city to move forward anyway.
There is little question that the relations between Commissioner Madigan and Mayor Yepsen are not cordial. It seems to me utterly unreasonable for the Times Union to cast this disagreement, though, as driven only by petty conflict and to characterize Commissioner Madigan as the villain whose policies are put forward because she has (in the words of the Times Union) an axe to grind.
I have to wonder, where is the Times Union getting their analysis from?
What follows is the Times Union’s editorial and Commissioner Madigan’s rebuttal.
By TU Editorial Boardon October 27, 2016 at 2:37 AM
As the Saratoga Springs City Council prepares to vote next week on a budget that includes – and excludes – some noteworthy projects, council members might consider how this might read in, say, a promotional brochure for the city.
As things are looking, it will read like this:
“Saratoga Springs is investing in its historic City Hall, with almost $750,000 in renovations to the finance commissioner’s office that include a new private bathroom and break room for the staff and some ceiling work.”
With some tweaks to the budget, on the other hand, it could read like this:
“Saratoga Springs is investing more than $830,000 in its citizens and its future, starting work in 2017 on a Greenbelt Trail that will eventually create a 24-mile walking and biking trail. The first phase of this more than $16 million plan will be a downtown connector linking parts of the trail in the heart of the city. The local commitment will leverage millions more in state, federal, and private investment.”
We’re all for preservation of historic buildings like City Hall, but clearly, the Greenbelt Trail would be a boon for the city and its residents, and yet another attraction for the many tourists who visit in the summer. A feasibility study of the trail estimated that it would mean several million dollars a year in health and environmental benefits.
A committee comprising the mayor and representatives of the four departments, in fact, ranked the connector project seventh on a list of 22 capital projects; the work in the finance commissioner’s office ranked ninth. There’s nothing to say both can’t be done.
But Finance Commissioner Michele Madigan, whose job it is to merge the recommended capital budget with the proposed operating budget and present the council with a comprehensive budget proposal, has her own priorities – and they don’t include the Greenbelt Trail.
Her stated reason is that she can’t justify borrowing $833,000 unless the city knows if outside grants will come through. The city doesn’t expect an answer from the state until December, nor from the federal Department of Transportation until early next year.
We’re not buying it. It’s no secret that Ms. Madigan is at odds with Mayor Joanne Yepsen, for whom the Greenbelt Trail is a priority. This smacks of petty politics at their worst – a worthy community project that would benefit the entire city financially and in terms of quality of life sidelined by a single public official with an ax to grind.
Because of the quirks in Saratoga Springs’ system commissioner form of government, the budget is normally presented in its entirety for an up-or-down vote. Mayor Yepsen suggests that rather than force the council into an all-or-nothing decision, the operating and capital budgets be voted on separately. It’s a fair approach – one that would allow the council to tell Ms. Madigan to get her priorities straight.
A recent Times Union Editorial took me to task over two of the 30 plus projects that currently sit in our Capital Budget (Finance Department Renovations at an estimated cost of $750K) and Capital Program (Greenbelt Trail Connector at an estimated cost of $2.3M, of which $833K would come from the taxpayers). The Editorial reduced my entire proposed budget down to these two projects and pitted them against one another as if there is some kind of rift between departments, and giving the impression that the City Council must choose between these two projects.
The budget I proposed for the taxpayers and residents of Saratoga Springs consists of a $45M Operating Budget, an $8.4M Capital Budget, a Debt Service Budget, and the Water and Sewer Budgets. I presented this “comprehensive budget” with no increase in property tax rates for the taxpayers of our city. The various budgets include funds for many high priority projects, funds for essential city services, wages and benefits, infrastructure and safety needs. It is important to remember that adoption of the city’s budget will require a majority vote of the Council.
I immediately responded to the Times Union’s first inaccurate article about the City Hall Finance Department renovations, which falsely claimed that I was getting my own private bathroom and kitchenette (for my exclusive use) with the following letter http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-opinion/article/Letter-Maintaining-City-Hall-essential-9240182.php. It seems I need to respond yet again. I’ve been offering weekly public tours of the Finance Department since the publication of the first inaccurate article; many have participated in these tours and all have concluded that this space – which occupies approximately 1/3 of the first floor of City Hall – is “desperate” for renovations.
The $2.3M Greenbelt Trail Connector, which began under Mayor Scott Johnson in 2013 (and for which I’ve publicly stated my support, repeatedly, on the record), has always been presented to the City Council as a project that would be primarily funded by grants and that the City would not be expected to commit any of its own funds until this grant funding had been secured. As a procedural matter during Council discussions of grant applications, I always ask for the record “is the City expected to provide any matching funds? If so how much, under what form, and does this obligate the City financially if we are successful at receiving the grant?” This is my duty and obligation as a Finance Commissioner exercising her fiduciary responsibilities to the City and its taxpayers. Since its inception the plan has always been that we would not move forward on the Greenbelt Trail Connector project until the applied for grant funding had been secured – which is expected in 2017. Therefore, this project is still in our 6 year Capital Program, which means we still plan to move forward with it, but is not included in the proposed 2017 Capital Budget. It would be irresponsible for me to propose that we borrow funds in 2017 – and ask our taxpayers to make principal and interest payments on those borrowed funds during the year – for a project that may not even move forward until 2018 or thereafter. I have stated, for the record, my support for amending the Capital Budget in 2017 if our grant applications are successful, as has Mayor Yepsen and at least two other Commissioners. I do not anticipate that getting the required votes to make this change in 2017 if the sought after funds are secured will be a problem, but I do not speak for the entire City Council.
Furthermore, I have been discussing all of this with members of the Greenbelt Trail Committee and Sustainable Saratoga. They understand what we are doing here and that this is not intended to jeopardize or delay progress on the Trail Connector.
This is merely an issue of timing. I say we shouldn’t borrow the funds until we actually know we need them. The “fiscally conservative” Times Union urges me to go ahead and borrow them now, and bake the repayment of them into the 2017 property tax rate, even if we don’t yet know we need them. I say lets wait a few months and borrow the money when we know we need it – and know how much we’ll need – there is no guarantee we will receive the full grant amount. The TU says this means my priorities are skewed and that I am engaging in petty politics. I say that this shows the TU editorial was written without a full understanding of the issues.
Another issue that needs to be considered is that the $2.3M cost estimate for the trail is just for one of eight phases of the proposed trail. The total cost is still not known, and has not been discussed with the City Council, but latest estimates are between $16.5M and $20M. For a full overview of the proposed Greenbelt Trail and it’s cost please visit https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxfrGj3VKIbcMVJIa09pZjROOFU/edit
Our very own Joseph Levy is running for the New York State Senate on the Green Party Line.
Here is a link to the WAMC story in which he debates Republican Kathy Marchione (whose odious campaign against previous incumbent Roy McDonald was based on opposing his vote in support of gay marriage) and the Democratic candidate Shaun Francis. The story includes audio excerpts.
Earlier this year, I did a post on the Ethics Board’s apparent violations of the open meetings law. The law requires that the public be notified at least 72 hours prior to meetings. It also requires that if a public body has a website the notice be placed on the website.
In July I emailed the Mayor concerning this with copies to the members of the Council, the chair of the Ethics Board, and the two city attorneys [see below]. In the email I provided the citation of the law and I documented that from the beginning of the year all the agendas of the Ethics Board (standard practices of all the city boards is to post their agendas as their meeting notices) were posted on the same day or after the meetings. I did this by FOILing the city for the dates the agendas were posted on the city website and comparing these with the dates when the meetings actually occurred as documented in the Ethics Board’s posted agendas.
Having had no response from the Mayor to this email for four months I decided to attend a City Council meeting and request a response on what appears to have been an ongoing violation of the law.
Following my remarks to the Council Commissioner Madigan asked that the city assistant attorney respond. Tony Izzo then addressed the Council.
His response was noteworthy. First, he responded to the Council as though my inquiry were only about a single meeting. In fact, as the email and documents make very clear, I was concerned about six months of violations. He then conceded that the particular meeting he was referring to had not been posted on the city website but still asserted that it had been properly posted (he never explained how) by one of the members of the Ethics Board. He offered that some sort of transition in city staffing was the reason for it not being posted on the city’s website for this particular meeting.
He then told the Council that as far as he was concerned, no violation of law had occurred. He also told the Council that this particular meeting notice was the only one that was not properly posted on the city’s website.
As readers of this blog will know, I like Tony Izzo very much. He is courteous and gentlemanly in all his dealings with everyone. Tony is a survivor. He has been the assistant attorney through multiple administrations over a period of what I believe to have been decades. Given the contrasting personalities and egos of our past mayors, it is rather amazing.
I am sympathetic to Tony’s desire to protect the city administration as he serves as their counsel. Regrettably his statements went beyond a reasonable defense of the Ethics Board. As regards the law, it seems quite clear. I include it below in my email to him. I am not an attorney but I consulted with an attorney who served as counsel to a major state agency who confirmed my reading.
What is beyond dispute is that the Ethics Board failed to properly notice their meetings from January to July of this year. I expect it goes back much farther but I restricted my FOIL to just this year. Given this fact, I am not convinced that notwithstanding Tony’s assurances, they are complying with the law even now.
I do not know whether Tony was uninformed when he addressed the Council.
Over a week ago I wrote to Tony on this issue asking him to respond [see below]. To date (eight days later) I have not had a response to the email below.
From: John Kaufmann ]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:59 PM
To: ‘Tony Izzo’
Cc: ‘Joanne Yepsen’; ‘Christian Mathiesen’; ‘Skip Sciroco’; John Franck, johnfranck@your-cpas.com); ‘Michele Madigan’; ‘Vincent DeLeonardis’; ‘Justin Hogan’
Subject: Misrepresentation Regarding Open Meeting Law and Ethics
Committee
Attachments: Kaufmann John – FOIL Responses
I was troubled by your statements to the Council on Tuesday night. The Council and the people of this city depend upon the attorneys who serve the Council to be accurate both as to the facts and the law.
In reviewing the video of Tuesday night’s meeting it appears that you made two statements that are incorrect regarding the Ethics Board’s adherence to the open meetings law.
In the video regarding the contention that notices for the Ethics Board meetings were not appropriately posted on the city website you told the council “I do not conclude [sic] I am not ready to conclude that there was a legal deficiency.”
You also said “The law indicates it should always be done as soon as possible. It was posted in some manner [my emphasis].” Article 7, section 104 of the Public Officers Law, however, is not ambiguous. It states:
5. When a public body has the ability to do so, notice of the time and place of a meeting given in accordance with subdivision one or two of this section, shall also be conspicuously posted on the public body’s internet website.
The statute does not use the work “should,” it uses the word “shall.” The difference between “shall” and “should” is the difference between mandatory and merely precatory. Unless you know of but neglected to mention some other provision that contradicts this statutory directive then your statement to the Council appears to be a misrepresentation of the law.
You also told the members of the Council that the Ethics Board would “put the notice on the website as well as we always have in the past.” You also stated “The meetings prior to that [the one notice you concede was not posted on the web] were all noticed on the web.”
I am assuming that when you said this you were speaking in good faith that notices of Ethics Board meetings were posted at least seventy-two hours prior to the respective meetings as required by law.
I FOILed the city as to the dates that the agendas were posted on the city website for the meetings so far this year. I am attaching the response to the FOIL. I am also attaching the agendas that were posted. You will note that the dates that the agendas were posted were either on or after the day the meeting took place.
I am at a loss as to the basis for your statement to the Council that the previous meetings had been properly noticed. If the FOILed records are true, it does not appear possible to characterize these previous postings as proper “notices” within the intended meaning of governing law.
As noted earlier, the citizens of Saratoga Springs and their elected representatives rely on their attorneys to be fastidious in stating the facts and in presenting the law. If I have missed something, I would be happy to be disabused of my confusion.
Would you please acknowledge receipt of this email and indicate whether or
not you will respond to it.
The Bloggers Presentation To The City Council
Tony Izzo’s Presentation
These are the agendas. Note the dates of the meetings
These are the dates when the agendas were posted [the same dates as the meetings or later than the dates the meetings took place
From: John Kaufmann [john.kaufmann21@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2016 12:55 PM
To: ‘Joanne Yepsen’
Cc: ‘Christian Mathiesen’; ‘Michele Madigan’; ‘Skip Sciroco’; ‘John Franck’;
‘Tony Izzo’; ‘Vincent DeLeonardis’; ‘Justin Hogan’
Subject: Potential Violation Of Open Meetings Law
I am writing you regarding an apparent violation of the Open Meetings Law by
the Ethics Board. As confirmed by Justin Hogan, its chair, his Board met on
June 20, 2016. Even as of today, July 9th, there is no record of this meeting on
the City web site, let alone a record of notice to the public that such a meeting
would be convened.
I contacted Mr. Hogan regarding this apparent failure and he responded by
stating that the notice was allegedly “posted” on June 14. In part because he
did not share with me where or how this posting took place, I did visit City
Hall today. There are a number of bulletin boards on the first floor of the
building, and I did find a bulletin board in the City Planning Office with the
title “Meeting Agendas” affixed to it. While it is possible that timely notice of
the meeting was posted on that space, now, some weeks following the Board’s
meeting, there is no such notice on the bulletin board regarding the June 20
meeting. As far as I can tell, there is no record that the June 20 meeting was
ever properly posted so as to give meaningful notice to the public of that
event. Accordingly, would you please inform me by email as to by whom the
notice was posted, and its location(s)?
The following are the requirements for notices to the public of meetings under
Article 7, section 104 of the Public Officers Law. (I have underscored the most
pertinent section):
§104. Public notice.
1. Public notice of the time and place of a meeting scheduled at least one
week prior thereto shall be given to the news media and shall be
conspicuously posted in one or more designated public locations at least
seventy-two hours before such meeting.
2. Public notice of the time and place of every other meeting shall be
given, to the extent practicable, to the news media and shall be
conspicuously posted in one or more designated public locations at a
reasonable time prior thereto.
3. The public notice provided for by this section shall not be construed to
require publication as a legal notice.
4. If videoconferencing is used to conduct a meeting, the public notice
for the meeting shall inform the public that videoconferencing will be
used, identify the locations for the meeting, and state that the public has
the right to attend the meeting at any of the locations.
5. When a public body has the ability to do so, notice of the time
and place of a meeting given in accordance with subdivision one
or two of this section, shall also be conspicuously posted on the
public body’s internet website.
Drawing from the above, even if there was documentation to show that a
notice was posted on a bulletin board in City Hall, the statutory
requirement for notices of meetings would not have been met. Based on
my correspondence with Mr. Hogan, it would appear that the Ethics
Board has been violating this provision for some time. While not
venturing a legal opinion here, it is my understanding that any business
transacted at a meeting that lacks proper notice is not valid.
Timing appears rather important here because the Ethics Board is
currently dealing with a controversial inquiry. It would be unfortunate
were the Board to publish an opinion whose authority is undermined by
something as elemental as lack of required public notice, before this
matter is resolved.
Thank you.
Saratoga Springs Politics 