07020 Forums  

Go Back   07020 Forums > Politics > State & National Politics > OPRA

OPRA NJ Open Public Records Act

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-23-2017, 02:45 PM
prattjus prattjus is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edgewater, NJ, USA
Posts: 537
prattjus is on a distinguished road
Township in Cumberland County "unable to locate" some closed meeting minutes; will ap

The Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) requires public bodies to make the minutes of their meetings, both public and non-public (i.e. closed or executive), "promptly available to the public." Recent correspondence with one South Jersey township reveals that minutes from closed meetings held five years ago are still not available for public inspection and that minutes from closed meetings held in the 1980's and 1990's have apparently been lost forever.

A May 16, 2017 Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request to Deerfield Township in Cumberland County sought "the minutes of the three (3) most recently held [closed] Deerfield Township Committee meetings for which minutes are available in either full or redacted form." The request went on to explain that if "the three most recent closed meetings for which minutes are available in whole or part took place ten years ago in April, May and June of 2007, then those would be the minutes that are responsive to this request."

In her May 18, 2017 response, Clerk/Administrator Karen Seifrit wrote that "due to the current unavailability of closed/executive session minutes, there will be a delay in filling your request" and that the closed minutes "need to be approved at the Township’s June 7th meeting."

On the same day that I received her response, I (in my role as Executive Director of Libertarians for Transparent Government (LFTG), which submitted the OPRA request) wrote back to Seifrit. I wrote that I was astonished at her response because it suggested that the Township considers its closed session minutes from decades ago to still be wholly exempt from public inspection. (Seifrit's May 18th response and my reply of the same date are on-line here.)

In order to clarify matters, LFTG submitted another OPRA request seeking minutes of two closed sessions that the Township's on-line public meeting minutes show as having been held on March 7, 2012 and June 20, 2012. The request also sought the minutes of every closed session held in 1983 and 1996.

On May 22, 2017, Seifrit responded to the second OPRA request. She wrote that the minutes for the March 7, 2012 and June 20, 2012 closed meetings will be approved at the June 7, 2017 meeting and that will disclose them by June 9, 2017. As to the minutes of the 1983 and 1996 closed meetings, Seifrit wrote that she had "searched for those records and have been unable to locate same."

Seifrit's response presents two problems. First, most members of the presently comprised Township Committee were not in office when the two 2012 meetings took place. Thus, a majority of the members who will be asked on June 7, 2017 to vote to approve the March 7, 2012 and June 20, 2012 closed meeting minutes were not present at either of those meeting. (Presently serving on the Committee are Frank Spatola, Jr. Mayor and Committee members Abigail Perlstein O'Brien, Rudy Danna, Jr., Bruce Murphy, II and John Stanzione. According to the minutes of the public meeting held on June 20, 2012, the mayor was then named Laurella and the Committee members present were named Lauermann, Spatola, Stanzione, Montgomery. Thus, only two members who served on the Committee in 2012 still serve on the Committee in 2017 (i.e. Spatola and Stanzione)).

Second, New Jersey requires a municipality's meeting minutes to be retained permanently. (See item no. 0508-0000 of the Municipal Agencies General Records Retention Schedule.) Accordingly, Deerfield is under a duty to retain all its Township Committee meeting minutes, including those from 1983 and 1996, and a citizen who asks Seifrit for minutes should not be told that she is unable to locate them.

Deerfield's noncompliance with the OPMA is especially disappointing because I personally attended the December 4, 2013 Committee meeting and addressed the Committee during the public comment period about the importance of OPMA compliance.

Reply With Quote


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stafford claims OPRA suit is "frivolous" and brought in "bad faith" to "harass the To prattjus OPRA 0 04-07-2015 03:23 PM
State: Parsippany Mayor's letter, on Township letterhead, asking judge for "leniency" prattjus OPRA 0 12-10-2012 10:54 PM
What if executive session minutes are heavily redacted due to "personnel issues" bein prattjus OPRA 0 06-02-2011 07:05 PM
Important OPMA case: Court forbids routine "sequencing" of open and closed sessions. prattjus OPRA 0 02-18-2011 12:38 PM
Gloucester Twp meeting minutes "cannot be located." prattjus OPRA 0 11-27-2010 01:13 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 07020.com - All rights reserved