Seems so, when they concocted two new positions in the city clerk’s office;

The council approved the new jobs last week. The items, however, were not on the council’s agenda. The council added them during the meeting and then voted to approve them, despite an ordinance that precludes the council from adding and then voting on matters unless it’s an emergency.

State law requires public bodies to post agendas at least 24 hours in advance. The council also was accused of violating the state’s open meetings law when it fired Owen.

Jen Holsen goes into more detail about the topic, and I highly recommend you read her analysis/commentary on the topic. (Both Friday posts).

 

3 Thoughts on “Did the SF city council break open meetings laws?

  1. Alice15 on January 23, 2012 at 2:16 pm said:

    What? Again? This isn’t even shocking anymore. All in a days work and noone at 9th & Dakota seems to give a damn.

  2. Muqhtar on January 23, 2012 at 3:21 pm said:

    “Like Alabama politics but with a Fargo accent…”

  3. Alice15 on January 24, 2012 at 9:42 am said:

    I was speaking with an individual yesterday regarding possible candidates for the upcoming elections. We have reached a new level of distrust and dissatisfaction with our current system when we virtually have noone confirming they are running or wanting to run. The constant thing I hear is “who would want to be involved with this circus?” Never in the history of SF have we had this type of discourse. Yes – there is Kermit – but how about new, young, and innovative blood? How about all those young professionals that voted yes and crammed the new EC in an industrial park through? It’s a sad state of affairs and it starts at the top.

Post Navigation