OM 99-15 (1999).

Case DateNovember 30, 1999
CourtRhode Island
Rhode Island Attorney General Opinions 1999. OM 99-15 (1999). State of Rhode IslandDepartment of the Attorney GeneralOM 99-15 (1999)OM 99-15 Town of ScituateAdvisory OM 99-15Advisory PR 99-04November 30, 1999John Gorham, EsquireP.O. Box 46North Scituate, Rhode Island 02857Re: Town of ScituateRequest for Open Meetings Act and Access to Public Records Act Advisory Opinion Dear Mr. Gorham: Your letter addressed to Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse has been forwarded to me for a response. You represent the town of Scituate, and in that capacity, are requesting an Open Meetings Act (OMA) and Access to Public Records Act (APRA) advisory opinion. With respect to your request for an OMA advisory opinion you relate: "[w]hen the Zoning Board meets and after it has heard the evidence, the members, in open session, discuss the evidence and the application of the Zoning Ordinance to the evidence among themselves, as would a jury or an appellant [sic] court. The only difference being that the Zoning Board does this in the open. These discussions are informal and often involve members comparing exhibits, maps and notes and at this time several conversations are going on between various members as well as with legal counsel. Some people in the audience have at times complained that this violates the open meetings law in that they cannot hear everything that is being said and that the discussions are not structured formally. After the discussions have been completed, the Zoning Board again becomes formal, a motion to adopt a decision is made and voted on by roll call vote." John Gorham, Esq. November 29, 1999 Page 2 of 4 You query "whether or not this is proper procedure and also whether or not it would be proper for the Zoning Board to adjourn to closed session to deliberate as would a jury or an appellant [sic] court." Initially, we address your question concerning whether it is proper for Zoning Board members, in open session, to discuss the evidence in a manner that prevents the public from hearing the discussion. Since the OMA does not explicitly address your question, "we examine the statute in its entirety in order to 'glean the intent and purpose of the Legislature.'" RIH Medical Foundation, Inc. v. Nolan, 723 A.2d 1123, 1126 (R.I. 1999). Pursuant to this rule of statutory construction, we observe that: "[i]t is essential to the maintenance...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT