| State of Rhode Island | |
| | |
| OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL | |
| 150 South Main Street- Providence, Rl 02903 (401) 274-4400 | |
| | |
| Peter F. Neronha | |
| | Attorney General |
May 14, 2021
OM 21-17
Ms. Bernie Courtney
Louise Marcus, Esquire
Legal Counsel, Jamestown Housing Authority
RE: Courtney v. Jamestown Housing Authority
Dear Ms. Courtney and Attorney Marcus:
We have completed an investigation into the Open Meetings Act (“OMA”) complaint filed by Ms. Bernie Courtney (“Complainant”) against the Jamestown Housing Authority (“Housing Authority”). For the reasons set forth herein, we find that the Housing Authority did not violate the OMA.
The Complainant contends that the Housing Authority violated the OMA when it failed to post a physical copy of the notice for its December 30, 2020 meeting “anywhere on the premises of the Jamestown Housing Authority” including in the Laundry Room. (Emphases omitted). The Complainant alleges that physical notice of this meeting was not posted anywhere on the Housing Authority premises where the Housing Authority meetings usually take place until January 11, 2021 – twelve days after the meeting in question took place.
The Housing Authority submitted a substantive response through its counsel, Louise Marcus, Esquire, which included an affidavit from Housing Authority Interim Executive Director Brian Anthony. Mr. Anthony attests that:
“The 12/30/2020 Meeting Agenda was posted by Resident Board Member C. Bell on or about 12/27/2020 on the Laundry Rooms’ Resident Bulletin Boards at Pemberton Apartments and Pemberton Place, the two residential buildings at JHA. In addition, on or about 12/23/2020 I posted the 12/30/2020 Meeting Agenda on the RI Secretary of State website and on 12/23/2020 I confirmed with Karen Montoya, Town Clerk, that Ms. Montoya posted the 12/30/2020 Meeting Agenda at Town Hall.”
The Housing Authority also provided documentary evidence confirming that the December 30, 2020 meeting agenda was posted on the Secretary of State’s website on December 23, 2020[1]; an email dated December 23, 2020 from Karen Montoya, Jamestown Town Clerk, confirming that she had posted the meeting agenda at the Town Hall, and a text message exchange dated December 27, 2020 confirming that Ms. Bell had posted the meeting agenda “on both the PP and PA laundry room billiton [sic] boards.”[2]
We acknowledge the Complainant’s rebuttal, as well as a supplemental rebuttal that Complainant submitted after this Office received clarification from the Housing Authority regarding the above-referenced text message exchange.[3] The Complainant does not dispute the Housing Authority’s assertions that the meeting notice was posted on the Secretary of State’s website and at the Town Hall, but contends notice was not timely posted on the Housing Authority premises.
When we examine an OMA complaint, our authority is to determine whether a violation of the OMA has occurred. See R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-8. In doing so, we must begin with the plain language of the OMA and relevant caselaw interpreting this statute.
The OMA provides that supplemental notice of a meeting must be posted forty-eight hours before the meeting in three locations: “the principal office of the public body holding the meeting, or if no principal office exists, at the building in which the meeting is to be held, and in at least one other prominent place within the governmental unit, and electronic filing of the notice with the secretary of state[.]” R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-6(c).
Despite Complainant’s general contention that the Housing Authority failed to post physical notice of its December 30, 2020 meeting on the Housing Authority premises, the evidence indicates that notice was posted on the bulletin boards of two Laundry Rooms of the Housing Authority’s residential buildings more than 48 hours before the meeting. Although the Complainant contests that notice was timely posted in the Housing Authority Laundry Rooms, Complainant has not provided specific evidence to refute the Housing Authority’s attestations and evidence that notice was timely posted there.[4] Nor has Complainant disputed that the Town Hall and the Laundry Rooms satisfy the OMA’s description of the two physical places where notice should be posted. See R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-6(c). Indeed, the Complaint in this matter specifically identified the Laundry Room as being in the vicinity of where Housing Authority meetings usually take place and as a place where notice should be posted. Accordingly, based on the totality of the evidence before us, we find that the Housing Authority did not violate the OMA.
Although the Attorney General will not file suit in this matter, nothing in the OMA precludes an individual from pursuing a complaint in the Superior Court as specified in the OMA. See R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-8(c). The OMA allows the Complainant to file a complaint within ninety (90) days from the date of the Attorney General’s closing of the complaint or within one hundred eighty (180) days of the alleged violation, whichever occurs later. See id. Please be advised that we are closing this Complaint as of the date of this letter.
We thank you for your interest in keeping government open and accountable to the public.
Sincerely,
Peter F. Neronha
Attorney General
By: /s/ Kayla E. O’Rourke____
Kayla E. O’Rourke
Special Assistant Attorney General
[1] Our independent review of the Secretary of State’s website confirms that the meeting agenda was posted on the Secretary of State’s website on December 23, 2020.
[2] It was not apparent to this Office who the parties were to the December 27, 2020 text message exchange. At this Office’s request, the Housing Authority clarified that the December 27, 2020 text messages were between Mr. Anthony and Ms. Bell.
[3] To the extent the Complainant’s rebuttal raises allegations of unethical conduct by a Housing Authority Commissioner, these statements are outside this Office’s authority under the OMA. See R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-8(a). The Complainant may wish to contact the Rhode Island Ethics Commission if she believes that the Housing Authority or one of its members has acted unethically.
[4] The Complainant generally alleges that at the Housing Authority’s January 21, 2021 meeting, she asserted that proper notice had not been provided for the December 30, 2020 meeting and Ms. Bell responded, “that’s because this meeting wasn’t FOR YOU, it was just FOR THE BOARD.” (Emphasis in original). However, the Complainant has provided no evidence to support this allegation and the open session minutes of the January 21, 2021 meeting do not include a record of this alleged exchange. Additionally, Complainant’s rebuttal relies on unspecific and circumstantial evidence, such as alleging that no residents attended the December 30, 2020 meeting (which Complainant seemingly alleges infers that notice was not provided) and asserting that she has spoken with other unidentified residents who claimed to not have received notice of the meeting. These general, unsupported assertions do not rebut the sworn statements and documentary evidence provided by the Housing Authority. Notably, there is no dispute that timely notice was posted at the Town Hall and on the Secretary of State’s website.