Dear editor:
(A letter to the Atlas Township Planning Commission):
Last month you indicated that the ‘Master Plan Subcommittee? of the planning commission was going to meet to decide on the format of the master plan update. You specifically indicated that the committee would be making a decision on the method of public participation to be used in the consideration of the update of the master plan. I requested that I be notified of the time of that meeting and was abruptly told by Mr. Statson that I would not be told when the meeting was being held.
The Open Meetings Act of 1976 defines a ‘subcommittee? as a ‘public body.? It further defines a meeting as the convening of that subcommittee for the purpose of deliberating toward or rendering a decision on a public policy ? such as the decisions on how to approach the update of the master plan.
The Open Meetings Act requires that all meetings, decisions and deliberations of a public body should be held in a public place available to the general public. It requires that all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting. It states that all deliberations and decisions must be made at the public meeting; that anyone can address the meeting; that minutes must be kept of the meeting and that ‘A meeting of a public body shall not be held unless public notice is given as provided??.
According to the Open Meetings Act, the ‘subcommittee? is required to post a calendar of its meetings within 10 days after its first meeting stating the dates, times and places of its regular meetings.
At the township board meeting on Monday, the board voted to approve a $22,000 contract to WadeTrim (which they did without obtaining bids) to update the master plan including the decision that only 12 people would be asked to participate in the forum to determine the future development pattern of the township. Since this decision was not made at last month’s planning commission meeting, it must have been made by the master plan subcommittee and should have been made under the auspices of the Open Meetings Act.
The act requires that any decisions that are made in violation of the Open Meetings Act must be invalidated and reenacted in a meeting that complies with that act; that members of a subcommittee who intentionally violate this act are liable of a misdemeanor and fines of up to $2,000.
This planning commission regularly holds ‘secret subcommittee? meetings that violate the Open Meetings Act. These subcommittees include the site plan subcommittee, the ordinance subcommittee, and let’s not forget the secret ‘where will we locate a mobile home park? subcommittee. These violations must cease. The committees must post their meeting times and dates and follow the rules laid out by the Open Meetings Act. Decisions made regarding the master plan update should be reenacted at a public meeting that follows the notice requirements of the Open Meetings Act.
Susan A. Arnold
Goodrich