Open Meetings
Hello. I appreciate all I learn on this feed. I have a question about open meeting. A P&Z meeting was set with agenda items sent to all with 300 feet as well as published in the paper. Now, the developers need to delay their appearance to gather more details. This doesn’t appear to be a “Continued or reconvened meeting” pursuant to 25 OS 304 (6). See also 25 OS 311(A)(11). Those statutes contemplate a meeting already ongoing wherein the announcement must be made AT THE MEETING. Here it’s the only matter on that agenda and hopefully the staff and commission members won’t have to appear.
25 OS 311 (A)(8) allows that if a change in date, time or place occurs, notice must be given to the City Clerk. However, the P&Z matter will be placed on the next regularly scheduled meeting so new notice should not be required.
None of the above statutes seem germane. As you have guessed, the goal is to not republish or resend notice to concerned citizens as none of the agenda items change. But perhaps that is unavoidable.
Thank you for your input.
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
Sent from my iPad
The two options I believe are: (1) cancel the meeting and issue new notices; or, (2) convene the meeting, call the item, open the public hearing to receive comments if applicable, and then move to table the item to the next meeting (which would not require new notice other than the notice given at the meeting).
Jon Miller
City of Mustang
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: Oama oama-bounces@lists.imla.org on behalf of Claudia Conner claudia.conner@bethanyok.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:17:49 PM
To: oama@lists.imla.org oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Open Meetings
Hello. I appreciate all I learn on this feed. I have a question about open meeting. A P&Z meeting was set with agenda items sent to all with 300 feet as well as published in the paper. Now, the developers need to delay their appearance to gather more details. This doesn’t appear to be a “Continued or reconvened meeting” pursuant to 25 OS 304 (6). See also 25 OS 311(A)(11). Those statutes contemplate a meeting already ongoing wherein the announcement must be made AT THE MEETING. Here it’s the only matter on that agenda and hopefully the staff and commission members won’t have to appear.
25 OS 311 (A)(8) allows that if a change in date, time or place occurs, notice must be given to the City Clerk. However, the P&Z matter will be placed on the next regularly scheduled meeting so new notice should not be required.
None of the above statutes seem germane. As you have guessed, the goal is to not republish or resend notice to concerned citizens as none of the agenda items change. But perhaps that is unavoidable.
Thank you for your input.
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
Sent from my iPad
Oama mailing list
Oama@lists.imla.org
http://lists.imla.org/mailman/listinfo/oama_lists.imla.org
My thoughts exactly. Thanks, Jon.
Sent from my iPad
On May 19, 2020, at 2:15 PM, Jon Miller jonmiller@jem-pc.com wrote:
The two options I believe are: (1) cancel the meeting and issue new notices; or, (2) convene the meeting, call the item, open the public hearing to receive comments if applicable, and then move to table the item to the next meeting (which would not require new notice other than the notice given at the meeting).
Jon Miller
City of Mustang
Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef
From: Oama oama-bounces@lists.imla.org on behalf of Claudia Conner claudia.conner@bethanyok.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:17:49 PM
To: oama@lists.imla.org oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Open Meetings
Hello. I appreciate all I learn on this feed. I have a question about open meeting. A P&Z meeting was set with agenda items sent to all with 300 feet as well as published in the paper. Now, the developers need to delay their appearance to gather more details. This doesn’t appear to be a “Continued or reconvened meeting” pursuant to 25 OS 304 (6). See also 25 OS 311(A)(11). Those statutes contemplate a meeting already ongoing wherein the announcement must be made AT THE MEETING. Here it’s the only matter on that agenda and hopefully the staff and commission members won’t have to appear.
25 OS 311 (A)(8) allows that if a change in date, time or place occurs, notice must be given to the City Clerk. However, the P&Z matter will be placed on the next regularly scheduled meeting so new notice should not be required.
None of the above statutes seem germane. As you have guessed, the goal is to not republish or resend notice to concerned citizens as none of the agenda items change. But perhaps that is unavoidable.
Thank you for your input.
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
Sent from my iPad
Oama mailing list
Oama@lists.imla.org
http://lists.imla.org/mailman/listinfo/oama_lists.imla.org
Claudia,
On a Planning and Zoning matter, as long as you hold the meeting that was advertised in the notice sent to the owners within the 300 foot radius, and then at that meeting pass a motion to post-pone consideration of this item to a date certain, then it is a pretty strong argument that the notice provision was satisfied, on the logic that those interested will have shown up to the original meeting and will have been advised of the postponement. However, having said that, since the entity that is the most impacted by a future argument based on defective notice, I would generally leave it to the applicant whether they wanted new notices mailed out if they were willing to pay for the cost of preparing and mailing.
Jeff Bryant
OMAG’s COVID-19 Info Page: https://www.omag.org/covid19-faq
Jeff H Bryant
Director of Legal Services
Associate General Counsel
jbryant@omag.org
3650 S. Boulevard
Edmond, Oklahoma 73013
Phone: 405-657-1419
Fax: 405-657-1401
www.omag.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Oama oama-bounces@lists.imla.org On Behalf Of Claudia Conner
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:18 PM
To: oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Open Meetings
Hello. I appreciate all I learn on this feed. I have a question about open meeting. A P&Z meeting was set with agenda items sent to all with 300 feet as well as published in the paper. Now, the developers need to delay their appearance to gather more details. This doesn’t appear to be a “Continued or reconvened meeting” pursuant to 25 OS 304 (6). See also 25 OS 311(A)(11). Those statutes contemplate a meeting already ongoing wherein the announcement must be made AT THE MEETING. Here it’s the only matter on that agenda and hopefully the staff and commission members won’t have to appear.
25 OS 311 (A)(8) allows that if a change in date, time or place occurs, notice must be given to the City Clerk. However, the P&Z matter will be placed on the next regularly scheduled meeting so new notice should not be required.
None of the above statutes seem germane. As you have guessed, the goal is to not republish or resend notice to concerned citizens as none of the agenda items change. But perhaps that is unavoidable.
Thank you for your input.
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
Sent from my iPad
Oama mailing list
Oama@lists.imla.org
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.imla.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Foama_lists.imla.org&data=02%7C01%7Cjbryant%40omag.org%7C37d67702bb844d44f8b808d7fc210aaf%7Cb13aadd514d84b918cf485be9d556ad7%7C1%7C0%7C637255091169902354&sdata=yvwxnnG3%2FCT0UMcmf4eFaS8fwhPLpR9OHfrcAW4JXrA%3D&reserved=0
Thank you, Jeff
Claudia
On May 19, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Jeff Bryant jbryant@omag.org wrote:
Claudia,
On a Planning and Zoning matter, as long as you hold the meeting that was advertised in the notice sent to the owners within the 300 foot radius, and then at that meeting pass a motion to post-pone consideration of this item to a date certain, then it is a pretty strong argument that the notice provision was satisfied, on the logic that those interested will have shown up to the original meeting and will have been advised of the postponement. However, having said that, since the entity that is the most impacted by a future argument based on defective notice, I would generally leave it to the applicant whether they wanted new notices mailed out if they were willing to pay for the cost of preparing and mailing.
Jeff Bryant
OMAG’s COVID-19 Info Page: https://www.omag.org/covid19-faq
Jeff H Bryant
Director of Legal Services
Associate General Counsel
jbryant@omag.org
3650 S. Boulevard
Edmond, Oklahoma 73013
Phone: 405-657-1419
Fax: 405-657-1401
www.omag.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Oama oama-bounces@lists.imla.org On Behalf Of Claudia Conner
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:18 PM
To: oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Open Meetings
Hello. I appreciate all I learn on this feed. I have a question about open meeting. A P&Z meeting was set with agenda items sent to all with 300 feet as well as published in the paper. Now, the developers need to delay their appearance to gather more details. This doesn’t appear to be a “Continued or reconvened meeting” pursuant to 25 OS 304 (6). See also 25 OS 311(A)(11). Those statutes contemplate a meeting already ongoing wherein the announcement must be made AT THE MEETING. Here it’s the only matter on that agenda and hopefully the staff and commission members won’t have to appear.
25 OS 311 (A)(8) allows that if a change in date, time or place occurs, notice must be given to the City Clerk. However, the P&Z matter will be placed on the next regularly scheduled meeting so new notice should not be required.
None of the above statutes seem germane. As you have guessed, the goal is to not republish or resend notice to concerned citizens as none of the agenda items change. But perhaps that is unavoidable.
Thank you for your input.
Claudia Conner
Bethany City Attorney
Sent from my iPad
Oama mailing list
Oama@lists.imla.org
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.imla.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Foama_lists.imla.org&data=02%7C01%7Cjbryant%40omag.org%7C37d67702bb844d44f8b808d7fc210aaf%7Cb13aadd514d84b918cf485be9d556ad7%7C1%7C0%7C637255091169902354&sdata=yvwxnnG3%2FCT0UMcmf4eFaS8fwhPLpR9OHfrcAW4JXrA%3D&reserved=0