Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: PA13-3 - result of secret meetings - one of which I learned via foia response

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    PA13-3 - result of secret meetings - one of which I learned via foia response

    Cannot have secret meetings in this state.

    Just got these records last week, and look at all that attended that meeting as the email body notes "our meeting" in the Ritter email.

    And it bodes of the SB 1160 being in the works behind closed doors.

    People should file complaints to void that law due to these secret meetings.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 06-03-2014 at 01:19 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    That sure looks like conspiracy to me - to cook up legislation behind closed doors (or on conference calls) w/o public lawmaking process.
    But we are talking about the Constitution State, and the duly elected representatives of the people should know whats best for the serfs.
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    That sure looks like conspiracy to me - to cook up legislation behind closed doors (or on conference calls) w/o public lawmaking process.
    But we are talking about the Constitution State, and the duly elected representatives of the people should know whats best for the serfs.

    Art. III of CT Constitution ... Section 16 states:

    SEC. 16. The debates of each house shall be public, except on such occasions as in the opinion of the house may require secrecy.

    They sorta forget this section of the constitution .... its meaningless, right?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Art. III of CT Constitution ... Section 16 states:

    SEC. 16. The debates of each house shall be public, except on such occasions as in the opinion of the house may require secrecy.

    They sorta forget this section of the constitution .... its meaningless, right?
    What kind of meeting was it? And is every meeting subject to public attendance, notification, etc?

    For example, if 2 of them wanted to propose and idea and had a "meeting" over lunch or over the phone is it required to be documented?

    Do you have the definitions and guidelines as to what constitutes a formal meeting?

    If they stop in the hallway on the way to the bathroom and say "oh by the way tomorrow on the floor I'm going to say this that and the other" would that be a meeting?

    I'm familiar with the process but very interested.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    What kind of meeting was it? And is every meeting subject to public attendance, notification, etc?

    For example, if 2 of them wanted to propose and idea and had a "meeting" over lunch or over the phone is it required to be documented?

    Do you have the definitions and guidelines as to what constitutes a formal meeting?

    If they stop in the hallway on the way to the bathroom and say "oh by the way tomorrow on the floor I'm going to say this that and the other" would that be a meeting?

    I'm familiar with the process but very interested.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    In CT, if 2 members meet to discuss legislation, it is a meeting and the open meeting requirements of the Act are in play. If they just bounce into each other to say hey, its not a meeting.

    see Ansonia Library Bd. of Dirs. v. FOIC, 42 Conn. Supp. 84 (1991)

    There is also a conflicting court case that says a quorum is required but that decision has been abandoned for the purposes of the FOIA Act.

    And a meeting is any type of gathering where business is conducted ... in person or electronically or via phone. See CGS Sec 1-200

    No such thing as a "formal meeting"; one is either a meeting or just a gathering.

    Notice requirements for members of the legislature is basically nill ... just guidelines.
    But meeting minutes are still required to be taken and published.
    And the venue of the meeting can be evidence that the public was not able to attend (like in a small office or conference room) and was not allowed to view.

    I've walked up to two members in hallways, etc. talking and they say "you cannot be here"...I turn on my recorder and tell them that this is a meeting and I have every right to witness it. They usually run away...

    I have found so many secret meetings (and I file complaints) that the agency that handles hearing these types of complaints (we have a special agency that hears FOIA complaints~we must go to this agency) now says that I have discovered too many and they don't want to hear the cases as it is creating a burden for them. I have a court case seeking a ruling on this issue. I have even found secret meetings of the agency that is supposed to rule on these secret meetings cases...I provided a party to a case the proof and the lawyer for the party filed an amended court complaint due to the discovery.

    I just got about 1000 pages of records from Sen. McKinney ... I'm almost certain to find secret meetings .... I requested the records back in March 2013 and have now just got them...

    And I'll be getting 25K pages of records from about 2 dozen assemblymen ... I expect to find many many secret meetings.

    I will file complaints about all secret meetings I find.

    Right now, I have only about 50 secret meeting complaints filed.

    Its a disease.

    Once one discovers a secret meeting then one has 30 days to file a complaint. I'll post some info regarding McKinney - the backstabber to gun rights folks and is now running for Gov. It will not look good for him if a dozen complaints are filed against him from different people.

    And its possible to void laws made behind closed doors when a decision is made regarding the secret meetings and a court can look at how a law is produced during a criminal trial.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Just a bump .. showing the state of democrats ... ignoring our contitution and our open meetings laws...

    This is a candidate in my district now ... for nov election

    guess who will be at the polling places informing the voters?

    Anyone in CT who wants to know their candidates and the secret meetings they have been involved with, reply to the thread..I'll look and see if they were also involved in secret meetings .... so you can hang out at a polling place and let voters know !

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •