Public Officers Law Article 7 Section 103(2)(e):
Agency records available to the public pursuant to article six of this chapter, as well as any proposed resolution, law, rule, regulation, policy or any amendment thereto, that is scheduled to be the subject of discussion by a public body during an open meeting shall be made available, upon request therefor, to the extent practicable as determined by the agency or the department, prior to or at the meeting during which the records will be discussed. Copies of such records may be made available for a reasonable fee, determined in the same manner as provided therefor in article six of this chapter. If the agency in which a public body functions maintains a regularly and routinely updated website and utilizes a high speed internet connection, such records shall be posted on the website to the extent practicable as determined by the agency or the department, prior to the meeting...
A significant amount of time and effort is expended in preparing the annual budget. It is often a very busy and stressful time. Often, computer-generated information is used. Although technology is ever evolving, it is still prudent to double check the numbers that you are presenting. For example, sit and read the final document to see if it makes sense. Then, get an adding machine and manually add the columns and the rows—making sure that the final product is accurate, realistic and makes sense. The additional effort spent on preparing an accurate and realistic budget generally reduces the risk of having to make adjustments later in the year or in future years...https://osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/lgmg/budgetprocess.pdf
*1.[1]
Official minutes and hearing proceedings of governing body or board, commission or committee thereof including all records accepted as part of minutes: RETENTION: PERMANENT http://www.archives.nysed.gov/records/retention_mu-1_general
When the public servants intentionally deny records for years, regardless of political affiliation, we MUST question why? All they law are in favor of the PEOPLES RIGHTS, when the servants intentionally segregate the people, when they violate constitutional of ONE individual to threaten and intimidate others, when they repeatedly state "stay out of the past" there is nothing there to help.... We must question MORE why, then do so many laws etc. PROTECT OUR RIGHTS, WHY RETAIN IMPORTANT RECORDS PERMENTALY.....
JANRUARY 9, 2019 AGENDA DOCUMENTS
the Open Meetings Law requires that a procedure be accomplished, during an open meeting, before a public body may enter into an executive session. Section 105(1) states in relevant part that:
"Upon a majority vote of its total membership, taken in an open meeting pursuant to a motion identifying the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered, a public body may conduct an executive session for the below enumerated purposes only..."
As such, a motion to conduct an executive session must include reference to the subject or subjects to be discussed, and the motion must be carried by majority vote of a public body's total membership before such a session may validly be held. The ensuing provisions of §105(1) specify and limit the subjects that may appropriately be considered during an executive session.
As early as 1981, citing opinions rendered by this office, it was determined judicially that:
"When entering into executive session to discuss personnel matters of a particular individual, the Board should not be required to reveal the identity of the person but should make it clear that the reason for the executive session is because their discussion involves a 'particular' person" [Board of Education of Doolittle v. Odessa-Montour Central School District, Supreme Court, Chemung County, October 20, 1981].
More recently, the Appellate Division, Third Department, confirmed the advice rendered by the Committee and held that:
"...the public body must identify the subject matter to be discussed (See, Public Officers Law § 105 [1]), and it is apparent that this must be accomplished with some degree of particularity, i.e., merely reciting the statutory language is insufficient (see, Daily Gazette Co. v Town Bd., Town of Cobleskill, 111 Misc 2d 303, 304-305).
Additionally, the topics discussed during the executive session must remain within the exceptions enumerated in the statute (see generally, Matter of Plattsburgh Publ. Co., Div. of Ottaway Newspapers v City of Plattsburgh, 185 AD2d §18), and these exceptions, in turn, 'must be narrowly scrutinized, lest the article's clear mandate be thwarted by thinly veiled references to the areas delineated thereunder' (Weatherwax v Town of Stony Point, 97 AD2d 840, 841, quoting Daily Gazette Co. v Town Bd., Town of Cobleskill, supra, at 304; see, Matter of Orange County Publs., Div. of Ottaway Newspapers v County of Orange, 120 AD2d 596, lv dismissed 68 NY 2d 807).
"Applying these principles to the matter before us, it is apparent that the Board's stated purpose for entering into executive session, to wit, the discussion of a 'personnel issue', does not satisfy the requirements of Public Officers Law § 105 (1) (f).
Permissive Referendum is a powerful tool for citizens to directly participate in decisions that affect their day to day life. It is a legal mechanism available for a community to contest and stop the sale or lease of Town /Village property; an avenue for registered voters to directly challenge and overturn the decision of a town/village board.
A $4 million project, to repair a defunct $1.5 USDA grant loan we just began repaying in 2015
18,932.86 in Regular Overtime Expended Note: Critical incidents below that contributed to this overtime o $2,98q.97 Overtime Expended for Barricaded Subject W Clark 5t o 52,565,88 Overtime Expended for Juvenile Assaulting Officers Case o S 770.58 Overtime Expended for Drug Overdose Death o $1,032.77 of expended will be reimbursed c $2,783.76 was taken as compensation time in lieu of overtime.
refer to blog post https://harley508.wixsite.com/forbettergovernment/post/state-and-federal-violations, concerns of how over time was paid.
Note this is not reflective to Chief documentation, per say. But we can ask, and should ask why we don't hire part-time officers? If you took the time to review the contracts, you can now understand, where our tax dollars go. Soon, we the taxpayers, if actually to be honest, right now, we may have to choose between public safety and safe potable water...
Better negotiations over contracts MUST BE DONE
,
January 23. 2019
Both Water reports lack pertinent detailed information.
Review the board minutes for yourselves at https://www.ilionny.com/government/
Every meeting all the way back as 2014, because anything prior to that will only yield more rights violated.
4 of the 5 present servants and 1 well placed MUB sub-servant have had their hands in the taxpayers funds going back to at least 2007...
We must demand accountability...
Comentarios