S Memo 11-9Posted on Jan 13, 2011 in Informal Opinions - Sunshine Law
S Memo 11-9
January 13, 2011
Notice of Cancellation of Meeting
Requester asked whether a violation of the Sunshine Law occurred in connection with a meeting held by the Hawaii Service Area Board (HSAB). Specifically, Requester, who is a HSAB member, asked whether a violation occurred because she was initially informed that the meeting was cancelled and then later told the meeting would be held, at which point she was unable to get a ride to the meeting.
OIP did not find evidence that a violation of the Sunshine Law occurred. Although notifying members of the public that a meeting was cancelled and then holding the meeting could violate the Sunshine Law in certain circumstances, none of the accounts (including that of Requester) states that any member of the public was among those told that the meeting was cancelled.