S Memo 13-6Posted on Jun 5, 2013 in Informal Opinions - Sunshine Law
S Memo 13-6
June 5, 2013
Requester asked for an investigation into whether certain actions of the North Shore Neighborhood Board (NSNB) at its meeting on September 28, 2010 violated the Sunshine Law. Specifically, Requester alleged that NSNB improperly restricted the public’s right to provide comments and ask questions relating to its agenda item listed as: “Andy Anderson Presents Conceptual Proposal/ ‛Old Haleiwa Hotel’ Replica Plans” (Hotel Proposal).
OIP found that the Chair’s preliminary statements at the start of NSNB meeting did not prevent members of the public in attendance from exercising their right under the Sunshine Law to present oral testimony on the proposed land sales, a topic that was related to NSNB’s agenda item concerning the Hotel Proposal. OIP found, however, that NSNB technically violated the Sunshine Law’s oral testimony requirement when it adjourned its meeting without giving the public the opportunity to present oral testimony on the Hotel Proposal after the developer’s presentation.