BILL NUMBER:A10196

TITLE  OF BILL:  An act to amend the public officers law, in relation to
the enforcement of the open meetings law

PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: This bill strengthens the open meetings
law by providing two alternatives to court  invalidation  of  an  action
taken  when  any  aspect of a meeting is closed in violation of the law.
First, a court could stay the implementation of an action and remand the
action to the public body for reconsideration. Second,  a  court  could,
upon  finding  a  violation  of  law by a public body, require mandatory
training for the members of such public body

SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: Subdivision 1  of  Section  107  of  the
public  officers  law  is  amended  to allow a court to impose mandatory
training by the Committee on Open Government about the open meetings law
upon the public body, or, alternatively, to stay the  implementation  of
an action taken by the public body and remand it for further reconsider-
ation back to the public body without prejudice.

JUSTIFICATION:    Section 107 of the public officers law permits a court
to invalidate action taken behind closed doors in violation of the  open
meetings  law.  In  New  York,  invalidation is discretionary, and "good
cause" to void action must be shown. Moreover, judicial decisions  indi-
cate  that  action  taken by a public body may not be subject to invali-
dation when the law is violated during a series of closed meetings  held
              

for  the purpose of discussion only, but when "action" is taken later at
an open meeting (see Woll v. Erie County, 83 AD 2d 792 and Dombroske  v.
West Genesee Central School District, 452 NYS 2d 146 (1983); also Bergan
v.  Vallette,  supra).  Therefore,  if  a public body deliberates toward
final action behind closed doors in violation  of  the  law,  and  later
takes  "action"  during an open meeting, there may be nothing to invali-
date. Stated differently, to avoid the most significant penalty that may
be imposed by the law, a public body  might  deliberate  in  private  in
violation of the law but escape the penalty by taking action in public.

Therefore,  the provisions of this legislation would broaden the court's
ability to declare a public body's actions as invalid and remand such  a
decision,  in  whole or in part, back to that public body without preju-
dice so that the issue may be properly and entirely discussed in public.
In addition, it would allow courts to impose mandatory training  on  the
open  meetings  law on public officers involved in the violation of that
law.

PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: New Bill.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None to the State.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect on the sixtieth day after  it
shall have become a law.