Wednesday, July 8, 2015

Mayor Nancy Vaughan call for illegal Greensboro City Council closed session on redistricting; Article 33C. Meetings of Public Bodies and § 143-318.11. Closed sessions.

§ 143-318.9.  Public policy.

Whereas the public bodies that administer the legislative, policy-making, quasi-judicial, administrative, and advisory functions of North Carolina and its political subdivisions exist solely to conduct the people's business, it is the public policy of North Carolina that the hearings, deliberations, and actions of these bodies be conducted openly...

§ 143-318.10.  All official meetings of public bodies open to the public.

(a)        Except as provided in G.S. 143-318.11..., each official meeting of a public body shall be open to the public, and any person is entitled to attend such a meeting.

§ 143-318.11.  Closed sessions.

(a)        Permitted Purposes. - ...closed sessions shall be held only when required to permit a public body to act in the public interest as permitted in this section.

Greensboro City Council 
would not be meeting "in the public interest"
but meeting to figure a way to save their own skins,
which is in their own personal financial interests.

A public body may hold a closed session and exclude the public only when a closed session is required:

(1)        To prevent the disclosure of information that is privileged or confidential pursuant to the law of this State or of the United States, or not considered a public record...

None of the information should be privileged, 
as it's a pitch from Brooks, Pierce
for hundreds of thousands in fees
to preserve the personal power of our current City Council members.

...(3)        To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body...

There is no cause for attorney-client privilege,
as a redistricting law suit would not be "in the public interest",
but in the personal financial interests of City Council members,
which means Mayor Vaughan's closed session proposal is illegal.

General policy matters may not be discussed in a closed session and nothing herein shall be construed to permit a public body to close a meeting that otherwise would be open merely because an attorney employed or retained by the public body is a participant.

Redistricting is a public policy matter,
which means Brooks, Pierce's pitch for hundreds of thousands
of taxpayer dollars to preserve a mostly crooked City Council 
should be in open session.

The public body may consider and give instructions to an attorney concerning the handling or settlement of a claim, judicial action, mediation, arbitration, or administrative procedure.

None of which apply to a law suit over redistricting,
as a judicial action would be in the personal financial interests
of City Council members and Brooks, Pierce.

...General personnel policy issues may not be considered in a closed session.

Redistricting is a "general personnel policy issue"
which is prohibited from consideration in a closed session.

A public body may not consider ...a vacancy among its own membership except in an open meeting.

A closed session on redistricting, which would create vacancies 
among City Council's membership,
is prohibited from being discussed in a closed session.

...A motion based on subdivision (a)(1) of this section shall also state the name or citation of the law that renders the information to be discussed privileged or confidential.

Which it can't,
as a closed session on redistricting is illegal.

For all the talk of transparency, 
Mayor Vaughan's proposal for a closed session on the topic
has none.

From a Facebook thread on Greensboro's redistricting

The big money D and R contributors are very interested in keeping the Greensboro's districts just like they are.

Samuel Spagnola on the legalities of Greensboro's redistricting

Greensboro is Corrupt; An Adaptation as our press has been compromised

New Greensboro City Council District 4 Analysis; 2013 and 2011 election

"Greensboro council says HB 263 redistricting is partisan and racist" and comment

The Declaration of Independence and Our New Crony Royalty

There were 25,575 voters in Greensboro's District 8 in 2011; Analysis

Preliminary City of Greensboro District Statistics; Voters but not how many of whom voted in prior City Council Races and Thoughts

New Greensboro City Council District 6 Analysis; 2011 General Elections