Back to the Email Menu 

From: Judy Gafa [mailto:gafaj@gpschools.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 9:57 AM
To: Lois Valente; Brian Summerfield; Margaret Weertz; Pangborn, Cindy; Daniel Roeske; Ahmed Ismail
Cc: Fenton, Christian
Subject: Fwd: Judy's Board Goal Email--How Does Responding to it Trigger an OMA Violation?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Fenton, Christian <Christian.Fenton@gpschools.org>
Date: Monday, March 23, 2015
Subject: Judy's Board Goal Email--How Does Responding to it Trigger an OMA Violation?
To: "ahmed@portraitplacegpw.com" <ahmed@portraitplacegpw.com>
Cc: "Gafa, Judy (GPPSS)" <gafaj@gpschools.com>, "MMcInerney@ClarkHill.com" <MMcInerney@clarkhill.com>


Judy/Ahmed,
I reviewed the question with Mark this am to make sure I was correct. If the Board President( or any other trustee) asked for suggestions (whether Goals or some other idea) it is not a violation of the OMA in and by itself.  It becomes a violation if one member were to challenge or suggest that another trustee's goal (in this case) was good, bad etc. The violation comes in the debate not in the suggestion of a goal. If you just collect the goals, whether individually or as a group it is fine. Collecting them individually would help limit the possibility of a debate or challenge to other Trustees.   It can become a violation if Trustee A responds and debates or challenges Trustee B,C, D etc goals.
I have copied Mark on this .
Chris



-----Original Message-----
From: Ahmed Ismail [mailto:ahmed@portraitplacegpw.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2015 1:08 PM
To: Fenton, Christian
Cc: 'Gafa, Judy (GPPSS)'
Subject: Judy's Board Goal Email--How Does Responding to it Trigger an OMA Violation?

Chris,

In order to respect Judy's request to not "reply" (I am assuming she meant "reply all") to the email below, I am just sending this email to you and copying Judy.

Since you are our FOIA coordinator, you also have the most working experience with OMA section definitions as well.  I am confused as to what section number of the OMA replying to Judy's email would violate.

Judy has not asked for or initiated any kind of deliberation.  She has asked that we "think" about what board goals each of would like to discuss at a future meeting.  She has not even asked that we submit them to her.

How would a reply (even if it included the goals I would like discuss) trigger a violation of a section of the OMA, and, if so, which section do you feel it would violate?

The only way I can see it would remotely cause concern of a "deliberation"
violation is if someone posted their board goals and another board member piped in and challenged the goals, which would then create the appearance of a deliberation.

On an semi-related request, under our new email posting rule, if you do feel replying to the email would cause an OMA violation, aren't you required to post it to the website?

This is a very low priority request, Chris, so if you don't know the section off the top of your head, don't worry about it and don't spend the money to ask Mark McInerney--just let me know and I will contact an OMA guru I know who I am sure will give me a "freebie" answer to this question.

Thank you,

Ahmed

________________________________
From: Judy Gafa
Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2015 12:19:29 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &
Canada)
To: School Board
Subject: Board Goals

Fellow Trustees,
After reading the survey results and comments, it is very clear that the community would like the board to function better.
I am going to ask each of you to think of one or two board goals to help us operate more effectively. Ideally these goal should be linked to the district goals.
I will set aside time for us as a board at a future meeting to discuss these goals and then set the goals for this board.
Please do not reply all to this email as it will violate the OMA.  Please send me your ideas separately and I will create a document to be published showing everyone's input.
Thank You
Respectfully
Judy Gafa