New Rochelle Board of Education Plots to Hold Illegal Secret Meeting to Evaluate “Tax Cert” Lawyers

As the reality of the decline in “assessables” has begun to sink in over at the City School District of New Rochelle, the Board of Education has been furtively discussing the idea of hiring “tax cert” lawyers to “recoup” property tax money.

Back in November we ran a story on this which board members unofficially denied: New Rochelle Solution to School Budget Crisis? Take Homeowners to Court!. Through back channels, the board claims that the lawyers are being hired only to “advise” on certiorari issues on commercial property coming before the District in the future. The entire process of adjudicating tax certioris is handled by the City of New Rochelle tax department so it remains unclear how ANY certiorari issues would become before the District. They might as well hire lawyers to advise them on how to handle Congressional or State Legislature legislation that comes before the District; there is none. After a recent board meeting, outside of City Hall, David Lacher was quite emphatic that the purpose of hiring the lawyers was NOT to file lawsuits but simply to “advise”.

The exact purpose of hiring these tax cert lawyers might be clear if the district had publicly disclosed an RFP or issued some sort of meaningful statement or had open, public discussions about why they believe there is a need to hire lawyers to advise the district on matters that do not come before the district, what the scope of their work will be, how much they will be paid and how they will be prevented from overstepping their bounds. So far, however, only bits and pieces of information have dribbled out at board meetings and now comes the news that the previously announced “special meeting” to interview lawyers and law firms for this work is to be held in secret session.

Board of Education Special Meeting

Members of the Board of Education will hold a Special Meeting on Tuesday, January 19 2010, 7:00 P.M. in the Carew Room at the Administration Building, 515 North Avenue, New Rochelle, New York. The Board anticipates making a motion to convene immediately into Executive Session for the purpose of interviewing attorneys and/or firms regarding tax certiorari matters.

I have asked the Board of Education to cite the relevant portion of New York State law that permits them to meet with these attorneys in secret. Perhaps our eagle-eyed readers can help identify the relevant line in Section 105.

New York State Open Meeting Law

§105. Conduct of executive sessions.

1. Upon a majority vote of its total membership, taken in an open meeting pursuant to a motion identifying the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered, a public body may conduct an executive session for the below enumerated purposes only, provided, however, that no action by formal vote shall be taken to appropriate public moneys:

a. matters which will imperil the public safety if disclosed;

b. any matter which may disclose the identity of a law enforcement agent or informer;

c. information relating to current or future investigation or prosecution of a criminal offense which would imperil effective law enforcement if disclosed;

d. discussions regarding proposed, pending or current litigation;

e. collective negotiations pursuant to article fourteen of the civil service law;

f. the medical, financial, credit or employment history of a particular person or corporation, or matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person or corporation;

g. the preparation, grading or administration of examinations; and

h. the proposed acquisition, sale or lease of real property or the proposed acquisition of securities, or sale or exchange of securities held by such public body, but only when publicity would substantially affect the value thereof.

2. Attendance at an executive session shall be permitted to any member of the public body and any other persons authorized by the public body.

There are 8 “general area or areas of the subject or subjects”. Let’s take them in order.

a. Is there a public safety issue involved? No.

b. Will the identity of an informer be disclosed? No.

c. Does this involve a criminal prosecution? No.

d. Does this involve propose, pending or current litigation? No.

e. Is this a matter of collective bargaining? No.

f. Is there some personal privacy issue involved? No.

g. Does this have anything to do with examinations? No.

So, on what legal basis is the Board of Education planning to adjourn to executive session? There is no legal basis. If I do not hear back from the Board of Education by the end of the day on Monday that they will hold this special meeting in public then I will report them to the New York State Committee on Open Government for violating the State’s Open Meeting Law. Of course, the District routinely violated both the Open Meeting Law and the FOIL law along with many other laws and could probably care less about breaking this law at this time but I will certainly raise the issue and object at the special board meeting on January 19th.