Matthew Cardinale and the Atlanta Progressive News have been battling the City of Atlanta over whether closed-door “Committee Briefings,” held seven times every two weeks, violate the state Open Meetings requirement.
While Matthew is an ideological liberal progressive, and he and I disagree on many things, I agree 100 percent with the idea that Georgia governments must be held to the highest standard of conduct under both the state Open Records laws, and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Simply put, these two laws work hand-in-glove to ensure that all citizens, liberal or conservative, have access to information about what their government is doing. They are fundamental to the ability of citizens to protect themselves against government corruption or overreaching. They are non-negotiable.
I believe that sharing these documents furthers the goals of the Open Meetings Act of protecting citizens’ right to access information about their government. I further believe that the First Amendment protects the media’s actions in disseminating such documents. So I’m sharing them with you.
Cardinale, working pro se, has filed complaints against these closed door meetings, working his way to the Georgia Supreme Court, which has granted review of the case.
Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens, who has become an Open Records/Open Meetings watchdog, has entered the fray, seeking to ensure that the City follow the law. Olens has also sued the Savannah City Council under similar circumstances, to require compliance with public notice requirements.
This week, Atlanta Progressive News received and has disseminated internal memos from the City of Atlanta’s lawyers to the Council members in which lawyers warn Council that some of these meetings fall under the Open Meetings Act and must comply with requirements for notice, public access, agendas, and minutes, and that a quorum of the Council or any Committee must not occur during such meetings or the meetings will violate the Open Meetings Act.
Well, now those lawyers want their memos back, claiming that the memos are protected by the attorney-client privilege.
APN obtained the memos from a confidential source and has every intention of upholding the confidentiality granted to this source.
But the Law Department is not happy about the memos having been released to APN and has asked APN to return the memos to their offices.
“I am writing regarding your posting in The Atlanta Progressive News (“APN”) on August 9, 2011,” [Atlanta Assistant City Attorney Kristen] Denius wrote in an August 10, 2011, letter to APN.
“The article is based upon correspondence protected by the attorney-client privilege,” Denius wrote.
“The article admits that, ‘APN obtained four memos prepared for City Council members by City attorneys from a source who was granted confidentiality because they were not authorized to release the information,’” Denius wrote.
“Accordingly, I respectfully request that you return the memoranda and any other privileged documents to the Department of Law immediately,” Denius wrote….
However, Atlanta Progressive News does not see any legal obligation–nor does the City of Atlanta provide any legal theory–as to why APN should return the memos to the Law Department.
APN provided the memos to Channel 2 WSB and they were featured yesterday in a segment on the City of Atlanta and the closed-door Committee Briefings.
Two things stand out about the dispute between APN and the City of Atlanta. First is that Matthew Cardinale is doing some solid reporting. I read APN’s email newsletters because although I disagree ideologically with Matthew, they cover in-depth issues related to city government that no one else in the media covers. Second is that APN is doing great work on behalf of all voters by serving notice that private citizens will take action to enforce the Open Meetings Act, and showing the private citizen action can get the Attorney General’s Office involved.
So here are the memos that the Atlanta Law Department very much wants back.
Memo 2 discusses Cardinale’s lawsuit attempting to enforce the Open Meetings Act.
Memo 4 discusses basics of the Open Meetings Act and its applicability to City Council.
{ 34 comments }
Peach Pundit – a veritable Wikileaks. Careful what you do while in Sweden though.
Attorney-client privilege? No. Methinks this would instead be an attorney work product doctrine issue, except it’s not. Such information is not subject to discovery, but that does not mean it’s undiscoverable. It’s like the Coke formula. The secret to keeping secrets secret is secrecy.
I’m with you on that one but I’d love to hear a lawyer’s point of view. You can’t unknow something, and you can’t unpublish it – once it’s in the papers it’s in the public domain. Whether the information is a) privileged or b) admissible in a court of law is something a lawyer might know. But beyond that fact, whether they were notified of the meetings’ illegality is incidental – the meetings were still illegal. The act that they were told this doesn’t change that, just makes me want to smack them harder.
I’m with you on that one but I’d love to hear a lawyer’s point of view.
As would I.
IANAL but as a trained paralegal the concept of ‘attorney-client’ privilege is on the ATTORNEY not the client. Client (in this case someone within the City) disseminated the information. To call these memo’s “secret” is…just weird.
Also, Todd, I agree with your assessment of Mr. C. Although I cringe a lot when he ‘raps’ his speech to council committee, he has been the type of gadfly that this city has not seen since a man named Suggs.
In the City of Dallas, TX, a young reporter made a living off picking the easy targets at City Hall. Eventually, Laura Miller became mayor herself. Stephanie Ramage was the closest we had to a L.M. so now Matthew takes up the, er, high heels of Stephanie and digs for the story that the AJC and CL just can’t be bothered to research.
APN broke the Eagle story, as well. See? Progressive liberals are good for some things too!
Frame this Rick:
You’re right.
Laura Miller, wow, that’s a blast from the past. I wish we had a Dallas Observer.
I hardly think we’re in any danger of Matthew becoming confused with John Pruitt. Matthew promises a new song for Monday during ATL city council public question time. Stay tuned!
Todd,
You will see my earlier message soon enough.
What gets me about you right wingers is that thee and we agree on issues like the Georgia Sunshine Laws, e.g., the Open Meetings and Open Records Acts. Indeed, Matthew tells me you were pushing him to make reference to the First Amendment, in his pleading even stronger as was I.
In many ways you support, as conservators of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights all that was progressive about the American Revolution.
But somewhere in there appears a disconnect. I must admit that to me that disconnect appears to arise out of some sort of subjectivity, out of notions about what you want personally. The failing I think is that you fail to understand that the tremendous technology and manufacturing engine developed by capitalism and which history was necessary and arguing against would be pointless as history speaks truth.
But now those who control that engine and technology are using it to destroy whole peoples and as well their own manufacturing system when in fact it would seem, and as Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels intimated in their voluminous works, further development of our species can only be achieved, as opposed to our destruction, by restoring and subjecting control to the community as a whole without which communal system of living by our very distant ancestors before they left Africa, none of us, none of this, would exist.
What I think you also fail to see is that communal control of that technology and productive engine can produce more than any of us ever dreamed of having.
That disconnect is what I fail to understand.
Jack Jersawitz
[email protected]
Take the blue pill.
Have you got any Allman Brothers records?
Todd, do not malign the ABB.
Besides if JJ is licking any stamps, then he’s probably got the Grateful Dead’s Europe ’72 going – Likely on vinyl with a set of Klipsch speakers running off of a tube amp.
I’m not maligning the Allman Brother Band. In fact, I favor revamping the Peach Pundit header to feature a semi-trailer with a giant peach in it with “Peach Pundit” emblazoned across it to pay tribute to the Allmans and to PP’s macon-based heritage.
It’s a reference to an old Saturday Night Live skit featuring Dan Akroyd as President Carter.
My apologies, then – and I agree about the logo.
And are you at all concerned about the cryptic reference to an earlier “message”?
Big Jack, just one question, what the hell are you talking about?
He is saying it takes a village….The disconnect is in discounting the individual.
The world growth in emerging markets is related to individuals whose property rights and a piece of their production has improved. Individuals need communities that improve their quality of life by finding the optimum level of public safety and services while minimizing material threats and nuisances.
One example of a corp paying attention to their profits: Jeff Immelt is Obama’s top outside economic advisor to help him improve U.S. jobs. Last month GE moved their healthcare x-ray div. HQ to Beijing. GE has more employees overseas and pays no or little U.S. taxes.
China has potential but moving the HQ? Follow the money. The U.S. has one of the world’s highest corporate tax rates of 35% and tax laws that aid multi-nationals. Tax revenues could be increased by eliminating the loopholes, subsidies, gov’t interference and cutting the tax rate to 15% or less. Multi-nationals will still operate around the world for many reasons but hundreds of billions or so $$$ would be estimated to come home.
Salty,
Thank you for your reply. I understand what you are saying and agree with a good deal of it.
But a question, how were you able to discern anything remotely like what you state from bigjack’s posting?
I was countering his remarks by a leap of faith to interpret what I think he said.
It serves no purpose to express my inner thoughts on where I think he is coming from as he might be willing to share that truth along with his profession and role in the community and we will be enlightened. Odds are on on some public service capacity…
‘Odd’ is the operative word here.
+1
Nice job of creative interpretation!
In addition, you’re spot on regarding corporate income tax rates, though I’d like to see those reduced to zero. Individuals will eventually pay the taxes anyway, either as income or capital gains . . . And income taxes were already paid on the money before investments were made.
Yep, poor ole Jack Jer…..is trapped in the wrong country…..
No corp inc. tax – No problem – the trade off is that all individuals must have some skin in the game, no deductions, rebates, transfers, subsidies, tax shelters…..we’d still need to come up with some tariff, fee, license collections and business revenues to drive some research & other public interest endeavors…..none of those third party consumer rebate, vote buying games.
lots of stuff to kick around – get everyone in with some national sales tax on all transactions, sales, deed transfers, barters……and begin a moderate income tax with flat plateaus starting at say $100k & bumping up at higher plateaus $250k, $500k, +$1mil……..
No taxes on capital gains & dividends – we got them at the initial transaction.
lots of other nuances but you got the idea.
But now those who control that engine and technology are using it to destroy whole peoples and as well their own manufacturing system when in fact it would seem, and as Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels intimated in their voluminous works, further development of our species can only be achieved, as opposed to our destruction, by restoring and subjecting control to the community as a whole without which communal system of living by our very distant ancestors before they left Africa, none of us, none of this, would exist.
Jack, seriously. I’m not trying to be rude and this really is a sincere question: Seriously?
You’re joking, right? You’re actually a conservative who is lampooning the left . . . aren’t you?
I am dead serious.
Saltywho gets a bit of it.
Let me expand.
To go any further, instead of to death of our species and probably the whole planet, it is necessary to return to the cooperative or communal form of production of our very distant ancestors, homo sap before we ever left Africa and began our world covering migration.
Those people survived only because they worked together given the odds of surviving with a few stones and sticks as tools.
History says that the social evolution from there (Although hidden away in one or another recess there still are some small stone age groups), often brutal and horrible as it was and is, was necessary.
But the last few hundred years or so says we are on the road to extinction unless we return to the social mode of our ancestors but this time on the high technical level we have achieved in spite of ourselves.
What puzzles me is how you all can be so insistent on those sections of the Constitution that address the rights and privileges of all but still and yet express the individualism that is leading to our extinction. It wouldn’t take much; just that murderous bastard in the white house unleashing a nuclear armed missile on Iran, or more likely China.
Do you doubt that both China and Russia have ICBM’s pointed our way? The explosive results will be bad but how much worse all that radiation?
Recently I read an item on political economy written by Fredrich Engels back in 1843 and was shocked because if I didn’t know he was writing then I would have thought he was here writing now.
The method of Marx and Engels is at base a recognition, which they learned from Hegel, that all things contain their opposite and so internally are in constant tension and it is those opposites, that tension or contention that is the source of motion and development.
The Engels piece on political economy is here… http://mysite.du.edu/~rkuhn/ints4465/engels.pdf
j.
Jack, Dude,
You are making me have flashbacks to all night conversations in college with my philosophy/antropology/psychology/history buddies……the real Jack was “On the Road”…..
So talk to any enlightened former hippie chicks that tried the commune and she’ll tell you Marxism, in any of its morphed forms, in real life is a total failure……human nature……too many grasshoppers and not enough ants……..don’t think I should get any more graphic than that on the chicks’ stories…..
me I got a job as a houseboy in a sororiety house and embraced ethical capitalism….idealistic too, but it worked….with a dash of hedonism & heineken
p.s. suggested deep readings: W.F. Buckley, Jr. (multi-talented dude, accomplished sailor)
“I got a job as a houseboy in a sororiety house…”
One question salty, why did you ever change professions?
C,
The pay was meals only, the fringe benefits were great………..
except 65 sorority ladies, 7 days a week where you served at their pleasure, wasn’t all it is cracked up to be……..
Made me a believer in monogamy……only one to answer to…..
Lots of funny stories & memories…….
jack,
Thank you for the reply.
Rather than go on at length, I’ll distill down my position to a few words: Abolition of private property does not create a classless society, it results in the creation of two classes: government and slave.
Those who control the resources, the government, control the production of life’s necessities (food, clothing, shelter) delivering ultimate control over all others. The private citizens must rely on the good will of the government in order to survive. Those citizens can never be free to make their own decisions when the result of following conscience is the starvation of their families. (See Stalin’s retaliation against the Ukraine, aka the Holomodor, in 1932-33 if you have any questions).
Congratulations and thanks to APN for this story.
Our form of government only works when the public is informed. Journalism – when done right – is oh so sweet.
Don’t ever compare John Sugg to libel bait Matthew Cardinale. Ever.
So how were the redistricting maps come up with? Were there meetings? Would they have not needed to be open?
Todd, good stuff but given your below quote why aren’t you, Sam Olens, the press, or anyone else here arguing that the Georgia General Assembly should also be subject to the state’s open meetings/records laws.
“I agree 100 percent with the idea that Georgia governments must be held to the highest standard of conduct under both the state Open Records laws, and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
Actually, if you read the law carefully the legislators are subject to the open records act.
I don’t have the text in front of me right now but I have on another machine a back and forth with some of those legislators and their attorneys in re records requests to the legislators and when I point out the text I’m here referring to they stop corresponding.
The text at issue (From memory) backwards includes the legislators because it specifically excludes the work and documents of a particular section of the legislature; hence the implication is that the intention was to include the legislators as subject to the Act.
I interpret the cut-off in the exchanges between those attorneys and I as a silent admission that they have no answer and probably hope I will go away.
j.
I’m too tired from traveling all day to respond to your post, Sluggo, but I’ll try to deal with it tomorrow.
Comments on this entry are closed.