"Jacksonville, Fla., Airport Authority's Closed Meeting Questioned"

Saturday, March 29, 2003

Jacksonville, Fla., Airport Authority's Closed Meeting Questioned
The Florida Times-Union


During a closed meeting that experts say is legally allowed only to discuss
security plans, the head of the Jacksonville Airport Authority in late 2001
briefed the authority board about creating a new position for a liaison to
the federal agency overseeing airport security. 

Executive Director John Clark said he presented his idea for the position
during a closed security meeting in November or December 2001. However, the
exact date of the briefing or exactly what was discussed can't be determined
because no minutes or recording was taken.

The job was given to former JAA Police Chief Gloria Smith in October without
any public notice.

The state created a special exception to public meetings laws following the
Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to allow the private discussion of
security plans to prevent criminals from getting inside information. 

A security system plan is defined by the state as "any information revealing
surveillance techniques or procedures or personnel."

Authority attorney Cindy Laquidara, who is chief deputy general counsel of
Jacksonville's Office of General Counsel, said the definition of security
plans applies only to the public records portion of the Sunshine Law. The
public meetings definition isn't as explicit, she said.

But four experts on the state Sunshine Laws disagreed.

Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation in
Tallahassee, said the same public records definition of a security plan
applies in meetings. The exemption doesn't allow for the discussion of a
personnel change. 

Pat Gleason, general counsel for the state Attorney General's Office, said
she's unaware of a special security exemption ever being cited to discuss a
personnel matter. Closed security meetings should only be called for the
discussion of security plans, she said.

David Bralow, an Orlando lawyer specializing in First Amendment issues, said
public meetings exemptions are supposed to be interpreted narrowly.
Discussion of the new job or Smith's reassignment during a closed security
meeting "was an expansive stretch of the statute."

Jacksonville lawyer Bob Dees, chairman of the Media Committee of the Florida
Bar Association, said because there's no record of what was discussed in the
closed meeting, it's not entirely clear if there was a statute violation.

"It's a tough call," he said. "But on the face of it, the reassignment of
existing personnel into a known position doesn't fall under that category."

Clark said it was his understanding that the security meetings could be used
to discuss "anything related to our security program."

Laquidara said application of the statute is a judgment call.

"It all depends on how you frame it," she said.

The Airport Authority has a history of testing the limitations of the
state's public meeting laws, called the Sunshine Laws.

On two occasions last year, authority officials conducted public meetings
that weren't advertised. One of the meetings involved the selection of a
contractor for the authority's new $8 million headquarters.

Also last year, the authority failed to take minutes of the first 30 minutes
of its board meetings as required of state law.


 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dc/dcboard.php

*****************************************