Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin March 10, 2016 I Volume 10 I Issue 5 <br />Procedure —Town boards go into <br />executive session for legal <br />consultation on proposed ordinance <br />Boards are accused of violating open <br />meeting law and ordinance is challenged as <br />null and void <br />Citation: Hughes Bros., Inc. v. Town of Eddington, 2016 ME 13, <br />2016 WL 159296 (Me. 2016) <br />MAINE (01/14/16)—This case addressed the issue of whether the <br />joint executive session of two town boards violated the open meetings <br />requirement of Maine's Freedom of Access Act, therefore resulting in <br />the ordinance discussed at that executive session being invalid. <br />The Background/Facts: In September 2013, Hughes Bros., Inc. <br />("Hughes") filed an application with the Planning Board (the "Board") <br />of the Town of Eddington (the "Town"), seeking permission to use <br />property in the town as a 20-acre quarry. While that application was <br />pending, the Board recommended to the Town's Board of Selectmen <br />(the "Selectmen") an adoption of a moratorium on quarries. <br />Eventually, on January 29, 2014, the Board and the Selectmen met <br />in a publicly announced meeting. Each board voted to go into execu- <br />tive session for "Consultation with Legal Counsel," citing to Maine's <br />Freedom of Access Act ("FOAA"). (See 1 M.R.S. § 405(6)(E).) The <br />jointly held executive session lasted for approximately one hour and 20 <br />minutes. At around the time of the executive session, drafts of a <br />proposed ordinance that would establish a moratorium on quarries were <br />prepared. <br />A month later, the Board voted to send a moratorium ordinance to <br />the Selectmen. The Selectmen then voted to place an article on a town <br />warrant announcing that the moratorium would be considered at a <br />special town meeting to be held on April 8, 2014. At the special town <br />meeting, the Town adopted an ordinance that imposed a moratorium <br />on mineral extraction activities. Thereafter, the Board voted to take no <br />further action on Hughes' application for a 20-acre quarry until the <br />moratorium expired, the application was withdrawn, or a court ordered <br />otherwise. <br />In the meantime, just prior to the public vote on the moratorium, <br />Hughes filed an action in superior court. Among other things, Hughes <br />asked the court to declare that any moratorium approved would be null, <br />© 2016 Thomson Reuters 9 <br />