Politics & Government

Supreme Court Rules Newport's Zoning Board Violated Open Meetings Act

The Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled Newport Zoning Board of Review violated the state's Open Meeting Act

The Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that Newport's Zoning Board of Review violated the Rhode Island Open Meetings Act when it failed to give enough information in an agenda for a meeting held on Feb. 23, 2009.  This decision overturned Judge Melanie Wilk Thunberg's ruling in Superior Court.

In November of 2008, the board received a request from Congregation Jeshuat Israel, whose home is the Touro Synagogue, to extend the time to make improvements to his property.  Israel had previously been granted approval by the board under the condition the work be completed in two years.

The board's agenda item for the extension request reads as follows:

Find out what's happening in Newportfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

IV. Communications
Request for Extension from Turner Scott received 11/30/08
Re: Petition of Congregation Jeshuat Israel

At the February meeting, the zoning board voted unanimously to approve the extension, with the condition the construction be completed by February 23, 2011.  The plaintiffs in this case, Sheila Anolik, Wendy Anolik, and Jeffrey Anolik said the agenda item was a “vague and indefinite” notice to the public and one lacking in specificity.

Find out what's happening in Newportfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

The Anolik family asked the approval to grant the extension be void and requested attorneys‘ fees and other relief deemed appropriate by the court. The zoning board denied the allegations and no other action was taken until they moved for summary judgment in September 2011.  

The Supreme Court’s analysis reads:

[T]he February 23, 2009 agenda item was completely silent as to which specific property was at issue; the agenda item provided no information as to a street address, a parcel or lot number, or even an identifying petition or case number. Additionally, and determinatively, we conclude that designating the agenda item under the rubric of ―Communications does not even remotely indicate that any action will be taken with respect to the agenda item.

Under this decision, the approval of the extension is null and void and the improvements may not continue.

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.