Bruce Bailey

The Georgia First Amendment Foundation is investigating the Catoosa County Utility District based on alleged violations of Georgia's Open Meetings Act.

"We currently are reviewing copies of some recent minutes of the Utility District and will be conducting an investigation concerning these concerns," said the foundation's executive director Hollie Manheimer in an e-mailed statement. "If necessary, we will be in touch with Utility District concerning any issues."

She said her group had received complaints about the way the board conducts its meetings.

Ms. Manheimer would not specify what complaints or possible infractions provoked the investigation.

The four water board members reached for comment Thursday said they were unaware of the investigation and did not know what the complaints were about.

"I have no idea," said Chairman Jerry Lee.

Vice Chairman Tony Henson said the board "didn't have anything to hide."

"We post everything every time we have a meeting," said board member Jacob Bowman.

Attempts to reach the fifth member of the board, Alvin Worley, were unsuccessful Thursday.

The First Amendment Foundation has scheduled an open government workshop in Catoosa County in April, according to its Web site.

Ms. Manheimer would not say if the workshop is related to the complaint, but it is the only such meeting targeted to a single county on the 2009 or 2010 schedules published on the foundation's site.

According to Georgia's Sunshine Laws, a publication produced by the state attorney general's office in cooperation with the First Amendment Foundation, open meetings laws apply to "every county, municipal corporation, school district and other political subdivision" and "every city, county, regional or other authority established pursuant to state law."

Bruce Bailey, a Chattanooga-based First Amendment attorney licensed in Georgia, said water boards and utility authorities are covered by Georgia's Open Meetings Act.

The act requires meetings of such groups to be publicized and accessible to the public, said Mr. Bailey, whose firm also represents the Chattanooga Times Free Press.

"The open meetings requirements are pretty clear in Georgia," he said.

Specific procedures and parliamentary procedures within the meetings are not spelled out by the open meetings law, he said.

If the First Amendment Foundation finds anything, Mr. Bailey said, they could file a complaint with the attorney general or file a claim in Superior Court.

In most cases where violations are found, the meetings in which violations occurred are voided, but actions taken can be redone at properly handled meetings, he said.