It's my view that the only change needed to the Open Meetings Act is a clear definition of "deliberate" for those who don't seem to get it.
And maybe stiffer penalties for violations, but there won't be any violations if there aren't any secret deliberations.
My dictionary says the definition of deliberate in this context is:
4. to weigh in the mind; consider: to deliberate a question.
6. to consult or confer formally: The jury deliberated for three hours.
To me, this means that the following is deliberation:
"I think this zoning request should be denied because it will increase traffic in the neighborhood. You should vote against it too. What does Jack think? Can we get him to go along?"
The following is not deliberation:
"This rezoning will increase traffic in the neighborhood. How's the coffee?"
What do y'all think?
- Women in Black vigils (3 replies)
- Emerald Academy principal named (36 replies)
- Report: School board member/candidate Gloria Deathridge health issues (34 replies)
- E.W. Scripps getting out of the newspaper business (39 replies)
- Sales tax holiday weekend starts today (2 replies)
- Huffman caves (4 replies)
- TN House 18: Martin Daniel responds to Rep. Steve Hall attack (11 replies)
- Ice-free Arctic may come as soon as 2054, study says (9 replies)
- First Friday Celebration with Knox Co Democratic Party (1 reply)
- Turnout predictions? (22 replies)
- NLRB rules on Browning-Ferris: MickyD's workers have the right to know for whom they work (4 replies)
- Adams and Ball spar at Bolivar candidate forum (33 replies)