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?
- Local Presbyterian church in turmoil over same-sex marriage (6 replies)
- Snow pics from Buffalo (6 replies)
- Companies accuse Haslam of leading Pilot Flying J fraud (3 replies)
- Haslam named chair of Republican Governors Association, nobody else wanted it (1 reply)
- VW sets new "Community Organization Engagement" policy at Chattanooga Plant (20 replies)
- RIP Mike Nichols (1 reply)
- Geek tip: Trick out your Android keyboard (1 reply)
- Christmas lights at Chilhowee Park (1 reply)
- Shopper News publisher Sandra Clark exonerated in theft trial (8 replies)
- Della Volpe opposes Tennova hospital relocation (16 replies)
- TNDP chair screening committee recommends three candidates (12 replies)
- Yet another Metro Pulse revival? (12 replies)