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?
- Geek stuff: Droid Turbo (6 replies)
- RIP Retired KSO Violinist and WUOT Program Director Norris Dyer (12 replies)
- Gene Patterson leaving WATE (26 replies)
- CCA et al fund private prison study (1 reply)
- Spend a day in a High School Student's shoes (4 replies)
- Throwback Thursday: October, 2009 (6 replies)
- Vote no on Amendment 1, skip vote for governor (or maybe not?) (75 replies)
- Burchett: McIntyre needs to go (86 replies)
- The Closing Days of 2014 Election (2 replies)
- Biting the hand for good cause (1 reply)
- PAC Money spent to fight Gloria Johnson (2 replies)
- Knoxville.com reviews Sassy Ann's (12 replies)
- Nov 2 2014 - 3:00pm (1 day 13 hours from now)
- Nov 4 2014 - 8:00pm (3 days 18 hours from now)