Tom Humphrey files this report on the recommendations by the committee studying changes to the state's open meetings act.
After all the study and debate, it appears all they can agree on is to change the law from not allowing deliberation among two or more officials to not allowing three (or a majority, whichever is less) or more to deliberate. By not allowing two or more, the current law effectively allows no deliberation. The new law, if as described, would now allow two to deliberate. It is not clear how this is a change for the better.
It should also be noted that the article contains a factual error. The article states "Current law says that a meeting of two or more officials can be a violation." Actually, the law says that deliberation between two or more officials is a violation, not a meeting, and even provides for exceptions such as chance meetings or visits to a project site.
According to the article, there were also arguments to allow deliberation by phone or e-mail, as these would not be a "meeting."
It's pretty sad that elected officials have so much trouble understanding that they can't deliberate in secret and that the public's business must be conducted in public.
- Five Knox Co. schools named as "Reward Schools" for performance and progress (2 replies)
- McIntyre: Burchett remarks "appalling" and "ignorant" (38 replies)
- Gaza: it's about natural gas (3 replies)
- Are Achievement School District schools achieving? (1 reply)
- Who's worse: Delusional sellers or Realtors who enable them? (26 replies)
- Gov Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power (17 replies)
- Laying the foundation (18 replies)
- Police state of America (33 replies)
- Conversations (4 replies)
- Corporate profits (1 reply)
- JD3 cleared to run for Congress (28 replies)
- ISIS (40 replies)
- Aug 23 2014 - 11:00am (1 day 18 hours from now)
- Aug 26 2014 - 6:00pm (5 days 1 hour from now)
- Aug 28 2014 - 6:00pm (1 week 1 hour from now)
- Sep 10 2014 - 7:00pm (2 weeks 6 days from now)