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.
- Companies accuse Haslam of leading Pilot Flying J fraud (2 replies)
- Haslam named chair of Republican Governors Association, nobody else wanted it (1 reply)
- Local Presbyterian church in turmoil over same-sex marriage (4 replies)
- 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)
- Snow pics from Buffalo (5 replies)
- 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)