It’s not as if media groups want live Webcasts of local governments’ executive sessions. All they want is to require that such closed sessions be audiotaped and the tapes preserved for a year for possible judicial review, should a citizen or media outlet suspect that the discussion violated the Kansas Open Meetings Act. Don Moler, executive director of the League of Kansas Municipalities, is among those who don’t get it, telling Harris News Service the bill is a “golden oldie” that “never was a good idea” and would “have a chilling effect on open and frank discussion.” He added, “I’d say this bill is a solution in search of a problem.” I’d say the way that executive sessions are overused in Wichita and elsewhere, the bill is essential to know how big a problem exists.
Legislators who think there’s such a thing as too much open government — there isn’t — could turn to an alternative bill that would be better than nothing. It would allow a member of the government board in question to request that an executive session be audiotaped. In any case, the point is: It’s hard to prove something was unlawfully discussed or decided in a closed meeting in the absence of any evidence either way.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
10 Comments
Makes you wonder if the pay raise for Chris Cherches ever would have been discussed.Ram it down the KLM’s throats!
“have a chilling effect on open and frank discussion.”
Excuse me? Sunshine law anyone? Does Don Moler think he’s George Bush? What next,Don, secret elections?
It won’t do any good as long as 18 minutes can be “accidentally” erased.
I have some limited experience in a kind of government posistion.
I have also dealt with the media in my posisition.
I have had meetings which were tape recorded and meetings which were not tape recorded.
I have even had meetings which were secretly tape recorded.
The reason why tape recording every meeting is a bad idea is that it changes the way you discuss everything.
Lets face it. Todays media feeds on trying to catch someone saying something stupid, silly, outragous, anything they can get.
When you know you are being recorded it is basically human nature to purposefully ensure that everything you say is not something that can be used against you. It really hampers the discussion.
On top of that it also encourages some showboating to glorify yourself of say things to make you look good.
I will never agree with the medias cry to have access to everything or to have everything tape recorded.
The truth is that if you tape record all those meetings all it will be is some gotch thing later.
There is a time and place for public meetings and there is also a time and place where meetings should and need to remain private.
Well Nathan,If taping inhibits people from saying stupid things, why not tape every public official all the time?
It is not about saying stupid things. It is about being comfortable discussing the actual topic instead of worrying about how your words can be twisted against you.
Public officials are employees of the public. Doesn’t the public have the right to know how it’s employees arrive at decisions that affect it? What would a private employer do with workers who refused to disclose what they did on his time?
Public representatives are not emplyees they are represntatives.
Completely different system.
I don’t think the public has a right to know everything about how representatives come up with their decisions.
I don’t know many private employers if any at all that tape record the meetings of their employees or require it.
It is not about disclosing what they do on company time, of course they do that. That is not the topic. The topic is tape recording meetings.
Ah, here we have the source of many disagreements. Nathan, they are public employees. They all work for us–including the president.
The only comparison to being an employee I can think of is that in a sense they are hired and fired by the people that elect them.
Other than that the similarities stop.
Even if we do go with the employee comparison, I still have yet to see any boss tape record every meeting his employees have.