Article Comment 

Voice of the people: Berry Hinds

 

 

Public deserves to know 

 

The CVB has to cancel a meeting because a quorum would not be present because board members had previous plans and the director is told not to reveal which board members could not attend because of privacy concerns. First this is an appointed public body which existence was codified by state statue. There are provisions in this body's by-laws that state a person could be removed from the board for lack of attendance from of a given number of consecutive meetings, therefore the lack of attendance should have been documented. If the board was unwilling to try to convene and document attendees they should release the names of the board members that stated they would not attend. Notice: For their privacy I do not say they should state why. 

 

If the board had tried to convene and they were not present we would not know why, just that they are not there. It seems the harder the public tries to get public bodies to become transparent performing the public business the more they retreat behind "privacy." They need to read and understand the purpose of the open meeting act and the court precedents and opinions from the Attorney General's office as well as the Ethics Commission findings and rulings. 

 

Berry Hinds 

 

Columbus

 

 

printer friendly version | back to top

 

 

 

Most Viewed Opinion Stories

 

1. Our View: And the winner is ... Poindexter Hall DISPATCH EDITORIALS

2. America's liberal tradition NATIONAL COLUMNS

3. Voice of the people: Martin Pomphrey, Jr. M.D. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (VOICE@CDISPATCH.COM)

4. Voice of the people: Marjorie (Margie) Canon LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (VOICE@CDISPATCH.COM)

5. Voice of the people: Kelsey Van Every LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (VOICE@CDISPATCH.COM)

 

More popular content      Suggest a story

 

 

Follow Us:

Follow Us on Facebook

Follow Us on Twitter

Follow Us via Instagram

Follow Us via Email