May 22, 2014 10:27:02 AM
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.
1. Our View: No shortage of cultural offerings DISPATCH EDITORIALS
3. Our View: A beneficial conversation, a needed partnership DISPATCH EDITORIALS
4. Other Editors: Ebola virus is a threat we can handle NATIONAL COLUMNS
5. Froma Harrop: 'Death with Dignity' law is least slippery slope NATIONAL COLUMNS