Too many cooks can “spoil the soup” – and in a way that’s what happened to the so-called open meetings bill in the Utah House of Representatives.
The House passed a diluted version of HB 84 by a vote of 66-3 after representatives weakened the enforcement section by cutting out criminal penalties for intentional violations and removing a method to allow citizens to recover court costs for challenges to decisions made in secret sessions.
Introduced by Rep, Genevieve Atwood, R-Salt Lake, the measure was amended both in committee and House debate.
Even though stripped of its major enforcement and penalty provisions, the bill still has merit. One of its strong features requires public agencies to give advance notice of meetings – by notifying a newspaper of general circulation and posting notice on the building where the meeting is to be held.
Most meetings by school boards, city officials, county commission, and other public agencies are held on a schedule set by law and times and dates are fairly well known. But special meetings are held – and the public notice required in the proposed new law would be very helpful here.
The present Utah freedom of information law enacted in 1955 permits public bodies to hold executive sessions (barring press and public) so long as they do not finally approve any ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, contracts, or appointments behind closed doors.
The proposed new law spells out subjects that can be discussed in executive sessions – personnel matters, union negotiations, deployment of security devices, property negotiations, and criminal investigations.
Whether this list is too encompassing may be open to debate. Whatever guidelines are finally adopted, we are convinced that sound judgment and restraint must be used by public officials, and by the press too. On the one hand, no one wants to break legitimate confidences or cost the taxpayers more money by airing an issue (such as property negotiations) prematurely. On the other, executive sessions must be used most sparingly if the public’s right to know is to be held paramount in the true spirit of our democratic government.
The open meetings bill is now slated for State Senate consideration. We urge the Senate in strongly consider restoring the teeth which were extracted by the House so that Utah will have an effective law on the subject.