Prying Open Public Meetings

The public’s business should be conducted in public.

That unobjectionable premise has been enacted into several laws in California, but public agencies increasingly seek and find ways to evade them. Under the laws, public bodies are allowed to meet privately when they are discussing legal strategy for pending litigation. But some agencies appear to have broadened that exception to include any meeting at which there is a lawyer in the room.

Legislation sponsored by Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp and the president pro tem of the Senate, Sen. David A. Roberti, would tighten the rules under which government agencies may meet in private. That is to say, the bill would allow the public to watch what is being done in its name and with its money. That’s all to the good.

This bill would continue to permit public bodies to meet privately when discussing pending litigation. But that exemption would not be allowed to cover any legal discussion of any matter that might conceivably lead to litigation. And before a meeting could be closed to the public, the lawyers would have to file written memorandums saying exactly why the closed session was called and the legal authority for meeting in private. None of the laws’ other criteria for closing meetings (matters involving personnel, national or public security, labor negotiations, license applications by rehabilitated criminals and real-property negotiations) would be affected by the Roberti bill.

The Legislature passed a similar bill last year. Unfortunately, Gov. George Deukmejian vetoed it. He specifically objected to a provision of last year’s bill that would have brought governors’ task forces under the open-meetings law. That provision has been dropped from this year’s measure in hopes of getting Deukmejian to sign it. It’s a good compromise, and the governor should go along with it.

The public’s business should be conducted in public.