From the Charlotte Observer (11/24/08): Public officials are permitted to meet in private. But their discussions don't have to stay that way, according to state law.
Elected officials disagree about how much information should bereleased after closed meetings. Some say public scrutiny can damagegovernment deals. Others say openness makes leaders more accountable.
TheObserver surveyed the incoming Mecklenburg Board of CountyCommissioners on their views about open government. Among thequestions: “Under what circumstances would you want informationdiscussed by commissioners in closed session to be revealed publicly?”
Theresponses, received before and after this month’s election, show boardmembers generally agree that topics like personnel should remain secret.
Butin other cases, the survey reflects a tension that many electedofficials say they face: between being transparent about businessconducted on the public’s behalf and protecting sensitive matters.
Statelaw allows, but does not require, public boards to talk in private onissues such as personnel matters and potential land purchases, or toget advice from their attorney. But the law is silent, with someexceptions, on whether board members can speak about those discussionsafterward.
Mecklenburg County commissioner Bill James pointsto two cases where he said information he shared after closed sessionscast a spotlight on multimillion-dollar land deals.
Oneinvolved the purchase of land for the new courthouse. The countyplanned to build the facility on public land, but talk later focused ona new, more expensive site. Commissioners had discussed the land inprivate, but James successfully pushed for a public hearing. The countyultimately returned to its original plan.
“Going public whenI did was the right thing, though some of the staff and commissionerswere mad about it,” James said in a recent e-mail. “Disclosure was inthe best interests of the public. This is also why I favor recording ofclosed session minutes.”
But others say it’s important to keep private discussions private.
“Thethreat of premature disclosure of matters which are proper fordiscussion in closed session (a very real threat in Mecklenburg Countybecause of commissioners’ tendency to do so for reasons of gainingpolitical/partisan advantage) often hinders full and completediscussion of the issues in the closed session,” wrote CommissionerDumont Clarke, a Democrat.
Other board members said it’s not always clear-cut.
“It’shard to give a hard and fast rule on (whether to discloseinformation),” said Republican Neil Cooksey, the incoming District 5representative. “But I think if it’s something that a commissionerfeels the public ought to know, then I think the commissioner ought tobe free based on his own conscience to go ahead and talk about that inopen forum.”
There aren’t any express rules on whetherpublic officials can reveal information discussed in closed session,said David Lawrence, an open government expert and professor at theSchool of Government at UNC Chapel Hill. He said the one exception iscertain personnel matters.
He said if a board has a closedsession on a lawsuit, for example, and a member later holds a newsconference, there’s nothing much the board can do to stop it. “Manythink it’s unethical, but that’s a different issue,” he said.
The debate over closed sessions is not just a topic for Mecklenburg commissioners. Consider:
Charlotte-Mecklenburgschool board member Larry Gauvreau drew criticism from his colleaguesin 2005 when he disclosed details to reporters of then-outgoingSuperintendent James Pughsley’s retirement request and the names ofadministrators being considered as interim superintendent.
Atthe time, Gauvreau said he didn’t believe those discussions should beprivate and he shared the information with reporters including at theObserver and at the Rhino Times, for which he had served as publisher.
Lastyear, Union County commissioner Roger Lane walked out of a closedmeeting to protest a discussion on a sewer policy he believed shouldhave been held in public. The board declined to hold a public hearing,and later approved the policy.
Molly Griffin, vicechairwoman of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school board, said that bodyfrequently talks about when it is appropriate to go into closedsession, as well as the need to keep closed session mattersconfidential.
“I think that if it’s in closed session, itneeds to stay in closed session unless there is a statutory or legalreason for disclosing it,” she said.
Mecklenburg CountyAttorney Marvin Bethune said there have been some instances wherecommissioners have started talking in closed session about a relatedmatter on the open part of the agenda, or on matters about which theydid not specify the reason for going into closed session.
“Sometimes they don’t understand where the line is,” he said. “My job is to tell them to stop, and they usually do that.”
ConnieBook, director of the Sunshine Center at Elon University, said the mostcommon complaints about closed meetings are when sessions wereimproperly called because officials did not cite the reason for themeeting, and the failure to keep proper minutes.
The lawrequires public bodies to keep minutes of closed discussions. But thethe law also states records can be withheld from the public “so long aspublic inspection would frustrate the purpose of the executive session.”
Lawrencesaid anyone who disagrees with how a meeting was held can question itpublicly. Beyond that, he and Book said, the only other option is tofile a lawsuit.