Honorable members of the General Laws - Procurement/Open Government Subcommittee
I oppose SB699 because it does not strike an appropriate balance between government openness and effectiveness.
Limiting the ability of public bodies to take final action on items that were not on the agenda before a meeting even commenced, those public bodies are subject to the whims of whoever drafts meeting agendas. In Oklahoma, former state superintendent Ryan Walters gained notoriety for refusing to include agenda items he disagreed with, abusing a similar notice law to prevent the Oklahoma State Board of Education from even considering actions he disagreed with. This could happen in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The limits of SB699 are also likely to undermine the ability of public bodies to amend items before they are adopted, for fear of judicial intervention. This would likely lead to public bodies either adopting items that could have been improved through deliberation or trying to hammer out details before an agenda has been finalized. Thus, public bodies would be encouraged to either produce mediocre decisions or engage in outside discussions that, even if structured to avoid violating the laws on open meetings, go against their spirit.
The goals of this bill are honorable. But the implementation is still defective. Please defer action on this bill until a proper balance between openness and governance effectiveness is met.
Honorable members of the General Laws - Procurement/Open Government Subcommittee I oppose SB699 because it does not strike an appropriate balance between government openness and effectiveness. Limiting the ability of public bodies to take final action on items that were not on the agenda before a meeting even commenced, those public bodies are subject to the whims of whoever drafts meeting agendas. In Oklahoma, former state superintendent Ryan Walters gained notoriety for refusing to include agenda items he disagreed with, abusing a similar notice law to prevent the Oklahoma State Board of Education from even considering actions he disagreed with. This could happen in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The limits of SB699 are also likely to undermine the ability of public bodies to amend items before they are adopted, for fear of judicial intervention. This would likely lead to public bodies either adopting items that could have been improved through deliberation or trying to hammer out details before an agenda has been finalized. Thus, public bodies would be encouraged to either produce mediocre decisions or engage in outside discussions that, even if structured to avoid violating the laws on open meetings, go against their spirit. The goals of this bill are honorable. But the implementation is still defective. Please defer action on this bill until a proper balance between openness and governance effectiveness is met.