Archives for 2005

From The Associated Press

By CHRISTOPHER SMITH
Associated Press Writer
Dec. 1, 2005

BOISE, Idaho (AP) – A statewide organization of Idaho citizens is overwhelmingly opposed to lawmakers having carte blanche to close legislative committee hearings, putting more pressure on legislative leaders to craft new rules and end a prolonged court battle over the current closed-door option.

Common Interest is a grass roots organization launched a year ago by a bipartisan group of former Idaho legislators in an effort to give average citizens a voice in the political process.

The 700 members are asked before each legislative session to vote on their top lobbying priorities.

“Our members, and Idahoans in general, consider it a violation of the fundamental principle of democracy that people should be excluded when their business is being discussed,” said Keith Allred, president of the Eagle-based group.

Allred said Common Interest would lobby the Legislature in the 2006 session for a limited closure rule that would allow meeting closures for pending litigation, employee discipline and security matters.

The Idaho Press Club sued the Legislature in 2003 for closing meetings of official committees, arguing that the state Constitution requires all business of the lawmaking body to be conducted “openly, and not in secret session.” A 4th District judge has twice ruled that the framers of the Constitution intended only the general sessions of the House and Senate to be always open, not the committee hearings.

The Press Club has appealed and oral arguments are scheduled Jan. 9 before the Idaho Supreme Court.

Idaho, Nevada and Wyoming are the only western states that allow legislative committees to use any reason to close hearings. Montana, Oregon and Washington require legislative committee hearings to always be open, while Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah allow committees to close hearings in specified extraordinary circumstances.

Between 1990 and 2003, legislative analysts said, only one of thousands of committee hearings was closed. Tension between lawmakers and the media rose in 2003, when six committee meetings were closed. Additional meetings were closed in 2004 as lawmakers negotiated a landmark water rights settlement with the Nez Perce Tribe.

No meetings were closed in the 2005 session, but the Senate voted in February for rule changes allowing committees to close hearings for any reason as long as two-thirds of their members voted in support.

The issue flared up Monday, when Republican members of a joint legislative study committee on state worker salaries voted to go into closed session. That prompted House Speaker Bruce Newcomb, R-Burley, to issue an admonition that secret caucuses were not appropriate for joint committees.

“I would like to make it clear, as speaker of the House, that our policy is that no committee, standing or interim, have a session in which a subcommittee meets behind closed doors,” Newcomb wrote. He could not be reached Wednesday for comment.

Senate Majority Leader Bart Davis, R-Idaho Falls, sponsor of the February measure to allow closure with two-thirds support, said Republicans and Democrats had previously agreed on a limited closure rule until Democrats “starting getting political pressure on the editorial pages” and sided with the Press Club in the current litigation.

“I just didn’t feel like there was the commitment from that point,” Davis said Wednesday. “I was willing to do it then, I’m willing to do it now, but I just don’t know where the other side stands on it.”

Senate Minority Leader Clint Stennett, D-Ketchum, said his caucus prefers to wait for the Supreme Court ruling since his Democrats want to “err on the side of more openness rather than less.” He also scoffed at GOP entreaties to join with Democrats in crafting a new rule when Republicans control 80 percent of the Idaho Legislature.

“Since when did Bart need my votes to do anything?” Stennett said Wednesday. “If they want to pass that rule, they have the votes to do so anytime they want to. We’ll wait to see what the Supreme Court says.”

___

On the Net: https://www.TheCommonInterest.org

From The Associated Press

From The Spokesman-Review

By Betsy Z. Russell
The Spokesman-Review
Nov. 29, 2005

BOISE – A legislative interim committee’s decision to send its members behind closed doors to debate details of new state employee pay legislation prompted protests and a rebuke from the speaker of the Idaho House.

The panel, a joint committee charged with improving Idaho’s compensation policies for state employees, was debating legislation to change the state pay system when Sen. Joe Stegner, R-Lewiston, called for a break to go into “caucus,” so the majority Republicans could agree on provisions of the bill behind closed doors. Sen. Bert Marley, D-McCammon, said minority Democrats also wanted to caucus, though Rep. Shirley Ringo, D-Moscow, noted that Democratic caucuses are open to the public.

Rep. Jana Kemp, R-Boise, objected. “I believe that the issue of employee pay is a non-partisan issue, and as such, I would propose that we conduct all business here in the interim committee,” she declared. But she was outvoted, 11-1.

Kemp then sat silently in her seat in protest as the other lawmakers left for their respective party caucuses. “I did what I could,” she said. “Notice where I’m sitting.”

Several hours later, House Speaker Bruce Newcomb issued a stern statement to the committee saying closed-door caucuses are not appropriate for joint committees, and amount to closed subcommittee meetings.

“I would like to make it clear as speaker of the House, that our policy is that no committee, standing or interim, have a session in which a subcommittee meets behind closed doors,” Newcomb wrote. “…On the House side, our policy is to avoid closed-door meetings of subcommittees and/or regular committees unless it is to gain legal counsel.”

The Legislature is being sued by the Idaho Press Club for holding more than half a dozen closed meetings of official committees in recent years. The case goes before the Idaho Supreme Court for arguments on Jan. 9.

Newcomb concluded his written statement, “When someone in a joint committee wants to have a closed-door meeting to discuss issues before the committee, I would instruct House members not to participate. The word ‘caucus’ is an inappropriate term for a joint committee.”

From The Spokesman-Review

Commission appears to have violated state’s open meetings laws by move

From the Lewiston Tribune

By Jodi Walker
Lewiston Morning Tribune
Nov. 22, 2005

GRANGEVILLE — Two Idaho County commissioners went behind closed doors for a conference call regarding the Forest Service’s roadless plan Monday over the objection of the third.

“It was basically a work session,” said Commissioner Jim Rehder Monday evening.

Executive sessions, or sessions where government bodies are allowed to conduct business without the public or press present, are allowed only for personnel issues or for pending litigation in Idaho.

The conference call was with the Idaho Association of Counties and about a dozen counties affected by the roadless document, according to Chairman Randy Doman.

“I didn’t want to go into executive session,” Doman said.

In a morning discussion of the issue, Doman asked the commission’s legal counsel about an executive session. When Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Dennis Albers was leery about the call fitting the definition of an executive session, Doman said he might just recess
the meeting to take the call, along with Rehder.

The two serve on the Idaho County’s roadless committee.

“I would rather have just gone off somewhere and taken the call,” Doman said Monday evening. Since the county is served by three commissioners, two commissioners made a quorum for the closed-door call, a move prohibited by state open meeting laws.

Rehder said Monday night the doors were not closed out of secrecy but so the commissioners could better listen without interruption. When asked if she could stay for the call, Commissioner Alice Mattson was told only those on the committee were invited to participate.

“If I don’t have to be here for roadless, I probably don’t need to be here for the rest of this,” she said angrily waving the day’s agenda.

The roadless plan is a draft of how the state of Idaho and its counties will manage Idaho’s roadless areas. Earlier this year the Bush administration gave state governors with federal roadless areas the ability to petition the secretary of agriculture to change the way the areas are managed.

Public meetings have drawn about 140 people in the last couple of weeks in Idaho and Clearwater counties. The goal of the plan is to include the public in the process. The commissioners closed the door citing a portion of Idaho Code that allows executive session for consideration of “preliminary negotiations involving matters of trade
or commerce in which the governing body is in competition with governing bodies in other states or nations.”

Mattson voted against the executive session but did remain in the room during the phone call. She said she contacted the Idaho Association of Counties during the lunch break and was told the call could be held in public.

Doman said the meeting was legally closed because of the negotiations of how to use federal, state and county money to pay for the roadless comment compilation.

“There were no decisions of the county. We were just listening and giving input,” Doman said.

— Walker may be contacted at c.

From the Associated Press

MOSCOW, Idaho (AP) – Open government and reining in fee increases are among the top issues of the University of Idaho’s new student body president, Humberto “Berto” Cerrillo, who won in last week’s election over rival Travis Galloway.

In winning 62 percent of the vote, Cerrillo, a 21-year-old junior majoring in Spanish and international studies, becomes UI’s first student body president from Lewiston in a quarter-century.

Galloway won 38 percent of the vote.

Earlier this year, members of the UI student senate voted down a proposal that would have allowed the panel to meet behind closed doors.

Cerrillo says that was the right move.

“We’re going to be open, we’re going to be honest and we’re not going to be making behind-the-scenes decisions,” said Cerrillo, who had previously served as an ASUI senator and adviser to outgoing student president Autumn Hansen.

Cerrillo also said he hopes to work with administrators at the financially strapped school _ UI was hit by firings earlier this year as it slashed $4.75 million from its budget _ to keep student fees from rising too quickly.

He wants to keep any increase below 7 percent.

“We’re looking for around 5 (percent),” he said.

From the Associated Press

From the Idaho Press-Tribune

By Vickie Holbrook, Managing Editor

What government meetings are open? When can elected officials close a meeting to the public? What records can you access?

Idaho has open meetings and public records laws, but the people who want to deny access and the people who want access sometimes interpret the laws differently.

And there are those who close meetings only to plead ignorance if they are challenged. Some people suspect that every agency that closes the door has something to hide from the public. That’s an understandable perception, and the faith in the system is further eroded anytime officials lock a door — even when it’s legal — or leave the public standing outside the meeting room because a door is “accidentally stuck” when a session should be open to anyone who wants to attend.

The fact is that as long as there are reasons government officials can lock the door or keep records secret, there is bound to be conflict.

But the Idaho Attorney General’s Office and an organization called Idahoans for Openness in Government and the Idaho Press Club teamed up a year ago to define the rules and answer questions.

The program is for the media, the public and government officials, and will provide answers to questions about the state’s public records and open meetings laws — and it’s promised to be in a no-legalese format. Some easy-to-understand booklets also will be available.

A three-hour session begins at 2 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 25, at the meeting room in Canyon County Courthouse, 1115 Albany, Caldwell.

A Boise workshop begins at 1 p.m. Thursday, Oct. 27, at the Boise Public Library Auditorium, 715 S. Capitol Blvd.

The Idaho Press-Tribune and KBCI Channel 2 are the local hosts for the meeting, and you are invited.

There is no charge, refreshments will be provided and 2.75 continuing legal education credits can be earned.

Please RSVP for the Caldwell workshop with Vickie Holbrook, 465-8110 or vholbrook@idahopress.com, and for the Boise workshop with Elinor Chehey at 343-8018.

Vickie Holbrook can be reached at 465-8110 or vholbrook@idahopress.com.

From the Idaho Press-Tribune

From the Associated Press

MOSCOW, Idaho (AP) — The University of Idaho student senate has decided to keep its meetings open to the public.

Voting Wednesday, the Senate shot down a proposal that would have stamped out the body’s voluntary adherence to Idaho’s open meeting law. The vote was 8-4, with some of the student senators in favor of closing the meetings, saying the body needed private discussions outside the knowledge of the administration.

“If the need arises to oppose the administration, we need to be able to operate behind closed doors,” Sen. James Fox, who voted for the bill, told the Lewiston Morning Tribune.

Sen. Ryan Marsh voted against the bill.

“I feel like we’re trying to get around the rules and laws with this proposal,” he said.

The debate about open meetings began after the Senate went into executive session, a closed meeting allowed only under strict guidelines in the open meeting law, two weeks ago. The Senate cited a private personnel discussion, a valid reason for an executive session.

But senators emerged from the closed meeting and immediately voted to cut the Vandal Taxi program, nicknamed the “drunk bus,” with no public deliberation.

A week later, Sen. Travis Shofner revealed that the Vandal Taxi program was in fact discussed in the closed meeting. Shofner was censured by the Senate for the revelation, and the outcry that followed led to the proposal to end the Senate’s voluntary adherence to the open meeting law.

The bill’s author, senate policy adviser Chris Dockrey, fumed after the vote and refused to indicate whether he would present a different version of his bill in the future.

He did speak in an open forum as the meeting began. “(This bill) will help this organization function more smoothly and achieve more for the students of this university by minimizing unnecessary side dialogue and noise and instead let the issues of the times take center stage,” he said.

Sen. Eric Everett said that passing the bill would have been admitting the senate had done something wrong.

“We have followed the Idaho open meeting law for years and had no problems until now because we are reacting to a perceived wrongdoing,” he said, maintaining the executive session didn’t violate the senate bylaws.

Everett also noted the Senate is entrusted with student money.

“We are spending the student fee dollars, and we are expected to spend it wisely,” he said.

From the Associated Press

Editorial from The Idaho Statesman, Sept. 30, 2005

Way to go, Lawrence Wasden.

The attorney general stood up for the Open Meeting Law � and sent a message to politicians statewide � when he accused Ada County commissioners of holding an illegal closed meeting.

The commissioners made the A.G.�s job easy. Their June 15 meeting was a blatant violation of the state law designed to ensure public officials do the public�s work in public. Still, Deputy Attorney General William von Tagen�s civil complaint, released Wednesday, is on target:

* He rejects the notion that commissioners needed to meet in private to discuss legal issues surrounding a proposed eastern Foothills subdivision. State law allows closed �executive sessions� to discuss pending or probable lawsuits. But as von Tagen notes, commissioners didn�t even have their lawyer in the meeting. �In no way was the commission receiving or exchanging information with its legal counsel.�

* Von Tagen criticizes the commissioners and their staff for failing to take minutes at the meeting. State law requires minutes even for executive sessions. Meeting notes don�t even say which commissioner suggested closing the meeting, or how commissioners voted on the idea.

Von Tagen�s complaint should be required reading for all elected officials. The complaint offers a stern reminder about working in the open � and following the rules on the rare occasion when a secret meeting is justified.

We hope Vern Bisterfeldt gets this message. Bisterfeldt, who worked a dozen years as a county commissioner and was elected to the Boise City Council in 2001, attended the June 15 meeting. He, like the commissioners, should have known better.

We hope the message hits home with the city and county officials who considered meeting last week at the members-only Arid Club to discuss building a taxpayer-funded detox center. The meeting was hastily called off when reporters and citizen watchdogs showed up � a public-relations black eye that just might have kept local leaders on the right side of the law.

The case of the June 15 meeting also offers a lesson in the power of citizen vigilance. Wasden got involved in response to a complaint from Tony Jones, an opponent of the Foothills subdivision proposal. By speaking up, Jones demonstrated that the Open Meeting Law is not just the news media�s law, but the people�s law.

Commissioners will make the next move. They can pay their fine � $150 apiece � or take the case to a judge. Considering that both Bisterfeldt and Commissioner Rick Yzaguirre have said the meeting covered topics that could have been discussed in open session, the commissioners ought to just cough up the money. They can chalk it up as tuition for a remedial lesson in Open Meeting Law.

Editorial from The Idaho Statesman, Sept. 30, 2005