Printer-friendly version Reader Comments

Legislators may consider requiring public officials to keep meeting records.

By KELLEY BOUCHARD Staff Writer August 28, 2007

Maine’s position as one of the few states in the country where public officials are not required to keep minutes of meetings is likely to be examined after a recent lawsuit highlighted the absence of a mandatory record.

The Legislature’s fledgling Right to Know Advisory Committee is expected to look into the issue this fall, and lobbyists for news organizations said they will be pushing for change.

The activity comes after a ruling by a Cumberland County Superior Court judge last week that parts of a July 25 closed- door Portland School Committee meeting, held during an ongoing financial and management crisis, were illegal when discussion strayed from protected personnel issues to public budget matters.

The Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram had challenged the legality of the private meeting under the state’s Freedom of Access Act.

Justice Roland Cole ordered the committee to release budget- related notes taken during the meeting by two members and its attorney, Harry Pringle of Drummond Woodsum in Portland, as well as a written statement from Superintendent Mary Jo O’Connor that was distributed at the meeting.

During an Aug. 17 hearing, Cole lamented Maine’s lack of a law to require public boards to keep meeting minutes, especially in executive sessions.

“It’s unfortunate that we do not have some sort of official record of what took place in executive session,” Cole said. “To the extent that anybody here has any influence with the Legislature, it would be my view that that should take place in the future because it really is very difficult, as we have just listened to here, to try to put together what took place in executive session.”

Cole’s concern will top the Right to Know Advisory Committee’s agenda when it meets Sept. 26, said Sen. Barry Hobbins, D-Saco, co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee and chairman of the Right to Know committee.

“This aspect of the judge’s decision and his comments at the hearing definitely will be up for review,” Hobbins said Monday.

Established in 2006, the 16-member advisory committee was created to review the state’s Freedom of Access Act and recommend changes to the Judiciary Committee. The advisory committee includes representatives on all sides of the Right to Know issue, including publishers, broadcasters, law enforcement, school departments and municipalities.

Some advisory committee members believe meeting minutes should be required.

“There should be a record of what happens in all meetings of public boards. The public needs to have a real understanding of what was discussed. There’s no way to do that unless you have a record,” said Malcolm Leary, who is owner of the Capitol News Service, president of the Maine Freedom of Information Coalition and a board member of the National Freedom of Information Coalition.

In executive sessions, Leary said, minutes should be taken so there’s a record of a board’s action if anyone questions whether a closed-door meeting was appropriate.

Maine law limits closed-door meetings to discussions of litigation, real estate transactions, contract negotiations and personnel matters, although more than 600 exceptions have been approved since the law took effect in 1959.

Harry Pringle, who represents school board interests on the advisory board, could not be reached for comment.

The documents released in the Portland committee’s case will be held for 21 days pending an appeal, which must be filed by Sept. 6. The School Committee is expected to discuss whether to appeal on Sept. 5.

According to the national Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Maine, Alaska, Arkansas and Kansas have no statutes requiring minutes to be taken at government meetings. Nearly every other state requires that records be kept in some form at both open and closed meetings, although some require them at open meetings but not closed meetings.

Many public boards keep minutes...