|
but as I read the items which are possible,
and apparently currently within the juris-
diction of the present Board of Public
Works, unless I am wrong, I would assume
that in connection with the construction of
buildings, equipment and other public
works, that the experiences I have had
serving on a board that has the same type
of functions where sometimes in the course
of negotiations with professionals, par-
ticularly where the contract will not re-
sult in the lowest responsible bidder being
awarded the contract, but where when you
are dealing with professionals and you
have to negotiate a contract with them,
that periodically we meet in executive ses-
sion, and the reason we do so is to set cer-
tain limits within which the staff members
may negotiate. It would certainly not be
in the best interests of the community and
the public funds that we were expending
if we did not have this executive session,
and if the public and the person with whom
we were going to negotiate knew what our
outside limit was. Now if some of this
board would ever have this kind of func-
tion, then of course there is no reason
that they should not have executive ses-
sions, but it seems to me that executive
sessions should be allowed, but only for a
very limited specialized circumstance. That
is what I would assume would occur.
I think it is unrealistic when you have
a board of three, to assume that if you put
a requirement in that there will always be
public sessions, that they will not, whether
by phone or otherwise discuss some of
these issues. What I think you are doing,
in let's say in the words of purity, you are
causing people to do things that they would
not otherwise do, and they are doing it
perhaps really with the best motives in
order to protect the best interests of the
State.
I would suggest that we should not drive
our public officials underground, but we
should recognize that under some limited
circumstances there may be such need and
therefore leave it to the legislature to de-
fine these circumstances very clearly, for
all to know, and hope that everybody would
act accordingly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion? Delegate Mentzer.
DELEGATE MENTZER: I would like
to support Judge Sherbow's amendment,
and would like to read from the Curlett
Commission: care must be exercised to in-
sure that decisions made by any Board
which may succeed the Board of Public
Works will be made in the open, at public
|
meetings, where hearings are held, proper
minutes kept, and decisions subject to pub-
lic scrutiny.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: Mr. Chairman, I
would suggest that we really are as one
in connection with the significance of pub-
lic hearings when they are important as
such, and that we recognize fully that
there are rare occasions when this just
would not be possible, nor even reasonable,
and I would wonder if Judge Sherbow
recognizing that we have now placed within
the transcript itself this consensus in re-
gard to how we feel about the importance
of the public in this relationship, would be
willing to withdraw his motion, realizing
that we do believe with him the significance
of the public hearing for the basic deci-
sions that are to be made?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: No, I do not
withdraw it. On the contrary, I think that
no matter how any of us feel about a com-
promise, and I am sure nobody is happy
about it, if we do not have this safeguard
in it, it is something that was warned about
in the Curlett Commission report, it was
referred to by the governor — I am sorry,
I do not have his exact language in front
of me; I loaned my copy to the vice-chair-
man yesterday, where the governor, if I
recall it correctly, indicated the idea that
there should be a public forum for these
matters. I do not know that he went as
far as to suggest that all the meetings
should be public, but I think you are cre-
ating a body whose usefulness is severely
hampered and restricted unless there is the
requirement that the sessions be open and
its decisions openly arrived at, recorded
for the public to see.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Storm.
DELEGATE STORM: Mr. Chairman,
my memory fails, but is there not a pro-
vision some place in the present Constitu-
tion, maybe it is statutory, that all actions
of any public body should be made in public
meetings, something like that?
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair is not
aware of any such provisions in the pres-
ent Constitution. Delegate Kiefer.
DELEGATE KIEFER: Mr. President,
there is a section in the administrative
law which provides that all administrative
bodies will have public hearings and make
no decisions without public hearings. It is
set out in the Code. I cannot tell you ex-
|
