I can't really disagree with you Mr. Scott (too many **** Scott's now on this forum ) because the phrase can mislead.

But consider this - a board DOESN'T HAVE TO go into an executive session - they can do that business in the open if they choose. They only do it because the law lets them, and in many cases for good reason.

A specific example of how I, the KC Star and one TV station got some city council and committees in Kansas City to open its doors to the public concerned real estate negotiations. It was about property for their new downtown arena.

The standard reply was they cloesd the meetings so the price wouldn't be affected. However, the properties in question were connected to TIF (KC handed out TIF like Illinois hands out party favors , and we told the parties if they were making decisions that would affect taxpayers in the future then they should let the taxpayers know in advance.

A couple of council committees began meeting openly when I kept airing, "they met secretly to talk about the deal and how much TIF will charge you taxpayers the next 23 years." The TV reporter aired his reports in the same manner. We were mentioned frequently in open meetings, pro and con about this but when that council left due to term limits, the suceeding council started meeting privately again .

It's true they can meet behind closed doors or secretly - but aren't required to do it.

Sez

Good points, Scott!

ss

Sounds like a terrific story to share with every member through a tuneIN submission. How about it?

Ron

Ben and all:

No, it's not your imagination. The Ashcroft Justice Department has set the current standard, which errs on the side of keeping the public in the dark. It trickled down fast, believe me.
I love Scott's writing tips. The term "executive session" means nothing to a lot of people. It's not wording you'd use in a casual conversation. Say it so they'll know it.

bob

I've recently filed my first FOIA request, too. Unfortunately, it wasn't for a news story -- at least not for one I was covering.

In the past month or so, I've been the victim of, of all things, identity theft. Long story short -- a checkbook of mine was stolen, and the alleged is in custody (turns out he was also AWOL). But in order to clear my name, TWO different collection agencies wanted copies of actual police reports detailing the incident. If you ask me, it shouldn't be up to me to get that information to them. But at any rate, I had to FOIA for the reports, and it's been weeks since such an agency has badgered me.

If anyone wants more details, I'll be happy to share. But the moral of my story is: Don't get so busy that you become absent-minded and lose track of personal belongings.

Forgot to mention in my previous post that, when I did file the FOIA, I got all the paperwork I requested in less than 15 minutes. Now that's service!

Now let's just hope I don't ever have to file a FOIA for something like that ever again.

Finally, I don't want to stir too much up here, but admittedly, I've used the term "executive session" before in stories I've written, and I've never heard a complaint. I like to think that sometimes, we don't give our listeners enough credit when it comes to things like that. (If that's what the agenda calls it, most of the time, that's what I call it.) That said, "behind closed doors" is the next best thing -- or "met in private". To me, "secretly" makes an executive session sound like an OMA voilation, with all due respect.