In the late ‘80s, the rock band Van Halen was taken to task when journalists discovered that their concert contract contained a clause stating, “There will be no brown M&M’s in the backstage area, upon pain of forfeiture of the show, with full compensation.”
Immediately dismissed as the excess of party-band celebrity and unrestrained hubris, the brown M&M brouhaha led to an aha moment when, years later, it was explained that the clause was actually a genius management tool.
The presence of brown M&Ms indicated to the band that the details of the contract had not been thoroughly adhered to, which means that there may be other errors, such as in the electric supply or stage weight capacity.
The presence of brown M&Ms indicated that those in charge had not read the contract.
When it comes to municipal governance, I believe that the State of Vermont’s open meeting law is the brown M&M. If a municipal authority fails to adhere to the simple specifics of properly conducting the people’s business in public, with required notification, open and transparent process, and appropriate engagement and participation of the public, it’s time to shut it down, get the contract, and do a complete municipal line check.
Vermont’s open meeting law is the bare minimum standard that must be met, and it is the law.
In general, the open meeting law requires public bodies to:
Post notices and agendas in advance of meetings
Conduct business in public
Provide for public participation
Take minutes and make them public
This sounds simple enough, and it’s only the bare minimum, and yet it seems that the enemies of the open meeting law are:
“That’s the way we’ve always done it.”
“Nobody has complained.”
“It doesn’t really matter.”
“I didn’t know.”
If you want to know where you stand with your local authorities and where they stand on a commitment to open and transparent governance, visit their website to look for their position on the open meeting law.
Do they state a commitment to open and transparent governance and follow that up with the processes and procedures they have in place to ensure that the public can navigate City Hall and participate in the business of the people?
Do they communicate how the local boards, commissions, committees, and workgroups are formed, what they do, when they meet, what the different rules are, how to engage with them, how to communicate with them, how to get on an agenda, how to simply get an agenda, and how to partner with our elected, appointed, and hired municipal partners to ensure that the public is engaged, involved, and working together to improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods? Or do they settle for the legal minimum, hoping nobody will notice when they fall short?
On the one hand, one might argue that the many hoops that a municipal authority must jump through can be cumbersome. That’s a fair argument. Engaging the public can be messy, complicated, and involve lots of moving parts.
On the other hand, one might argue that ignoring the law and the public can be even more cumbersome. It’s hyperefficient to conduct people’s business without public participation, but at what cost?
For starters, it’s against the law. Knowingly and intentionally violating the provisions of the open meeting law is a misdemeanor.
Second, it’s counterproductive. The most resilient communities are built on a foundation of an engaged public that partners with those in authority and participates in improving the quality of life in the community, not as spectators but as vital contributors of knowledge, insight, wisdom, and sweat.
In response to a recent experience I had where a city meeting violated the open meeting law, I’m asking the following questions:
Does an agenda for a hybrid meeting (in-person and remote access) need to include information on the hybrid nature of the meeting and how people can attend both in person and via remote access?
When the chair of a committee circulates a survey to the members of the city’s board of aldermen, soliciting feedback on a draft short-term rental ordinance, does this initiate a serial meeting where members of a body communicate online or in person but out of the public’s eye?Does the public have the right to offer public comments on all agenda items and public comments on items not on the agenda?
When a supermajority of aldermen attend a committee meeting, does the nature of the meeting become a board of alderman meeting?
At the end of the day, I am committed to ensuring the public is aware of its right to participate enthusiastically in the people’s business, and it starts with a welcome mat at City Hall.
Stephen Box is a housing provider in Rutland County, developing, renovating, and managing residential properties. Contact Stephen at VermontHouser@gmail.com or 802-342-4940.
