High Stakes Musical Chairs: Public Meetings Aren’t Public If There Are No Seats – Or Standing Room – For the Public

It’s the DC government version of a tree falling in the forest: If a meeting is said to be open to the public, but there is no space for the public, is it truly an open meeting? That was precisely the question raised last week, when Mayor Gray briefed the DC Council on his fiscal year 2012 supplemental budget. For members of the public, trying to watch the meeting was like playing a game of musical chairs, because the public was only allowed one out of 32 seats in the room.

We hope Mayor Gray and the DC Council will change this practice so that DC residents can fully witness critical meetings in which public policy decisions are being shaped, meeting both the letter and spirit of our public meetings law.

Here’s what happened last week when the Mayor and Council met to discuss plans for the $79 million in higher than expected revenue for fiscal year 2012 and Gray’s proposal to spend it. Once the Mayor, his staff, the 12 DC council members, and their respective staffs assembled, it was standing room only in Room 502, the Chairman’s conference room. Members of the public who showed up long in advance of the meeting to snag a seat were told that space needed to be saved for staff and the press. Ultimately, after much effort, a spot was made for one member of the public—and everyone else was told they needed to be outside the door. There was no attempt to televise or broadcast the proceedings to those outside government who came to witness the proceedings.

That’s certainly not in the spirit of our open meetings law, which was updated in 2010 in order to ensure that the public could attend the meetings of government bodies. After some controversy over whether or not the DC Council attempted to exempt itself from some of the requirements of the law, the Council assured the public that its own rules would be in keeping with the spirit of the open-meetings law.

Some councilmembers say they prefer to hold these discussions off the dais and in a room where they face each other and can speak less formally. But that means the public seems to get left out.

One easy solution would be to move these budget briefings to a bigger room…

…Such as Room 412 for example…

…Or how about Room 123…

If neither of those strikes your fancy, it’s just a short walk over to Room 120…

There are several advantages to these rooms. First, they have ample room for elected officials, staff, and the public. Plus, they are equipped with television cameras, so the meetings can be televised and recorded. This practice should be extended to any official meetings where budget-related issues are discussed. The open-meetings law is intended to enable the public to listen in on these critical deliberations. Televising these meetings will enable the Council to fully comply with the spirit of the law, while leaving more than enough elbow room for councilmembers and their staffs.

This is an issue that will do doubt come up again next month when the Council holds its pre-budget vote deliberation on the fiscal year 2013 budget. We urge our elected officials to make sure these meetings meet the letter and spirit of our law—and allow the public to fully participate.