VIEWPOINT | Open meetings short course would be good government
Guest column by David Bordewyk, South Dakota NewsMedia Association
The theme for this year’s National Newspaper Week is “Telling Our Stories” – a reminder about the role of newspapers in reporting the important stories in their communities.
Stories that run the gamut: human-interest features, football game recaps, new businesses in town and, of course, local government meetings.
Keeping an eye on government and informing readers about public board meetings are among the most important jobs for a community newspaper. Sometimes, the local newspaper reporter may be the only person sitting in the audience for a city council or school board meeting.
South Dakota’s open meetings laws provide a road map for how government boards must notify citizens about upcoming public meetings and how they conduct certain aspects of their meetings.
At times, the open meetings laws can be confusing and lead to misunderstanding. Over the years, newspapers have reported many stories about problems related to compliance with our state’s open meetings laws.
Among the cases that have come before the South Dakota Open Meetings Commission since its inception in 2004 are those rooted in the fact that public officials did not properly understand the laws and they unknowingly violated them.
That is why South Dakota NewsMedia Association – which represents the state’s newspapers and various digital news outlets – will support a bill in the 2025 legislature that would require all public boards to review the open meetings laws once a year. We believe a little refresher course each year would go a long way toward eliminating those unintended violations and missteps involving these important laws.
The proposal as currently drafted is straightforward:
“Any agency, as defined in § 1-26-1, or political subdivision of this state that is required to provide public notice of its meetings pursuant to § 1-25-1.1 or 1-25-1.3 must receive a presentation from a licensed attorney employed by the agency or subdivision at the first official meeting of the agency or subdivision each calendar year, reviewing the explanation of the open meeting laws of this state published by the attorney general, pursuant to § 1-11-1.”
That’s it. No heavy mandate and no expenditures of tax dollars. Just a bit of time devoted annually to reviewing the open meetings laws.
The open meetings guide prepared by the South Dakota attorney general is an ideal educational tool to help public boards complete an annual review. You can find it on the attorney general’s website (www.atg.sd.gov) under the “legal resources” tab.
Most government boards in South Dakota are comprised of citizens who volunteer their time and energy to serve in a public role. A little education will go a long way toward supporting our volunteer public officials in navigating an important set of open government laws. This would be especially helpful given the natural turnover of boards either by elections or other means.
Open government is akin to good government. We believe our legislative proposal will reinforce both of those important ideals.
David Bordewyk is executive director of the South Dakota NewsMedia Association, which represents the state’s newspapers and various digital news outlets.
I found it interesting during the pandemic when many public meetings were conducted online and streamed, that participation, meaning the number of folks watching and listening to those meetings far exceeded the number of folks who'd ever attended a council meeting in person. This was applauded though most of the members were anxious to return to face to face meetings and none of the online meetings really took advantage of the tools available for online meetings. For example, it's common for folks in online meetings to utilize the chat function to ask questions and to "raise their hand". when they wish to speak, and to do active on the spot surveys, so it was possible to increase public participation though I don't know any city councils or other public meetings that took advantage of it. You wouldn't have to answer questions posted in the chat, but you would get a sense of what people were thinking and you could ask them questions via a survey that would instantly give you percentages of those responding, e.g., 54% of those watching support the proposal. Today we hear so much about folks who aren't engaged but when we have tools that could increase public engagement, we choose not to use them. Even now, when folks stream meetings, they choose not to engage the public--almost like they fear increased engagement. I'm being a little facetious, but typically I hear council members say they've "heard from constituents" but there's no way to verify how many have responded and what they've actually said, the survey option would let everyone know. All that aside, Mr. Bordewyk is correct that absent more transparent public meetings, it's the press that keeps the public informed and reminding people of the requirement of open meetings on an annual basis insures public servants are aware of what it requires.
Well said Mr Bordewyk!!
You wrote, “ Sometimes, the local newspaper reporter may be the only person sitting in the audience for a city council or school board meeting.”
That is especially the case in Sioux Falls, as the city council enacted a rule several years ago which moved questions and comment period by the public to the end of every council meeting. Additionally the council and mayor refrain then from answering questions, challenging the way they do business.
I remember when Ralph Morris, a retired Morrell union officer made it a point to attend every council meeting and bring issues of interest to the entire city before the council and or to challenge an action by the council that was not in the best interest of the city.