|
VIRGINIA
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ADVISORY COUNCIL
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
|
May 25, 2004, Richmond
The subcommittee
on electronic meetings, comprised of Council members Hallock,
Hopkins, and Miller, met on May 25, 2004 to discuss several
issues concerning electronic meeting requirements and requirements
for notice of raised by representatives from the Clerk's Offices
of the Senate and the House. The meeting was well attended
by representatives of the press, public, and state and local
government.
The subcommittee
discussed several issues relating to the electronic meeting
provisions found at § 2.2-3708 of the Code of Virginia
and was considering the following areas where change may be
warranted. It was suggested that requiring 30 days notice
for an electronic meeting was onerous. Often times meetings
are not planned 30 days in advance. Also, various situations
may arise closer to the meeting day, such as personal emergencies
or other exigent circumstances which prevent members of a
public body from being physically present at a meeting. Another
issue raised was the limitation of only allowing 25 percent
of meetings annually to be conducted electronically. For example,
if a public body only meets three or four times a year, such
as a General Assembly study, it may be difficult or impossible
to hold even one electronic meeting. The question was raised
as to whether there should be an emergency provision that
would allow a member of a public body to participate electronically
at the last minute due to a personal emergency without triggering
the requirements of an electronic meeting (i.e. no heightened
notice, etc.). The law currently requires that an electronic
meeting be suspended at all locations if there is an audio
or visual malfunction -- even though a quorum must be at one
location. The purpose behind this provision is to guarantee
public participation at all locations, since all meeting locations
must be open to the public. However, it was noted that it
might be difficult for one site to realize that another site
has lost the audio or the audio/visual feed. Finally, it was
noted that while electronic meetings are beneficial to the
members of a public body, they can also be used as a means
to increase public participation in meetings, and that technology
can be used to enhance meetings for both members and the public.
The subcommittee
also discussed the general notice requirements for all meetings
(and not just electronic meetings). The law currently requires
posting notice in two physical locations, and posting electronically
is "encouraged." It was noted that the Internet
is now a place where interested persons often look for notice
of a meeting. Additionally, because the law already requires
state public bodies to place their meeting minutes on the
Internet, it makes sense to use the Internet to also post
notice.
The subcommittee
plans to meet again in July (tentatively July 7). Staff will
prepare draft legislation that will:
·
Shorten the notice requirement for electronic meetings from
30 days to 7 days and remove the 25 percent limitation on
the number of electronic meetings. This will be used as a
springboard for further discussion. It was decided to not
include an "emergency " provision for personal emergencies
of members at this time, but it may be discussed further at
the next meeting.
· Address the malfunction of the audio or audio/visual
feed issue. It was suggested that notice of electronic meetings
include a phone number of a contact person that participants
at the various sites can call during the meeting to notify
others that they have lost audio or audio/video feed.
· Include a requirement that state executive public
bodies post notice of all meetings on the Internet, in addition
to posting notice at the two physical locations. These public
bodies must already post minutes, and as of July 1, post FOIA
rights & responsibilities information on their website.
Local governing bodies will be encouraged to post notice on
the Internet, as there is no current requirement that local
governing bodies have websites.
Representatives
from the clerks' offices will examine the possibility of establishing
telephone numbers that members of the public could use to
call into to monitor and listen to meetings (any meeting,
not just an electronic meeting) as a means of increasing public
participation through technology.
Also
of note, the subcommittee is attempting to set up an audio/visual
meeting for its next meeting to allow Mr. Hopkins to join
in the meeting from Blacksburg. Not only will this save him
five or more hours of driving to physically attend the meeting,
it will also give the subcommittee first-hand experience with
electronic meetings.
|