Open Meetings Laws, 2d

Ann Taylor Schwing has significantly elevated the democratic values of government openness, responsiveness and accountability . . . .

From the Foreword by Robert K Puglia
Former Presiding Justice, California Court of Appeal,
Third Judicial District (1974-1998)

• Table of Contents
  • Summary
  • Full Table of Contents
• Ann Taylor Schwing
  • About the Author
  • Author's Resume
  • Author's Publications
  • Contact
• Related Links
• Recognition
  • Citations
  • Reader's Testimonials
• Ordering
  • Order Information
  • Order Form
• Home

§ 4.24 D. Local Public Entities

There are compelling justifications for liberal application of the open meeting laws to local public entities. Local bodies may have the most significant day-to-day impact on the lives of their citizens and may be the most subject to the influence of public opinion. The smaller geography of the local public body makes attendance at open meetings a realistic possibility for all the persons governed by the body, unlike state bodies which are meaningfully accessible only to those who live near the meeting location or those who are unusually interested in a matter before the body.

Colorado's open meeting law originally applied only to statewide public bodies but was amended in 1991 to extend to local public bodies.

§ 4.26 1. Cities and Towns

Open meeting laws typically apply to cities and towns and similar local political subdivisions within the state or to their governing bodies. Application of open meeting requirements to such local public entities is especially significant because these entities operate in the same locale as the citizens they serve, making citizen participation in government readily available to the public. As a result, cities, towns, and municipalities, however they may be denominated in a particular state, are especially appropriate public entities to be subjected to the requirements of the relevant open meeting act. Home rule cities in some states may escape the application of the state open meeting requirements only to be subjected to charter requirements for open meetings. The Ohio Constitution, Article 18, section 3 provides that charter cities are not subject to the open meeting law. The charters of charter cities contain open meeting requirements of their own which may be more strict than those in the state open meeting law. In other states, home rule cities and other political subdivisions remain subject to the state open meeting law.

In states that hold town meetings as a form of town government, the open meeting law may or may not apply to the annual town meeting. In Wisconsin, for example, the annual town meeting is not a governmental body if it is held on first Tuesday in April. In Massachusetts, the term "governmental body" expressly excludes a town meeting. By definition, of course, the town meeting is open to the public. In Oklahoma, town meetings shall comply with the open meeting law if any business other than election of the mayor will occur.

§ 4.28 2. Counties, Boroughs and Parishes

Like municipalities, counties, boroughs, and parishes or their governing bodies are typically subject to the open meeting laws. Statutes that do not expressly identify these public entities as subject to their open meeting laws include them within the political subdivisions that are subject to the law.

Open Meeting Laws 2d, § 4.24.D. (Footnotes omitted.)

Copyright 2006

Fathom Publishing Company