‘The formation
of public policy
is public business’
Guest opinion by
SEN. CLINT STENNETT and
SEN. FRED KENNEDY
Senate Minority Leader Clint Stennett,
D-Ketchum,
represents District 25 in the Idaho Legislature, and
Sen. Fred Kennedy, D-Mountain Home, represents District 22.
The Republican majority is once again
flexing its muscle, continuing the pattern of holding certain committee meetings
in closed or executive session. And once again, our Senate Democratic caucus
will continue to protest this illegal and arguably unconstitutional activity.
True to our position we voted "No" on the
motion to allow the Resources and Environment Committee to go into executive
session to consider and discuss the mediation of Nez Perce water rights in the
Snake River Basin Adjudication. The motion passed, the meeting was closed and we
did not participate.
Idaho Code Section 67-2346 clearly
provides that all meetings of any standing, special or select committee of the
House and Senate shall be open to the public at all times. Our senate caucus
does not believe that the Senate has the constitutional authority to
unilaterally adopt a senate rule that is in direct conflict with a state law
adopted by both houses of the legislature and approved by the Governor, and may
in fact be in conflict with Idaho's Constitution. As a result, the Senate
Democratic Caucus believes that to conduct an executive meeting of the
committee, relying on Senate Rule 20(E), is in violation of the open meeting
laws of the State of Idaho, and particularly Section 67-2346, Idaho Code. This
is the same position that we took when the Senate Resources Committee voted to
go into executive session for a committee meeting on April 23, 2003.
We believe there may be legitimate
extraordinary circumstances where it would be prudent for a legislative
committee to be able to meet in executive session, closed to the public and the
press. The purpose of this latest meeting may well be one of those legitimate
circumstances. However, it is the judgment of the Senate Democratic Caucus, that
if the legislature desires its standing, special or select committees to hold
executive closed meetings, to discuss sensitive legal issues to which the State
is a party, and if the Idaho Constitution allows it, legislation should be
enacted to amend I. C. Section 67-2346, clearly stating the specific
circumstances and procedures under which executive sessions of the committees
may be conducted.
The Attorney General has issued an opinion
stating that since Article III, Sec. 9 of Idaho's Constitution provides that
each house of the legislature shall determine its own rules of proceeding, the
current rules adopted by both houses providing the authority for committees to
conduct meetings in executive session, even though in direct conflict with I. C.
Sec. 67-2346, must govern the actions of each house. Other attorneys, however,
have taken the position that since Article III, Sec. 12 of the Idaho
Constitution provides that "the business of each house, and of the committee of
the whole shall be transacted openly and not in secret session," neither house
of the legislature has the constitutional power to adopt rules of procedure that
conflict with this specific prohibition against secret sessions. Our caucus
believes that, unless a court tells us otherwise, this conflict between a rule
adopted by the legislature, a state law enacted by the legislature, and Article
III, Sec. 12 of the Idaho Constitution, should be resolved and the
Constitutional prohibition on secret sessions, set forth above, should take
precedence.
The legislative intent when the Open
Meeting law was enacted is abundantly clear: "…the legislature finds and
declares that it is the policy of this state that the formation of public policy
is public business and shall not be conducted in secret."
The intent of our forefathers when they
adopted the Idaho Constitution is equally clear:
"the business of each house...shall be
transacted openly and not in secret session,"
The language in Idaho Code 67-2346 is
irrefutable: "...all meetings of any standing, special or select committee of
the House and Senate shall be open to the public at all times".
We do not believe there is any ambiguity
in the direction expressed in our Constitution and statute. Open public meetings
are required – and we expect to abide by that mandate.