[Ansteorra] Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS

[mikea]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:10:31AM -0600, Sir Morgan Buchanan wrote:
> So you CAN think of reasons why the doors should legitimately be closed.... 
> Are you then saying you are choosing to believe this isn't one of those 
> times?  I'm at a loss here...  Everyone seems to be saying they can see 
> there are reasons for closed door meetings, and nobody knows for certain 
> that "this" isn't one of those times.

I rather like the way the Oklahoma Statutes require executive sessions
of governmented-funded orgs to be held: a public notice must be posted
in advance, stating the time and place of the meeting, setting out an
agenda which includes each piece of business to be transacted in that
executive session and what part of the statute permits that piece of
business to be held in an executive session. Any failure to comply as
regards agenda or notice makes the minutes of that executive session
public and nullifies the actions taken in that executive session. In
particular, if anything other than the business on the agenda happens
in that executive session, everything that happened becomes public and 
the decisions are null and void.

I should think that our appointed-over-us leaders in the SCA would be 
able to function in that environment when making discussions on how
we all are going to play the game, how to handle our money, and so on. 
We could, of course, decide instead to vote with our feet, or look at 
other alternative choices.

There may in truth be good reasons for closed-door meetings, but at 
the moment we can't always tell that the business in the meeting and 
the reasons for it are things that should be discussed behind closed 
doors. This would at least move us towards the Caesar's-Wife side of 
things: not only be virtuous, but be _seen_ to be virtuous.

-- 
Mike Andrews        /   Michael Fenwick    Barony of Namron, Ansteorra
mikea at mikea.ath.cx  /   Amateur Extra radio operator W5EGO
Tired old music Laurel; Chirurgeon; SCAdian since AS XI