Our View
Put public e-mails on the record
There's a solution to the growing phenomenon of "serialized meetings" among elected officials: Make every e-mail they send or receive, that pertains to public business, part of the official record for public meetings.
If put where everyone can see them, people could see what their representatives have been saying to their peers, to city or town staffers, or to their constituents. This way, nothing can be done in the darkness, since it is being forced into the sunshine.
Rep. Stacy Dostie, D-Sabattus, has a new bill before the Legislature to stop "serialized meetings" that can occur via e-mail. (These pseudo-meetings occur when selectmen or councilors build consensus for decisions via e-mail, in violation of the spirit of Maine's open-meeting laws.)
This is a direct result of goings-on in her town regarding the departure of the town manager, Gregory Gill. In this case, decisions about Gill were essentially made via e-mail among selectmen. This is not right, yet so easy in this era of tweets, texts and forwards. Serial meetings should be punishable, but by then, the damage is done. How are they preventable?
Easy. Whenever a board of selectmen or city council is scheduled to meet and a packet of material is prepared, their e-mails about public business should be in the official record. If these e-mails contain nothing questionable, no harm is done.
And if they do, whatever it is can be addressed with proactive haste, instead of reactionary zeal.
Only one town — that we know of — does this. Bar Harbor regularly provides the e-mails of its selectmen (which was started through the laudable efforts of the Bangor Daily News.) Constituent questions, official chatter, public announcements ... all are detailed and available.
It's a brilliant idea. By having e-mails available for inspection, officials cannot misuse instant communication to skirt sunshine laws.While collection and dissemination of this material for some municipalities could be burdensome, we'd submit the alternative is worse.
Namely, the revelation of public e-mails — like what's happened in Lewiston, Sabattus, Rumford, etc. — that can show officials too willing to cross ethical, professional and statutory bounds when they think nobody is looking. Offering e-mails voluntarily would be a refreshing blast of honesty from municipalities, by both endorsing transparency and committing to ensure all their business is public.
Electronic communication, on the whole, is a frontier for public records laws. (Issues with social networking sites like Facebook, for example, are only now being explored.) The right strategy is transparency. People shouldn't be wondering what their selectmen or city councilors (or legislators) are talking about via electronic means.
The public should know. Putting e-mails in the record does that.
Advertisement
Displaying comments, from newest to oldest
verified Robert Reed, I'm very
Robert Reed,
I'm very surprised that after the very rough time you experienced in your very brief foray as a public elected official that you would be ignorant enough ,to have the audicty to challenge the ethicis of a councilor from across the river, all of whom I'm proud to have served with! I do think that such legis lation as propoded by Rep. Dostie Coul be viable, and worthy if itwas well written and easy to interpret, and enforce,my experience with the LSJ however in attempting to just get a brief defination as to how many actual elected off icials in attendence would constiute such an occassion as meeting the defination of a public meeting,ws noteasily answered
'"working for a betterAuburn"
as meeting the defination of a public meeting,ws noteasily answered
'"working for a betterAuburn"
Auburn Councilor at large Bob Mennealy
__
Councilor Mennealy, there is
Councilor Mennealy, there is nothing in what I questioned of an Auburn city Councilor that hasd not already been reported in this very paper and having been questioned by citizens of your fine city, one I was raised in. But if being a city councilor means supporting your fellow councilors and not calling out their errors and mistakes and questioning their ethics then I should never run for office again. This country guarentees my freedom of speech and imposes no silencing simply because I hold an elected position, in fact I should use that position to point out these things. As to this subject of emails, my point was that the LSJ editorial concept does not go far enough in correcting what is determined to be an issue. Ban emails, councilors simply use cell phones and private meetings to continue the actions the LSJ would not want to see happen. Maybe a better way to explain Dosties concept is to call it "Lipstick on a pig" - makes someone feel good but at the end of the day the pig is still there.
I really can't believe there
I really can't believe there is support for this at the Sun Journal. The same organization that would HOWL if a law was created to grant FOIA status to emails from their subscribers and sources. (Be careful, you may be next) The last I knew we had a Constitution that has a Fourth Amendment in it. If I desire to correspond with my elected officials, in my opinion that is private correspondence between me and my representative and, unless illegal, is protected under the US Constitution. This recommendation is put forth by the same ilk who protest the reading of "suspected terrorist" email, but seem to think it is a perfectly good idea to read my concerns addressed to my elected representative in private email in Sabattus or Lewiston USA. Simply amazing. This piece of legislation is at the very least ill-advised and in my opinion unconstitutional. It would have a chilling effect on a citizen's right to privately correspond with his or her elected official. I find it amazing, but not surprising, that such legislation would be proposed, let alone be included in what the legislature has moved forward for consideration before legislature adjourns.
This concept does absolutely
This concept does absolutely no good and will accomplish absolutely nothing! While it may feel good to make such a request, because of past instances many public servants could be convinced to use other means to discuss the business behind closed doors. Think about this - the LSJ wanted dirt on the firing of Mr. Bennett so they pulled thousands of emails - what did they get on me? - me asking the city administrator if there were still funds for downtown rehab on behalf of a constituent (full disclosure - the business in question is owned by the same person I work for but through a different corporation) and an email where I blasted our Mayor for being a baffoon. Wow! talk about a smoking gun. Oh and if just one Councilor or official knows an FOIA request is coming - what are the chances they can warn others who could then clean the cupbaord so to speak? Yes, it happens!
Here's what really needs to happen - First - give councilors city owned laptops for email accounts and getting documents. Imagine the savings in printing and delivery of each weeks mail to our homes. Put all email council agendas and budget stuff right on the laptop for ease of use, sign a waiver for damages and theft and let it be. At any time that laptop could be subject to search and review by the powers to be as they have ownership. Second, give the councilors city owned cell phones to conduct business on and have available for public review a list of whom they are calling, when and how long. While its still not a smoking gun, I can say it would at least shed light on who is talking to whom. Third, ban all councilors from privately meeting outside chambers or official events. Maybe even an ethics pledge not to do so with loss of their position for violating the oath.
A small price to pay for laptops, you can buy the small mini's for about $400 and they will last quite a while. Use today's technology, this might be a good investment and save significant printing time and expense. But email alone is not the answer, its just too easy to get around.
Dosh, if I'm so wrong then
Dosh, if I'm so wrong then why did the LSJ NOT find a smoking gun about Mr. bennett's firing with all the e-mails they reviewed? Quite simple because most councilors know better than to put anything on email, and we did not learn that one on our own! If you experienced the volume of folders, binders and paper that each of us receives, plus the cost to deliver to each of our homes by hand, you'd understand how much could be saved by having city provided laptops do the same and have a city owned email accout for city business included in them. Oh and yes, I am still acouncilor, in fact I'm hearing rumors about a write in campaign on my behalf.
verified Excellent idea, except for;
Excellent idea, except for; 'Offering e-mails voluntarily'. That would be like the fox guarding the chicken house. I agree 100% with this Editorial if it would/could be enforced.
Thank you.
verified What an excellent idea. And
What an excellent idea. And let's have any official violating the law be subject to jail. Of course the first course would be to elect people who HAVE ethics, but unfortunately we do not find that out until AFTER they enter office.
Tron, you must be referring
Tron, you must be referring to the Auburn councilor who was developing property and influencing votes without disclosing his conflict of interest.
verified Absolutely, he and one more
Absolutely, he and one more that I feel has loose ethics. Also it appears there may be a case made of some Sabattus officials, and we both know some Lewiston officials that fit the category, you betcha.
Would be more interesting to
Would be more interesting to see the cell phone records of certain officials such as sabattus and those they may hev been conversing with BEFORE the coup....but lets not forget, Stacey Dosties doesn't know how to vote in Augusta until she goes into the Majority leaders office and has a discussion much like many in the dem party....isn't that the same violation?
Advertisement
Advertisement
Most Popular Today
verified on "J. Ziehm: LePage forgetting his childhood"
Fractured Legislature.
It is clear to me that the only thing fractured in Agusta is the State Legislature.They have been working without supervision long enough to put the State deeply in the Red.It will take some strong supervision and fiscal disipline from LePage to de-fragment what the Liberals have done to the Fiscal House.
verified on "Strathglass Park improvement plans stymied over ownership issue"
Once again
The Rumford Board of Selectmen prove themselves to be idiots. Free work, free upkeep, and free cosmetic improvements in an area that desperately needs it shot down because the majority can't get their heads out of their posteriors.
GOOD JOB!!! Sorry, Mr. Blampied, that you have to live in a place like this.
verified on "Livermore Falls board discusses complaints on sand-pile use"
Public access from Sewall Street.?
What about allowing public access to the topside of the pile from Sewall St. and having the bottom part off limits to the public? Wouldn't take much more than putting the posts and cables back up so no one can drive on the pile and dump a bucket or two of sand up there once in a while.
In order to make comments, you must verify your account.
In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.
Login or create an account here.
Our policy prohibits comments that are:
- Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
- Excessively foul and/or vulgar
- Inappropriately sexual
- Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
- Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
- Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.