Sunday, October 12, 2008
Editorial: Conduct codes don't trump free speech
Roanoke and Radford city councils should end a prohibition on talking about closed-door sessions.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
It's a good idea for city councils to have codes of conduct that clearly explain to elected members what behavior is acceptable and what is not.
But sometimes it is items in the codes that are unacceptable.
For instance, the codes of conduct in Roanoke and Radford both prohibit council members from discussing what goes on at closed meetings.
In Roanoke, violating that provision "could result in public censure," according to the council's code of conduct.
There's just one problem, of course: City council members have First Amendment rights to free speech, and no code of conduct can trump those.
In an ideal world, councils would never go into executive session without good cause. And council members would never stray off the topic into discussions that should be public.
In that ideal world, perhaps, such a provision might make sense.
In the real world, however, councils often go into closed sessions when they shouldn't, and they often talk about matters that should be presented to the public.
Gagging a council member under those circumstances is simply wrong.
Gagging council members is exactly the result. In a recent controversy over a Freedom of Information Act request that was released by the city in redacted form -- even though it is a public record -- Radford City Councilman Dick Harshberger said he could not talk about it, despite his campaign promise for a more open city government.
Roanoke's rule could be why Mayor David Bowers refused to comment about a move by council to recommend that the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee adopt bylaws.
Even though the discussion had percolated into the public, Bowers said he wouldn't talk about it because it had once been discussed in closed session.
That's probably too strict a reading of the code. It's one thing not to reveal the actual discussions that go on in closed session, but certainly the broad topics of closed sessions cannot be considered off-limits forever.
An open government advocate thinks the policies are inappropriate.
"We don't like to see a policy that basically violates First Amendment rights to discuss public issues in public," said Megan Rhyne, director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government. "I just don't think it's a good policy to limit the First Amendment rights of council members."
Radford and Roanoke should take the gags off their council members.
