By Michael Bielawski
A Vermont House of Reprensentatives committee today considered a bill that would allow the state-funded ($1.1 million budget request) Truth and Reconciliation Commission to meet without public and press present.
A spokesperson for the Vermont press said full transparency is required because the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is involved in state policy work, including the possibility of requiring reparations payments to minorities.
The bill would require online access only to the meetings. Media members testified against the bill and also expressed concern about efforts to allow public meetings to be held exclusively online.
H. 649 – “An act relating to the Vermont Truth and Reconciliation Commission” can be read here.
Introduced by former Windsor school board chair Rep. Elizabeth Burrows (D-Windsor) would “create certain exemptions from the Open Meeting Law for meetings of the Commission and to permit commissioners to confer with each other; and to create a duty of confidentiality for participants in affinity groups organized by the Commission.”
Specifically, the bill would exempt the Commission from holding physical meetings or naming a physical location for the meetings. When meeting in a physical location, it could bar the public and press “upon a finding by the Commission that there are material threats to the health or safety of the Commission, its staff, witnesses, or invitees.”
A similar rationale was employed to exclude the press and public from last year’s House proceedings on whether to impeach Franklin County John Grismore. Legislative leaders said people testifying might feel afraid to speak openly.
The purpose of the commission according to its state webpage states, “We seek collective liberation from violence and discrimination systemically perpetrated by the State of Vermont. We do this by uplifting community voices through storytelling, researching, and community relationships, and make legislative recommendations.”
Lisa Loomis who is president of the Vermont Press Association as well as the editor/co-owner for the Valley Reporter, spoke first with the committee.
“The Vermont Press Association is deeply concerned on behalf of its members throughout the state but also the public that there is an effort to make state government less transparent and potentially give very special treatment to the Vermont Truth and Reconciliation Commission.”
She also expressed concerns about moving public meetings to online-only.
“The Press Association is equally concerned by efforts, by groups seeking to have the Senate Government Operations Committee to weaken Vermont’s Open Meeting Law by creating a way for boards to hold completely digital meetings and not providing a home base for the public including the handicapped and low-income folks to be able to attend and participate in the public process,” she said.
She added, “The public has a right to attend and participate in the public process regardless of whether they have a smartphone, laptop, or tablet.”
She noted that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is a publicly funded body meaning any policy making that they do must be discussed in the light of public observation.
She further noted that such measures would violate Vermont’s Open Meeting Law as well as the Vermont Constitution.
When a lawmaker suggested that the commission might need privacy as a means of safety, Loomis dispelled that notion.
“In my three decades of working in journalism in Vermont there have been three instances where there was a potential for any possibility of more than raised voices and in both instances the boards knew ahead of time and had the local sheriff and/or a state police officer in the room,” she said.
She further clarified that even were the meeting recorded and livestreamed that would not change the necessity that members of the public and press be allowed physically at the meeting.
Michael Donoghue, who is the executive director for the Vermont Press Association, spoke next. He also disputed any notion that public bodies have the right to make meetings private for safety purposes.
“The chair can ask that person be removed or ask the person to leave,” he said. “And that’s been done, I’ve seen that happen at a lot of public meetings in my five decades of covering a lot of public meetings.”
He further noted that Vermont at its status quo currently ranks very poorly for its transparency with the public.
“Some of you may know that Vermont for the longest time was ranked 48th, 49th, or 50th as being the among the least transparent states in the United States,” he said.
Wendy Mays, executive director for the Vermont Association of Broadcasters, also spoke. She made clear that the intention of this commission, as stated in its policy, is to influence public policy.
She says it’s to “examine and establish a public record of institutional, structural, and systemic discrimination in Vermont both past and present caused or permitted by state laws and policies,” she said reading from policy documents.
She continued, “The work that this commission is about to take up is extremely important and the work that they generate will be consequential to all Vermonters.”
She noted that will especially be true if the commission recommends reparations are paid to minority groups with taxpayer dollars.
She pointed out that if the effort as stated by the commission is to establish public records, how can that be done without involving the public?
She said, “How can a public record of systemic discrimination be established and actions be taken if the public does not have access to the majority of the information that led to the commission’s recommendations.”
The whole committee meeting can be viewed here. The bill was also scheduled for discussion in the House Judiciary Committree.
The author is a reporter for the Vermont Daily Chronicle