2009.01.20
How do you find out about local government meetings?
There are a couple of bills before the General Assembly that would change the way local government communicates with the people. I'm curious what readers think.
Right now, when a local government wants to hold a meeting, say a Roanoke City Council meeting, it must advertise the agenda in the newspaper of general circulation in the area. That's a state requirement, and the idea is that it's the best way to let the most people know what their government is doing. It also allows people to know when and where meetings are so they might attend.
House Bill 2355 and House Bill 1879 would lift that requirement. Instead, localities could advertise their meetings and agendas on their own Web sites, on public access radio or television, by text message or e-mail, or other means. (Check out the two individual bills for specifics.) Nothing, of course, prevents governments from using those mechanisms now, but they must use the newspaper.
I can see both sides of this issue.
The Virginia Press Association and the Virginia Coalition for Open Government (podcast on the topic) oppose the bills. They argue newspaper printing of agendas has the potential to reach the maximum number of citizens. Anyone can subscribe to the paper or read it at the library. Internet broadcasts, however, are less accessible because a digital divide exists in the state. Moreover, some people just aren't comfortable using technology.
I'd add to their points that a newspaper printing creates an official, third-party version of the agenda that everyone has. If the agenda appears only on the city Web site or a public access broadcast, staff or council could change it at the last minute in violation of the law, and proving the change would be difficult.
There are other problems -- television broadcasts don't allow access at citizens' convenience, for example -- but those are sufficient to give pause.
Yet is a digital world. It's a fact that fewer people are reading print newspapers. Putting agendas online would reach a lot of people, and not taking out ads in the paper would save some token amount of money in cases where the paper charges for the space. (Full disclosure: The Roanoke Times charges for the ads.)
Maybe the solution is to continue requiring newspaper printing but also require some form of online printing in addition to, not instead of, it.
What do readers of the RT think?
RSS feed 
Yes it should be printed in the newspaper. You can subscribe to receive the agenda in your email in box. However, even those with computers and internet access in their homes do not know how to access it nor read their email consistently even if they did subscribe.
Of course, even in print many would not read it. There is no cure for apathy. My favorite quote by George Carlin - "Scientists announced today that they have discovered a cure for apathy. However, they claim no one has shown the slightest interest in it."
Comment by Valerie — January 20, 2009 @ 5:36 pm
trejbal, you are a better man than I. I can only see one side of this issue. It should be required to publish in the paper plus any two of the other proposed mediums. I read the complete text of the bills as proposed. Unless I missed something, they could hide a notice and I would have to hunt through all the mediums hoping to find it. Does any one know if that is correct?
Comment by Allen Bunch — January 20, 2009 @ 6:07 pm
As Allen, I think it should be published in the newspaper and a couple of other media. Perhaps the RT could have a set page (back of the Virginia section?) where people know that, if there is a notice, it would be there.
Comment by Joe (ntp) Merola — January 20, 2009 @ 6:38 pm
I'm not sure if requiring public meetings to be placed in the newspaper makes as much sense any more; newspaper penetration is shrinking, particularly in younger demographics and rural localities, and if newspapers charge for the ads all the law does is guarantee some revenue stream for the newspapers.
In terms of actually encouraging public participation, the law as it stands can make some government officials lazy; run a legal ad and they've met the requirement of the law, regardless if very many people actually show up to the meetings.
As with anything dealing with public dollars, the law should require that agencies make the best use of communications technologies and mediums to encourage participation, without mandating how agencies need to spend their money.
If the law requires that a certain medium be used, it should also require that the ads be run at no charge.
Comment by Jeremy — January 21, 2009 @ 9:10 am