Transparency in Government: Through a Glass Darkly

I've been asked more than once: if transparency results in better council-staff-citizen relationships, why do cities have to be forced by lengthy statutes like the Texas Open Meetings Act to make government more open to those citizens, who, after all, are footing the bill?

Why do those citizens have to jump through hoops and pay money and wait for days to see public documents under the Texas Public Information Act? 

Why do councils have so darned many executive sessions? 

Transparency isn't as simple as it seems. 

It's not always in those taxpayers' interest for everything pertaining to city business to be made public:

• When the council is negotiating to buy or sell real estate, or negotiating some other contract, or competing with other cities to try to lure a highly desired development into the city, discussing the details in public would give the other party a big advantage and cause the city - and thus, its citizens - to get the short end of the deal.
• When the city is involved in a lawsuit, revealing strategy and certain facts in public could result in a loss in court and cost the taxpayers large amounts of money. 
• When the council is discussing its security plans, devices, and procedures, doing so in public would make it far easier for hackers or physical infiltrators to defeat those security measures and attack the city's networks or facilities. 
• When the council is discussing personnel matters, it's prudent to protect the privacy of the employee under discussion unless that employee requests that the discussion be in public. 
• To protect the attorney-client privilege, it's standard practice for the city - like any individual - to seek legal advice in private. 

That said, I believe councils do have too many executive sessions. There are times when a topic technically falls under the open meetings exceptions in the state law, but there's no compelling reason to invoke it. Just because you can doesn't mean you always should. 

In addition, while state law doesn't prohibit council members from discussing executive session topics with others outside the executive session, our city has a code of ethics provision that does. Citizens can't get council members to reveal any information about certain developments, for example, not because the councilmember wants to keep things from them but because they can be brought up on ethics violation charges if they do.

In my opinion, that needs to be changed. It should be a violation only if it's proven that it caused harm to the city or some individual. As mayor, I will advocate for a review and revision of the code of ethics to ensure its provisions are to protect the citizens, not to force councilmembers to keep information from them that could and should be revealed.