BOULDER — A nearly 100-year tradition of keeping all City Council deliberations open is in danger of being tossed in the name of good government, say critics of a proposed change to Boulder’s charter.
“At times, is what we do inefficient? Well, yes,” said City Councilwoman Crystal Gray, who is opposed to allowing the City Council to convene private executive sessions. “But does the public deserve the right to know how we spend money and conduct business? Again, yes.”
Most, if not all, city councils in Colorado use executive sessions to hash out “sensitive matters,” including land transactions, litigation and negotiations as well as security issues. It’s allowed under Colorado law as long as council members follow certain procedures.
But since 1917, Boulder’s governing document has declared all meetings of the City Council and its committees to be open to the public. There is no mention of council members adjourning to executive sessions.
“Boulder has always been known for open government,” Gray adds. “And I want to keep it that way.”
But this November, city voters are being asked to amend Boulder’s charter to allow the City Council to convene executive sessions. For practical purposes, say proponents, it’s time Boulder joined its peers.
“We’re doing this to improve our efficiency to benefit the taxpayer,” said Boulder Mayor Shaun McGrath.
The city, for instance, could have paid too much in open-space purchases made since 1967 because private landowners knew exactly how much Boulder would offer because its bargaining position was openly discussed.
“We also need to be able to talk about security issues, whether it’s homeland security or the security of the council chambers, and we can’t have that kind of conversation in a public setting,” McGrath said.
It’s also best to review many detailed personnel matters behind closed doors, he said.
“When we review the work of our council employees, we do so in front of the television or in public,” he said. “If you are an employee or employer, that’s not a situation you want to be placed in.”
Boulder’s virtual ban on executive sessions is unique in Colorado, especially given its size, said Sam Mamet, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League. Boulder’s population is about 92,000.
“The openness has its positives as well as its negatives,” Mamet said. Openly interviewing city- manager candidates — a recent process in Boulder — could prevent good prospects from applying for the job, Mamet said.
Still, he said, “Boulder has always operated in that fairly open approach. That’s the way they do things up there.”
Proponents of the change say they will still go above and beyond to adhere to Colorado’s Sunshine Law when calling for executive sessions.
“That’s an important value in our community, open meetings and open dialogue,” McGrath said.
But former Boulder Mayor Linda Jourgensen said nothing that has come before the council since 1917 has warranted private discussions.
“Transparency in government is on people’s minds these days,” Jourgensen said. “I think it would be a mistake to backtrack on that now.”
Monte Whaley: 720-929-0907 or mwhaley@denverpost.com
