Editorial: Opening ‘public’ meetings

Sunday, Sept. 16, 2007 | 1:26 a.m.

Lawmakers reworked state law this year after questions about whether the Nevada parole board was violating the open-meeting law.

The board habitually worked in secret, despite state law declaring its meetings open. Board members examined evidence and made decisions in private, changed agendas without notice, excluded inmates from some hearings and did not disclose the reasons for its decisions.

Board members were able to point to some ambiguity in the law that seemed to exclude them from open-meeting requirements. They also objected to any provision mandating attendance of prisoners, saying it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to move prisoners across the state and would be a logistical nightmare.

The bill the Legislature passed exempts the board from the open-meeting law but mandates compliance with some basic provisions, such as giving proper notice of meetings, allowing inmates to speak at their hearings and providing recommendations to help inmates who are denied parole to improve their chances at subsequent hearings.

The Legislature's Interim Finance Committee this month approved money for a video conferencing system for the state's prisons, giving inmates a chance to participate without the prison system having to incur the cost and risk of transporting prisoners.

Those are pragmatic ways to address some of the weaknesses in the previous law. However, the new law failed to give the public a clear insight into the board's decision-making process. In a recent opinion to the board, Deputy Attorney General Cynthia Hoover noted that the law calls meetings of the board "quasi-judicial," allowing the board to kick the public out when it deliberates and keep the reasons for its actions to itself. That is a shame. Shouldn't the public know why the board decides to grant or deny a prisoner parole?

The Legislature directed an advisory commission to study how the state's open-meeting law should apply to the parole board, and we urge the commission to recommend opening up the board's deliberations. It is in the public interest.