This week the Kosciusko County Commissioners proposed holding an executive session to talk to architects about building a new jail.

The commissioners are trying to decide which architect will get the contract for the jail. It's a pretty significant chunk of county dollars.

The commissioners wanted to meet with the architects individually, in private to discuss these matters.

From a bargaining standpoint, that makes sense.

Let's think about this for a moment. Say you want to buy a new Porsche 911 turbo slantnose cabriolet. You go to one dealer and negotiate your best deal. Then you go to a second dealer armed with the very useful information you got from the first and try to get an even better deal.

Maybe you even fudge a little on what the first dealer offered you.

The scenario would change dramatically if both dealers sat down in a room with you at the same time, wouldn't it?

Of course the county would be in a better bargaining position with these architects if they could negotiate in executive session.

Problem is, the Indiana Open Meetings Law (IC 5-14-1.5) doesn't allow it.

The law was passed for one simple reason. Lawmakers believed the public's business must be conducted in public. After all, the public is paying the bills.

Sometimes - as in this case - it seems as if the law might cost the taxpayers some money. If that is the case, then that is the price we must pay to keep a system of checks and balances on our elected officials and tax dollars.

It's worth it.

I just wish more people understood how significant the business of government officials is and became more informed and involved.

Here's a good example.

Warsaw schools built a new high school a while back. Story after story on the front page of this newspaper chronicled the progress, the cost, the effect on the taxpayer.

But after the school was built and the increase showed up on our readers' property tax statements, my phone started ringing.

"Why didn't you tell us our taxes were going up because of this high school?" they asked.

My simple response in each case was, "We did."

People don't really seem to notice what their elected officials are doing until it hits them in their pocketbook.

Wouldn't it be nice if they paid a little more attention to these details?

But even if taxpayers don't care, the open meetings law was put on the books so the workings of government are easily accessible.

It was written to keep the public's business public.

There are exceptions.

These exceptions can be handled in executive sessions and the public can be excluded.

The exceptions are spelled out in the law and the law states that executive sessions "may be held only in the following instances":

• Discussion of strategy in collective bargaining.

• Discussion of strategy in the initiation of litigation or litigation pending or threatened.

• Discussion of implementation of security systems.

• Discussion of the purchase or lease of real property.

• To interview prospective employees.

• With respect to any individual over whom the governing body has jurisdiction to receive information concerning alleged misconduct and to discuss the individual's status...

• Discussion of records classified as confidential by state or federal statute.

• Discussion before a placement decision an individual student's abilities, past performance, behavior and needs.

• Discussion of a job performance evaluation of individual employees.

• When considering the appointment of a public official to develop a list of prospective appointees, consider applications and make one initial exclusion of prospective appointees from further consideration.

• To prepare or score examinations used in issuing licenses, certificates, permits or registrations.

As you can see, it probably would take an attorney to sort through all this. These are paraphrased versions of the exceptions. The whole law runs to five letter-sized pages.

I think it's a lot to ask of our elected officials to wade through all that information each time they try to schedule an executive session.

I guess that's a small part of why newspapers exist - to remind them.

No decisions can be made in executive sessions. Motions must be made and votes cast in public meetings.

Of course we in the newspaper business aren't naive enough to think that elected officials don't get together over coffee once in awhile. They hash things out and then show up at the public meeting for a quick vote.

It happens. It's not legal. But it's all part of the give and take.

Overall, I'm confident that our local elected officials have the best interests of their constituents at heart. I am also confident they want to abide by the law.

As a jail project unfolds, the newspaper will be there at every turn.

I hope our readers see it as an opportunity to be informed, or better yet, to become involved in the process. [[In-content Ad]]