Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, April 27, 1990                   TAG: 9004270586
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: B3   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: PAT BADEN EDUCATION WRITER
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

COUNTY MEETING ON SCHOOL FUNDS CALLED A VIOLATION

Paul Mahoney, an attorney for the school district, told board members that according to a recent state attorney general's opinion, the April 2 meeting fell under the provisions of the state's open-meeting law, and the media should have been notified and allowed to attend.

"It appears that I have bad news," he told the board. "According to the attorney general's opinion, the situation is as follows: If the board appoints or creates a committee that is given a charge to perform, or which reports back to the board, it will fall under the open-meeting law and you will have to give appropriate notice to the media."

The meeting had been held to discuss a school district deficit and a request that the county advance $500,000 to help cover costs through the end of the school year.

The two board members and two supervisors reached an agreement that involved a county takeover of the district's finance department in return for the money.

The members did not give public notice of the meeting and refused to discuss the details until the following week, when the proposal was formally unveiled at a Board of Supervisors meeting.

By law, whenever a majority of members on a governing body meets, they must give notice and allow the public to attend.

To circumvent that requirement, officials have often held meetings that involve less than a majority of members.

But in a Feb. 21 opinion, Attorney General Mary Sue Terry said that such meetings violate the Freedom of Information Act. Terry's opinion came after two officials in Blacksburg met in closed session with two Montgomery County officials.

Terry said that because members were selected for a specific purpose, "It is my opinion that each of the two-member delegations constitutes a `committee' . . . and must, therefore, comply with the requirements of the act."

Mahoney called Terry's opinion "ridiculous and inconsistent," pointing to the year-long consolidation talks between Roanoke and Roanoke County, which were held in closed sessions.

However, the law provides a specific exemption for such talks. In addition, the consolidation team provided public notice of every meeting. Mahoney said that while he considered Terry's opinion "absurd," he advised the board to abide by it or risk a lawsuit.

"If they [the media] want to play the game that way, go ahead and bury them with a telephone book of meeting notices," he said. "I would take it a step further and notify them of all statewide committees you attend as well."