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

DATE: FRIDAY, July 13, 1990                   TAG: 9007130688
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-10   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

CLOSED MEETING

TAXPAYERS are putting up $260 million during the state's 1990-1992 budget period to fund the operations of the University of Virginia - excluding funds for the UVa hospital and tuition and fees paid by students.

Taxpayers' confidence in that institution's accountability is not enhanced when its new president and governing board hide out for two days at the luxurious Tide's Inn near the Chesapeake Bay to discuss their plans.

It is not clear whether last weekend's "retreat" by UVa's incoming President John Casteen and members of the university's board of visitors violated the state's Freedom of Information law that requires open meetings.

School officials have defended the closing of the meeting to the public and press by saying the discussions revolved around personnel matters, evaluation of departments, and fund raising - subjects that lawfully can be discussed in private.

But their statements suggest that the agenda was not that limited. Rector Edward E. Elson says during the two days of chats Casteen told the board "how he plans to allocate the assets of the university, and sought our opinions as to the programmatic priorities he envisages."

When members of the news media complained that Elson's statement hinted that the talks were out of range of topics exempted from Freedom of Information requirements, the rector said the word "assets" referred to personnel. "We look on the people who are working here as the assets," he said.

That's a questionable explanation. Technically, the UVa officials may not have done anything illegal. The open-meetings law is very loose - thus ripe for various interpretations.

But the cozy meeting - away from the hubbub of the campus and out of reporters' earshot - went late into the night Saturday and continued for several more hours on Sunday. Could the public officials really have met for that long without veering away from their stated narrow agenda?

Closed retreats for public officials are a bad idea. The legislature has recognized that; during its 1990 session, it swiftly trashed a bill that would have sanctioned retreats. What, after all, are such retreats a retreat from?

Public business should be conducted in the public's view. Period.

by CNB