All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.

Vox Hawkeye A Study in the Intellectual Call for Open Government (and How One State Heeded It)
Unformatted Document Text:  conference committee version on a vote of 80 to 4. 176 In retrospect, the compromise reflects a Solomonic use of excision and explication. For example, in dealing with the dispute over what will, or will not, constitute a “meeting,” the conference committee judiciously deleted the problematic term “informational.” Thus amended, the full definition of meeting was constructed to mean “a gathering in person or by electronic means, formal or informal, of a majority of the members of a governmental body where there is discussion, deliberation or action upon any matter within the scope of the governmental body’s policy-making duties. Meetings . . . shall not include a gathering of members of a governmental body for purely ministerial or social purposes when there is no discussion of policy or no intent to avoid the purposes of this act.” 177 According to conference committee member, and House floor manager of the bill, Rep. Don Avenson (D-Oelwein), the term “ministerial” was defined as those “strictly non-policy-making functions, such as opening the mail.” 178 With regard to the nagging question of when a meeting dealing with personnel issues could be closed, the conference committee finally decided, to the eventual approval of the House, that “a meeting may be closed ‘to evaluate the professional competency of an individual whose appointment, hiring, performance or discharge is being considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury to that individual’s reputation.’ In addition, the employee would have to request a closed session.” 179 Disarming, perhaps, on what may have been the most contentious issue before it, the conference committee decided to adopt in toto, and propose, the House’s provisions of the law relating to keeping the majority of collective 176 Charles Bullard, “House Okays Compromise on Open Meetings Law,” The Des Moines Register, 28 April 1978, 4A. 177 Ibid. 178 Ibid. (This admittedly vague terminology has benefited somewhat from subsequent Iowa Attorney General’s opinions, specifically AG 79-5-14 [Cook to Pellet and Crabb]; AG 81-2-13 [Stork to Reis]; and AG 81-7-4 [Stork to O’Kane]). 179 Ibid.

Authors: stepanek, steve.
first   previous   Page 45 of 55   next   last

background image
conference committee version on a vote of 80 to 4.
  In retrospect, the compromise reflects a Solomonic 
use of excision and explication.
For example, in dealing with the dispute over what will, or will not, constitute a “meeting,” the 
conference committee judiciously deleted the problematic term “informational.”  Thus amended, the full 
definition of meeting was constructed to mean “a gathering in person or by electronic means, formal or 
informal, of a majority of the members of a governmental body where there is discussion, deliberation or 
action upon any matter within the scope of the governmental body’s policy-making duties.  Meetings .  .  . 
shall not include a gathering of members of a governmental body for purely ministerial or social purposes 
when there is no discussion of policy or no intent to avoid the purposes of this act.
  According to 
conference committee member, and House floor manager of the bill, Rep. Don Avenson (D-Oelwein), the 
term “ministerial” was defined as those “strictly non-policy-making functions, such as opening the mail.”
With regard to the nagging question of when a meeting dealing with personnel issues could be 
closed, the conference committee finally decided, to the eventual approval of the House, that “a meeting 
may be closed ‘to evaluate the professional competency of an individual whose appointment, hiring, 
performance or discharge is being considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury 
to that individual’s reputation.’  In addition, the employee would have to request a closed session.
Disarming, perhaps, on what may have been the most contentious issue before it, the conference 
committee decided to adopt in toto, and propose, the House’s provisions of the law relating to keeping the 
majority of collective 
Charles Bullard, “House Okays Compromise on Open Meetings Law,” The Des Moines Register,  28 April 1978, 
 Ibid. (This admittedly vague terminology has benefited somewhat from subsequent Iowa Attorney General’s 
opinions, specifically AG 79-5-14 [Cook to Pellet and Crabb];  AG 81-2-13 [Stork to Reis]; and AG 81-7-4 [Stork 
to O’Kane]).

All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 45 of 55   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.