 |
| ESPC Home | | | 2005 LAP* Book | | | Background | | | Legislator Profiles | | | Key Votes | | | LAP* Book Home |
|
|
| Numeric List |
|
|
| Budget |
|
|
| Accountability |
|
|
|
Health & Human Services |
|
|
| Justice System |
|
|
| Education |
|
|
| State Employees |
|
|
|
Taxation & Revenue |
|
|
|
Wildlife & Environment |
|
|
|
Worker & Public Safety |
|
|
| Tribal Affairs |
|
|
| Senior Citizens |
|
|
2005 General Session
HB 337 would have broadened the reasons a public board could close a meeting by defining another executive session rationale. HB 337 proposed allowing a board to go into executive session, closed to the public, to discuss marketing or pricing strategies of competitive ventures.
Under Wyoming's Open Meetings Act, a governing body of an agency may hold executive sessions closed to the public to discuss litigation, personnel matters, legally confidential matters, and a few other statutorily defined matters. HB 337 would have added the discussion of competitive ventures as another permitted executive session.
Supporters of the bill, including the bill sponsor Jerry Iekel of Sheridan, said the bill was meant to assist hospitals that face competition from doctors who offer services in their offices that compete with services offered by hospitals. Iekel wanted to allow hospital boards to close meetings to discuss and plan ventures to compete with doctors or with other hospitals.
Opponents, including the Equality State Policy Center, the Wyoming Press Association and the League of Women Voters, argued that the bill was very broad and would apply to all public agencies and boards. Opponents defended the open meetings law as a way to hold public officials accountable, and to help citizens understand and be involved in public policy. Opponents were troubled by the concept of a public body closing a meeting to talk about competing with the private sector.
The House Corporations, Elections and Political Subdivisions Committee defeated HB 337, unanimously.