Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> VOTING AT OPEN MEETINGS. <br /> <br /> The Open Meeting Law requires that all votes of members must <br />be recorded in a voting journal and that the journal must be made <br />available for public inspection. The statutory provision requiring <br />the body to record the votes of members likely prohibits the public <br />body from taking secret ballots even if the final overall tally is <br />recorded. In the event that the legislature intended to allow <br />secret ballots where the final vote was recorded, the statute would <br />have provided that the vote (singular) of the members would be <br />recorded. The term votes (plural) suggests that individual votes <br />must be recorded. <br /> <br /> Nevertheless it may be argued that a secret ballot is <br />permissible in the event the final collective vote is recorded. <br />This argument would interpret the plural term "votes" in "votes of <br />members" as meaning members collectively voting on more than one <br />issue (i.e. the committee votes on two bills). This line of <br />argument would stress that the legislature could have easily <br />drafted the bill to explicitly require that individual votes be <br />recorded in the event that it meant to have individual votes <br />recorded. Note that the last sentence in the Open Meeting Law <br />provides that "the vote of each member shall be recorded on each <br />appropriation of money .." In the event the legislature intended <br />to require that public bodies record individual votes, the term <br />"votes of members" could have easily been drafted as "the vote of <br />each member." This issue has not been litigated through the <br />appellate courts and remains unsettled. <br /> <br /> <br />