NORWICH – Department of State Committee on Open Government Executive Director Robert Freeman visited Norwich Town Hall Monday evening, where he offered his expertise to the public in relation to the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) and the Open Meetings Law.

About 30 people – both public officials and community members – attended the event as Freeman offered advice to anyone who requested clarification on the two laws, and described the duties of the Committee on Open Government.

“It’s a unit within the Department of State, very small, the staff is three of us at full strength. I describe it as the smallest state agency that actually does anything, and leave the rest to your imagination,” said Freeman, adding that the unit offers advice, opinions, guidance, and training to anybody to wants to know about public access to government information in New York, primarily in relation to FOIL and the Open Meetings Law.

“What I want to leave you with tonight is the general notion that the two laws we’re talking about are based primarily on reasonableness and common sense,” Freeman said. “All they really say, all they should ever say, in my opinion, is that everything is open except to the extent that disclosure would hurt, significantly, either somebody in terms of an invasion of privacy, the government in terms of its ability to do its job well on behalf of the public, or sometimes a private company in relation to its competition.”

Freeman said in most instances, unless the disclosure of information would harm an individual, government body, or company, the end result is often disclosure of the information. “Obviously that’s an oversimplification, we have too many laws in New York, they’re not necessarily consistent, but that is the general thrust of our open government laws in New York.”

Community members in the audience asked Freeman to elaborate on the Open Meetings Law, which applies to public bodies, or, an entity consisting of two or more members to carry out some sort of governmental function collectively as a body, Freeman said. He said the question that arose on day one of the law’s implementation was, ‘What is a meeting?’

“Since the late ‘70s, it’s been clear that any gathering of a quorum, a majority of the total membership for the purpose of conducting public business, is a meeting covered by the Open Meetings Law, even if there’s no intent to take action, regardless of what it is called,” said Freeman.

“The Open Meetings Law does not permit a board to conduct a valid meeting or take action except at a meeting held in accordance with the Open Meetings Law, which would be either a physical coming together of a majority or, now, a virtual coming together by means of video conferencing.”

Freeman said the Open Meetings Law contains a statement of intent that states the public has the right to attend, to listen, and to observe the performance of public officials. As a result of this, a meeting cannot take place over the telephone––but it can take place as a video conference.

“If a meeting is to be held by means of video conferencing, the notice of the meeting must indicate that to be so,” said Freeman. “It has to indicate where the members will be participating and that anybody can attend in any of those locations. As long as those people at those two or more locations can observe on another, it’s a valid meeting.”

The Committee on Open Government issues opinions to New Yorkers who have questions about the legality of government. Although it can’t force compliance, Freeman said he still likes to think it has a degree of influence. “The whole idea of the issuance of an opinion, whether it be verbally or in writing, is to number one educate, number two persuade, and number three encourage compliance.”

Still, Freeman said, “There are lots of ways to avoid accountability. That’s the reality of it.”