HCS HB 316 -- OPEN MEETINGS AND RECORDS LAW

SPONSOR:  Jones (89)

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Special Committee on
General Laws by a vote of 14 to 0.

This substitute changes the laws regarding the Open Meetings and
Records Law, commonly known as the Sunshine Law.  In its main
provisions, the substitute:

(1)  Requires all records of the Missouri Ethics Commission to be
open records except for any investigative reports prepared by
commission employees regarding complaints until a decision is
rendered and any reports of complaints that the commission
dismisses.  The respondent to a commission investigation may
request that his or her records be sealed for good cause shown;

(2)  Requires all meetings of the commission to be open except
those in which the commission discusses a pending complaint;

(3)  Specifies that a "quasi-public governmental body" will
include any association that receives public funding through dues
paid by a public governmental body or its members;

(4)  Requires the minutes to reflect a general account of the
discussions that occurred at a closed meeting;

(5)  Specifies that only members of a public governmental body,
their attorneys and staff assistants, and any necessary witnesses
will be permitted in any closed meeting of the governmental body;

(6)  Specifies the criteria for the litigation exception to the
open record disclosure.  An actual lawsuit, a threat of a
lawsuit, or a substantial likelihood of litigation must exist in
order to close information regarding a cause of action;

(7)  Requires information to be made available in an electronic
format if a public body keeps records in an electronic format.
Data must be available in a format accessible to the public if it
is stored in a data-processing program.  Hospitals will not be
compelled to violate their licensing agreements involving
proprietary data-processing systems;

(8)  Reduces from $1,000 to $100 the maximum civil penalty for
any violation of Sections 610.010 - 610.026, RSMo, and increases
the maximum penalty for a purposeful violation of these sections
from $5,000 to $8,000;

(9)  Allows courts to use the penalty of voiding a public body's
actions when evaluating actions in violation of Sections
610.010 - 610.026 that occur at any meeting not only at closed
meetings; and

(10)  Requires any public meeting of a public governmental body
addressing issues regarding a fee or tax increase, eminent
domain, zoning, transportation development districts, or tax
increment financing to give at least five days' notice prior to
the meeting, exclusive of weekends and holidays when the facility
is closed.  The meetings must allow time for public comment.  If
proper notice is not given, discussion on the issue will be
postponed and no vote will be taken for at least 30 days.

FISCAL NOTE:  Estimated Cost on General Revenue Fund of Unknown
in FY 2010, FY 2011, and FY 2012.  Estimated Cost on Other State
Funds of $92,250 in FY 2010, $0 in FY 2011, and $0 in FY 2012.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that the bill makes necessary
clarifications to the Sunshine Law.  It will make the Missouri
Ethics Commission comply with many disclosure requests; limit the
use of the litigation exception; prevent abuse of the open
meetings requirements to raise taxes and impose other fees; and
make documents available in an electronic format if they are kept
electronically.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Jones (89); Missouri
Broadcasters Association; David Cook, United Food and Commercial
Workers 655 and Teamsters 688; Missouri Press Association;
Missouri Retailers Association; Robert Fleming; Jake Purcell,
City of Cape Girardeau; Thomas Cramer, City of Brentwood; Donna
Holly; Dr. Thomas Sagor; John Maupin; and Michael Kelley,
Mid-America Retail.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bill say that most political
subdivisions do not have the resources necessary to comply with
the record-keeping requirements.  Strict liability penalties for
violating the Sunshine Law is not good policy.  Electronic
record-keeping requirements for subdivisions that store records
electronically could be an unfunded mandate.

Testifying against the bill were Missouri Municipal League;
Missouri Association of Counties; St. Louis County Municipal
League; and Cooperating School Districts of Greater Kansas City.

OTHERS:  Others testifying on the bill answered technical
questions.

Testifying on the bill was Jean Meneke.

Missouri House of Representatives
95th General Assembly, 1st Regular Session
Last Updated November 17, 2009 at 9:24 am