posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 12:41 PM
And the plot thickens...
The ACLU got involved in the Partial Nudity Ban in this Southern Oregon City and now the City Council has invoked "Executive Privilege" and is
holding a closed-door executive session to decide upon the Ban, without public scrutiny.
City nudity debate closed to public
Under Oregon law, executive sessions are closed to the public. Members of the media can attend, but cannot report on the proceedings. Oregon public
record law also exempts internal advisory communications from public disclosure. Councilors would not be legally allowed to engage in verbal
discussions of the nudity ban.
Commissioner Colin Swales sent a message to the council's public e-mail board saying he could find no provision under Oregon's laws on executive
sessions that would permit the closed-door discussion of nudity.
"I can find nothing (excepting '... current litigation or litigation likely to be filed ...'), that would allow such an unnecessarily secret
cover-up of this matter," Swales wrote.
Ralph Temple, who has spoken to the council in the past on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union, joined with several other residents in
"protesting against an executive session based on protecting the city from exposing itself to a justified lawsuit. What is this — the Bush
I guess Municipal Governments learned a thing or two from the previous and current Presidential Administrations, and decided to try out their Play
The irony is that although the City Council is supposedly trying to prevent "giving people information about the best ways to file lawsuits
against the city"
over this Partial Ban on Nudity, they are opening themselves up for a law suit from the people for misusing and abusing
Executive Sessions. This is of course in addition to the inevitable lawsuits that will be filed if they do go forward with extending the Partial Ban
on Nudity. Now that the ACLU is involved, that is pretty much a given at this point.
If local government becomes self-serving and no longer serves the interest of the will of the people, how can we expect a larger federal government to
do the same? Something is horribly wrong when public servants, even on such a small scale as a small town of 20,000, can't serve the public interest
and have to hide behind closed doors and "Executive Privilege" to keep from their constituents from finding out what it is that they are doing.
I find it rather humorous, personally, that the proverbial straw to break the camel's back in this city wasn't Taxes, or Jobs, or something
infinitely more important, but a matter of the Right to Run Amok Naked if you want to, even though only 2 out of 20,000 ever would.