Three commissioners are at a bar ...

Obviously, I think this editorial is kinda silly ...

In the wake of Tuesday's meeting, a couple of things should happen. First, Athens-Clarke's mayor and commissioners should commit themselves to complying with both the spirit and the letter of the open meetings statute. Additionally, it might be wise for state lawmakers to take a look next year at tightening the open meetings statue to include, in at least some circumstances, meetings that don't involve a quorum of an elected body.

Both suggestions are unnecessary.

The first one would assume that something improper or illegal was going on. However, as the newspaper willingly concedes, no law was broken. Furthermore, those in attendence at the meeting even permitted a reporter to attend for the various presentations, despite the fact they had sufficient legal cover not to. If anything, the commission went above and beyond in being open and accessible to the public by letting the reporter sit through the meeting, thus letting the Athens Banner-Herald give us this solid story detailing the positive developments in the community's quest to build a diverse, local economy.

To suggest otherwise - as the editorial implies - would seem to be somewhat irresponsible. The commission, with regard to this instance, acted perfectly within the letter of the law. An argument can be made that because the meeting contained news that would arguably be of interest to the community as a whole, they might have wanted to consider giving more public notice of it so interested parties could attend. However, let's be clear, that would have been a courtesy extended that was not required by state law, and the crux of the editorial is the commission was up to something no good and ought to quit.

Second, I'm not sure what in the world the state legislature ought to address. Quite frankly, I'd rather see them focus their energy on fixing transportation and reforming our tax code rather than tweak what is a rather clear piece of state law.

To require non-quorum gatherings, even just a handful of them, is adding yet another lay or bureaucracy and micro-management when it's not needed. The reason we have the notion of a quorum is to give all parties - members and non-members, public and private - a sense of what is necessary to conduct business. To lower the legal bar to include non-quorum gatherings would insert a level of unneeded confusion into what is a perfectly reasonable and well-functioning process.

Again, would it be that if Alice Kinman, Ed Robinson and Harry Sims decided to get together and play Jenga, do we need to make sure that's on the calendar? If Melvin Davis, John Daniel and Margaret Hale opt to go whitewater rafting, do we need a reporter bobbing alongside them?