(Continued from page 25)

to propose changes in laws dealing with open meetings and the availability of documents.
• The task force includes representatives of news organizations, law enforcement officials, prosecutors, and officials from cities, counties and school districts.
• Venhuizen, the governor's communications director, said the diverse group is seeking consensus on ways to make government more open.
• "We have a group here that represents a wide variety of interests and opinions. I've been impressed so far with the way the group has come together and worked together," Venhuizen said.
• Dave Bordewyk, general manager of the South Dakota Newspaper Association, said the 33-member panel has engaged in vigorous debate but is working well.
• "I think it just demonstrates these issues touch a lot of people. You've got to make sure you're involving everyone in terms of trying to figure out what can work and what can't," said Bordewyk, a task force member.
• One of the issues that the group is studying is whether police should make their logs and mug shots of arrested crime suspects available to the public.
• Panel members also are reviewing whether to release recordings or transcripts of 911 calls and videos taken by cameras mounted in police cars in some cases. Venhuizen said the group will look at how other states determine which recordings are appropriate to release. Members also will examine laws in other states to see how certain police reports are handled, he said.
• Some of the proposals seek to make sure state and local boards and commissions follow South Dakota's open meetings law, which requires them to give notice of a meeting and its agenda at least 24 hours before the meeting. These meetings can be closed to the public if the discussions are about personnel issues, student performance, litigation or contracts, employee contract negotiations, pricing strategies by publicly owned businesses and certain economic development matters.
• One proposal would require boards and commissions to record closed meetings, with the recordings kept sealed unless someone complains a meeting was improperly closed. A judge or some other official would listen to the recording of the meeting in question to determine if the panel acted properly.
• The task force also is studying whether text messages or emails among board members should be made public if the communication amounts to a meeting.
• Representatives of townships want the law clarified to determine when township supervisors are holding a meeting. Supervisors in many rural townships are responsible for fixing roads and bridges, and some wonder if gathering to do that work is considered an official meeting.

(Continued on page 27)