Gov. Reynolds vetoes open meetings bill after advocate warnings

Gov. Kim Reynold vetoed a bill Friday that would have increased the penalties for violating Iowa’s open meetings law over concerns that a section of the legislation would have created a loophole for government bodies to meet in private.

The bill, House File 2539, would have raised the penalty for violating Iowa’s open meetings law to up to $12,500 for a knowing violation and up to $2,500 for unknowingly violating the law.

The controversy arose over a last-minute amendment added by Senate lawmakers just before they passed the bill during the last week of the session earlier this year.

Iowa government bodies, boards and commissions are generally required under the open meetings law to meet in public and follow certain transparency rules.

Existing law allows members of a body to gather for “ministerial or social” purposes if they do not discuss policy. The amendment sought to expand those exceptions to say that members of a government body attending the same event hosted by a political party, candidate or civic organization would not be considered an open meeting.

But, as government transparency groups noted in letters to Reynolds, the amended language does not carry over the qualification that policy cannot be discussed at those gatherings. The result, they said, was a loophole that would have allowed government bodies to hold private meetings to discuss public policy.

In a letter accompanying her veto, Reynolds indicated she agreed with those concerns, but said she hoped the Legislature would continue pursuing bills to strengthen transparency. It was the only bill Reynolds vetoed this session.

“Although well-intentioned, the amendment to the definition is unnecessary and will cause confusion,” Reynolds, a Republican, said in the letter. “Open meetings laws need to be clear; otherwise, their application and enforcement will be inconsistent and varied.”

In letters sent to Reynolds this month, the Iowa Public Information Board and Iowa Freedom of Information Council warned that the bill could weaken Iowa’s open meetings law.

“Instead of clarifying that members of government boards could attend events of political parties and civic organizations without violating Iowa’s open meetings law, the actual language in the enrolled bill can be interpreted to not include the statute’s existing prohibition on deliberation of public policy issues when government board members attend social or ministerial gatherings,” wrote Randy Evans, chair of the Iowa Freedom of Information Council, on May 14.

Erika Eckley, the Iowa Public Information Board executive director, said the amendment was unnecessary for the stated goal, because the existing law already allows members of a public body to attend a civic or political event as long as they do not discuss policy.

  Buy Photo

Lawmaker: Veto 'won't sit well' in Scott County

Rep. Gary Mohr, R-Bettendorf, introduced the bill in the Iowa House in response to concerns he had about the city of Davenport's $1.6 million settlement with the former city administrator — without a public vote from the City Council.

He said he was disappointed the governor vetoed the bill and wished she had reached out to him before making the decision. Mohr said he would have preferred Reynolds sign the bill now and have lawmakers fix any ambiguities next session.

  Buy Photo

"I don't quite understand why the governor would veto that bill. I think it's important that we increase those penalties fivefold," he said. "And we're going to continue to have things like what's happening in Davenport happen in other areas, people withholding public records."

Mohr said Quad Cities residents reached out to him with transparency concerns over Davenport's separation agreements and over records relating to a partial building collapse in May 2023 that killed three people. He said the current law is inadequate to deal with major violations of the law.

  Buy Photo

"My introduction of the original bill was in response to the public outcry, that this isn't right, and the public wanted something done about it," he said. "That's why I think it won't sit well in Scott County, because the Scott Countians are the ones who encouraged me to introduce the bill in the first place."

Rep. Brent Siegrist, a Republican from Council Bluffs who managed the bill in the House, said House lawmakers would revisit the legislation next year. He said he thought the House version of the bill was stronger before Senate lawmakers amended it.

“The Senate saw fit to change it right at the last couple hours, and had they not done that the bill would have been signed and we would have had much stronger open record laws,” he said. “So we’ll go back at it next year and try to get the House version passed again.”

Erin Murphy of The Gazette Des Moines Bureau contributed.