Lest you think we don’t need to strengthen transparency laws
The CFOIC article linked first below details a lawsuit pending against Colorado’s Energy and Carbon Management Commission (the appointed board which handles, among other things, permits for drilling for oil and gas).
Quoting with link intact:
“A lawsuit accuses the Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission of violating the state’s open meetings and open records laws by denying public access to a commission-appointed advisory committee and by withholding the committee’s draft report. Brad Klafehn, an environmentalist, asked in January to observe meetings of the commission’s Biological Resources Working Group, established to develop recommendations about ‘the regulation and protection of invertebrates and rare plants.’”
The commissioners are claiming that the advisory committee is not a public “state public body” as defined in Colorado Open Meetings Law and thus Mr. Klafehn is not entitled to view meetings or minutes of same.
Their claim strikes me as somewhat disingenuous, as this quote points out (again, copied with link intact):
“Klafehn addressed the commissioners during the public comment portion of their Jan. 28 meeting. Commission chair Jeff Robbins told him the open meetings law doesn’t apply to the working group because it involves only one commissioner, not two or more, and no decisions are made during meetings. Benjamin Boudreaux, the senior assistant attorney general who advises the commission, expressed agreement with his assessment. ‘We’re just trying to work through issues. We have a number of working groups, and this is the approach we’ve taken,’ Robbins said. ‘It allows us to have commissioners bring subject-matter expertise individually to different topics … It is not, in any manner, a means to be non-transparent. It’s a matter of trying to get things done and then bring it back to the commission for full meetings and full public participation.’”
What I mean is that a decision to set up an advisory committee with only one person strikes me as a nifty way to avoid public scrutiny, to fly just under open meetings law requirements.
The fact that the product of the meeting gets presented later in front of all the commission doesn’t, in my view, “cure” things (see “Related” below). As one of those pesky members of the public who likes to know what my government is up to, I want to see process and not just results; both of those have value to me.
I almost certainly don’t agree politically with Mr. Klafehn, but I wish him well with his lawsuit.
In a larger sense, this article points to a repeated theme here: we as citizens must be vigilant against intrusions by the government into our right to know what they’re doing (see the second link below for another example involving Secretary of State Griswold).
We must, as Mr. Klafehn is doing, fight to defend our own lest we turn around one day and find our rights gone.
https://coloradofoic.org/lawsuit-colorado-energy-commission-violated-open-meetings-and-open-records-laws/?fbclid=IwY2xjawTxc2NwZG9mAWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAGJyaWQRMUlvT3o0ZU1kWXpyaW85MVVzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeb09z8jAIN5o2RcOHJZQu9aEjVk6MNYBxXjSNmG6PCh47rDiJjAVJvrx8u9M_aem_GL4r57-MCqhK_CsTs4A9pg
https://coloradoaccountabilityproject.substack.com/p/griswold-in-the-ags-office-would
Related:
In the above, I alluded to a governmental body coming back after the fact to fix up an open meetings law violation.
It's not quite analogous to what the Energy and Carbon Management Commission is up to, but the earlier CFOIC article below details a recent Colorado Supreme Court decision on curing violations of Open Meetings Law.
https://coloradofoic.org/colorado-supreme-court-upholds-cure-doctrine-for-open-meetings-law-awards-attorney-fees-to-plaintiff-in-woodland-park-school-board-case/
The Colorado Sun loves them some Professor Masket
A recent Sun article (linked first below) prompted a comment from a reader involving many things, one of which being the following quote from the article:
"Ballot measures have always posed a quicker way for interest groups with money to influence what laws get passed, rather than lobbying for bills at the legislature, said Seth Masket, a political science professor at the University of Denver who has studied ballot measures in California."
Putting aside the content of the professor's quote, the reader's comment reminded me of something I've noted about him. The Colorado Sun sure loves them some Professor Masket; they come a runnin to his yard for what he's serving up. He' a go-to political science professor when the Sun needs a quote.
A quick nip through the second link below makes that clear. It's a site search run on the Colorado Sun for Seth Masket.
I don’t know Professor Masket personally. I reached out to him with some questions for this post (and an opportunity to toss his two cents in), but I didn’t hear back. But this post isn’t about Professor Masket per se, nor is it about any particular view he holds. This is more of a reminder to you as a reader about what you are presented by media and your responsibility to mind what you ingest.
Professor Masket and the Sun illustrate two things worth remembering.
Often, when newspapers quote academics, they are put alongside advocates on all sides of an issue. It’s tempting to think, because of this placement and because they’re academics, that they speak from a neutral perspective on the issue. That their being an “expert” on something means they do not have a bias.
This is wrong. To illustrate, I point you to Professor Masket’s op-eds written for the Sun. Read through both. You can clearly glean from them what his political leanings are. It is naive to think that he is able to separate his opinions from what he is saying. The same holds true for all academics, regardless of their field.
You should also remember to pay attention when reading an article or any particular news outlet, that who they talk to matters as much as who they don’t talk to. Ask yourself as you read, who got the microphone and who didn’t here? Would all the “experts” in a particular field feel the same way? Would any differ in opinion or in how they characterize things? Like as not, they wouldn’t.
You cannot control what any given media outlet does, but you can control yourself and what you consume. Take responsibility for making sure that you are a well informed media consumer, someone who knows and understands the differing facets of the issues that matter to you.
Story in the Colorado Sun today: https://coloradosun.com/2026/08/27/road-funding-ballot-measure-pulled-after-deal-reached-with-lawmakers/
Big mistake! This is why the republican party is in the gutter.
One hundred predominately liberal legislators will figure out a way of dishonoring any highway funding agreement with the sucker republicans. Result? More potholes but many more electric school buses.