Apropos Kentucky — whose lawmakers are transparently secretive about the redistricting process:
"Open meetings give citizens the ability to know what their government is doing and fully participate in civic life. Citizens also act as counterweights to those who are paid to represent particular interests.
"Citizens who participate in open meetings represent the public interest. That is almost impossible to do if the public isn't there.
"Other downsides of closed meetings and private dealings include:
•Bad process produces bad outcomes.
•Taxpayer money is wasted.
•Legislators are deprived of public support to counter influence that may not be in the best interest of communities.
"A 2018 study examined the effects of less government monitoring when newspapers close. The consequences included higher government wages and deficits, and increased likelihood of unplanned expenditures. Municipal borrowing costs increased approximately $650,000 per issue when jurisdictions go to the bond market.
"Clearly, decisions made without observation are expensive.
"The commission's transparency failures are especially troubling because of the role it plays in our citizen-driven form of government. The panel convenes every 10 years to draw the lines of legislative and congressional districts.
"Those boundaries determine who represents us. By largely deliberating over boundaries in secret, the commission made it impossible for voters to know how their representation was determined.
"Thar is an affront to our national principle that sovereignty belongs to the people.
"[We have] a good Open Public Meetings Act. We must insist that our public officials follow it â and live up to it in spirit."
