Vermont’s Open Meeting Law (OML) was designed to ensure government transparency and public participation, preventing backroom deals and guaranteeing that citizens have a voice. But does it actually succeed?

Too often, public meetings occur with little real public awareness, and officials claim they followed the law while doing the bare minimum to ensure meaningful engagement. Many Vermonters don’t realize important decisions have been made until it’s too late to object. So, how does the law work, where does it fall short, and what can citizens do to hold their leaders accountable?

What Does the Open Meeting Law Require?

Vermont’s OML applies to all public bodies, from selectboards and school boards to state commissions and advisory groups. The basic requirements include:

• Public Notice – Regular meetings require at least 48 hours’ notice, while special meetings need 24 hours’ notice, posted in two designated locations and on a town website if one exists.
• Open Attendance – Any member of the public can attend and observe.
• Public Participation – Officials must allow public comment, though they can limit its duration.
• Minutes and Records – Minutes must be taken, made public, and include votes and discussion details.
• Restrictions on Executive Sessions – Private meetings (executive sessions) are allowed only for specific matters like legal issues, personnel, or contract negotiations.

These sound like strong protections, but in practice, they don’t always guarantee meaningful public awareness or engagement..

The Illusion of Public Awareness

Compliance with OML doesn’t mean the public actually knows about or understands a meeting’s significance.

• Minimal Notification – Many meetings are announced in obscure locations, such as a town bulletin board or buried within a newspaper notice.
• Lack of Digital Accessibility – In the modern age, a town website with a dedicated meeting page and email notifications should be the norm—but it’s not.
• Timing and Agenda Ambiguity – Meetings often happen at inconvenient times, and vague agendas can obscure major policy decisions.

Officials sometimes use the phrase “but it was a public meeting” to imply the public was fully informed. In reality, simply holding an open meeting does not ensure the public was aware or had an opportunity to participate.

Meeting the Minimum vs. Striving for True Transparency

Vermont’s Open Meeting Law sets the minimum standard for public notice, but true transparency means going beyond the bare minimum. Just because a meeting is technically posted doesn’t mean the public is engaged or even aware that it’s happening.

Public officials—whether on selectboards, school boards, or state commissions—should recognize that when issues are significant, they should exceed basic notification requirements.

Proactive steps such as additional notices on websites, social media updates, email notifications, and live-streaming meetings can greatly improve public awareness and engagement. The goal should be to ensure that people see and understand meeting notices, not just to check a legal compliance box.

Public Meetings vs. Public Hearings: A Crucial Distinction

Not all public meetings are the same. Understanding the differences is critical:

• Public Meeting (or Meeting Open to the Public) – Officials conduct business in front of the public, but public participation may be limited or nonexistent.
  • Posting Deadline: 48 hours for regular meetings, 24 hours for special meetings.
• Public Hearing – A meeting designed specifically to collect public input, where citizen comments must be heard.
  • Posting Deadline: Typically 15 days’ notice, published in a newspaper of general circulation and posted in multiple public locations. Some hearings may require additional or different notice periods depending on the issue.
• Warned Informational Meeting – A meeting held before a formal vote, often for budgets or major policies.
  • Posting Deadline: 30–40 days in advance in designated public locations and at least five days before the meeting in a newspaper of general circulation (unless published in the town report).ted locations.
• Public Warnings – Official notices announcing meetings or votes.
  • Posting Deadline: 30–40 days in advance for town-wide votes, posted in multiple locations and, when required, published in a newspaper or included in the town report.

Without understanding these distinctions, citizens may assume they’ll have a voice in a meeting when, legally, they may not.

Support FYIVT Today – Choose Your Impact! Name Your Own Price to Help Us Keep Fighting for Truth and Transparency. Every Contribution Makes a Difference!

Executive Sessions: When Transparency Ends

While executive sessions serve legitimate purposes, they can also be misused. Officials can enter private discussions for reasons such as legal issues or personnel matters, but these closed-door meetings can sometimes be used to shield controversial discussions from public scrutiny.

If a board routinely enters executive session without a clear reason, or seems to discuss topics that should be public, it’s worth asking why. Transparency should be the default, not secrecy.

The Need for Modernization

Vermont’s Open Meeting Law was crafted when bulletin boards and print newspapers were primary communication tools. In today’s digital world, the law should be updated to ensure:

• Dedicated Webpages for Public Meetings – Every town and state board should maintain an easily accessible meeting calendar.
• Email Notifications – Residents should be able to sign up for alerts about upcoming meetings.
• Improved Meeting Accessibility – More meetings should be live-streamed and recorded for those who can’t attend in person.

These simple changes could significantly improve civic engagement.

Why Citizen Due Diligence Matters

Even if officials follow the letter of the law, citizens must ensure they follow its spirit. Here’s how Vermonters can stay informed:

1. Check Your Town’s Meeting Notices – Learn where and how your local government posts meetings.
2. Subscribe to Local Email Lists – If your town offers email alerts or social media updates, sign up. If they don’t, advocate for one.
3. Review Meeting Agendas – Read agendas carefully to catch major decisions before they happen.
4. Attend When Possible – Being present sends a message that people are paying attention.
5. Hold Officials Accountable – If a meeting is poorly warned or officials overuse executive sessions, speak up.

Conclusion

Vermont’s Open Meeting Law was meant to foster government transparency, but it falls short when meetings happen with minimal public awareness. While officials may meet the legal standard, that doesn’t mean they are truly committed to public involvement.

Citizens must take an active role in ensuring their government remains accountable—because transparency only works if people are actually paying attention.

If you found this information valuable and want to support independent journalism in Vermont, become a supporter for just $5/month today!

Dave Soulia | FYIVT

You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Parler (@fyivt) | Gab | Instagram

#fyivt #TransparencyMatters #CivicEngagement #VTPolitics

Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!

Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!

Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!