To the editor:

On July 9, at 6 p.m., an open meeting of the Sunshine Ordinance Sub-Committee will be held in the Salem City Council chambers. The purpose: To discuss the committee's recommended changes to Article XIV of the Salem Code of Ordinances, also known as the Sunshine Ordinance, passed in 2005.

The public is welcome and should make every effort to attend. Here's why:

This landmark ordinance helps illuminate Salem's decision- and policy-making processes. It sets reasonable conditions on how and when meeting and agenda information must be made public. If meeting notices and agendas don't meet those conditions, then decisions made in those meetings could be invalidated.

After the City Council unanimously passed this ordinance, then-mayor Stanley Usovicz vetoed it on the grounds of "significant concerns regarding the potential legal liability of the city (and) financial liability of the taxpayers." (Letter to City Council, July 6, 2005)

The 'legal liability' argument, to me, implied a fear of being held accountable for bad practices that were expected to continue regardless of the ordinance. The argument bypassed the central ethical issue — that it is wrong for city officials to make decisions affecting residents without their knowledge and without soliciting their input. Period.

Even if it's a matter of "Oops, we forgot," carelessness and sloppiness are no excuse.

Nine of the eleven councillors voted for ethics, transparency and accountability, overriding the veto. The dissenters: Councilor at Large Tom Furey and Ward 7 Councilor Joseph O'Keefe.

This past spring, the Sunshine Ordinance Sub-Committee, under the leadership of Councilor O'Keefe, dismantled Article XIV by, among other things, striking key provisions concerning the invalidation of decisions made under conditions that violate the article. The subcommittee also includes Ward 5 Councilor Jean Pelletier, Jane Guy, Cheryl LaPointe, Eileen Sacco, City Solicitor Beth Rennard, and Jason Silva.

Pressed by a vocal group of residents, Councilor O'Keefe recently scheduled an open meeting of the subcommittee for 2 p.m. on Thursday, June 25.

He rescheduled for the evening of July 9 after getting complaints about the inconvenient time.

It is in the interest of every Salem resident to attend this meeting or watch it live on SATV if they still plan to cover it.

And it is in the interest of every neighborhood association in Salem to send a representative to a special meeting of the Alliance of Salem Neighborhood Associations on Saturday, June 27, at 9 a.m. at the Beverly Cooperative Bank, 73 Lafayette St., to discuss the ordinance.

Let's not institutionalize administrative sloppiness or, worse, unethical, under-the-carpet decisions by standing by as the sun sets on transparency and accountability.

Leslie Limon

Salem