Social secrecy

In justifying recent private meetings of the new University of North Carolina system Board of Governors, the system's counsel conveniently rationalizes a closed-door meeting by saying ... it wasn't a meeting. No, system vice president Laura Luger said, a gathering of the board in Chapel Hill that was not open to the public was "outside the scope of an official meeting by all of its parameters."

Board members, many newly appointed Republicans, had what sounds like a get-acquainted session that included a dinner and breakfast in addition to meetings. The closed meetings amounted to more than seven hours of time in a two-day period. If they were social, it must have been some shindig.

This is a public body doing the people's business, and while some of the business here seems to have been entirely social and thus not subject to the state's open meetings law, there were indeed discussions about issues facing the university in gatherings that were closed. The board should not put itself in a position that requires definitions of "scope" by its lawyer.

Don't get us wrong. These meetings typically aren't exactly filled with the excitement of a Ringling Brothers production. Even if the public were invited, people would not be pounding on the doors and attendance would not be standing room only.

But this is a new board, and its members made an early stumble. Also taking part in the meetings, naturally, was new UNC President Tom Ross. Ross is perfectly comfortable dealing with the public and certainly understands his obligation to openness as the university's chief executive. It would be unfair to hold him entirely responsible for this episode.

But there are veterans on the board who should have raised questions. Too many times, public boards of all sizes in North Carolina have tried to excuse secrecy by arguing that no votes were taken, no official business was done. And too many times, it's turned out that public deliberations have been shaped by private ones. This is not acceptable.