Although his county commissioners wisely declined his invitation for individual private meetings, the fact that Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline requested such meetings indicates he still fails to grasp the intention of the Kansas Open Meetings Act.

After commissioners raised questions about the way Kline was running his office, the former Kansas attorney general reportedly sent an e-mail asking commissioners for individual one-hour meetings to try to ease their concerns. However, commissioners declined the meetings, saying they could be perceived as an attempt to skirt the Open Meeting Act, which requires discussions of official business to take place in public sessions.

In typical fashion, Kline turned the situation back on commissioners, saying, “It’s amazing to me how sensitive the community is about speaking.” On the contrary, it seems Kline is the one who is “sensitive” about speaking – at least in a forum that is monitored by the public.

In his e-mail, Kline said he wanted to meet individually with commissioners – not their lawyers – because the presence of an attorney might violate the spirit of the open meetings law. In what possible way? Perhaps by blowing the whistle on a potentially illegal private discussion of public business.

A similar situation arose in February 2005, when Kline conducted two meetings with conservative members of the Kansas Board of Education at which he discussed the teaching of evolution in Kansas schools. Although the situation wasn’t pursued as a violation of the open meetings law, it was a clear attempt to privately advise a majority of the state board on a matter that should have been discussed in an open meeting. It’s disturbing that Kline continues to be unwilling to do that.

A spokesman for Kline said commissioners are hearing a lot of things that just aren’t true and “We just want to clear the air.”

If it truly is Kline’s goal to “clear the air,” he shouldn’t hesitate to present his case to the public at an open meeting of the Johnson County Commission.