Mr. Brooks Skinner
CitizensÕ Rights Division
North Carolina Attorney GeneralÕs Office 
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 - 0629

(919) 716 - 6780; (919) 716 - 6705 [fax]

Dear Mr. Skinner

We are writing to request that the Attorney General determine whether meetings of the North Carolina Woodchip study are public meetings,  and thus subject to the North Carolina Open Meetings Law.
 
In our opinion, the evidence is rather straightforward that these meetings are subject to these laws.

* The study is publicly funded; and is run by the Southern Center for Sustainable Forests,  a joint organization of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,  North Carolina State University, and  Duke University.
* Meetings of the study team and advisory committee    
   take place in public facilities, 
* State agency officials participate in the meetings
* The public participation element of the Woodchip Study is being run by the Natural Resources Leadership Institute, (NRLI) which is made up of the Cooperative Extension Service of the USDA and NCSU, and is guided by an advisory board which includes federal, state, industry and NGO representatives.  NRLI is funded by a line item in the state budget.

* NRLIÕs purpose, as expressed in its own literature, is to 'resolve' environmental disputes outside of the public process, by convening meetings of 'students' from industry,  government and stakeholder groups.  Decisions and agreements made as a result of these meetings directly guide policy at NCDENR, without being subject to the normal administrative process.


Despite the above, the organizers of the woodchip study have claimed they are exempt ffrom the Open Meetings law.  They have used this claim to ban the use of audio or video recording equipment to record meetings of the public advisory committee of the state woodchip industry study,  including meetings where the scientists hired by the state to carry out the woodchip study  report on their  research findings.

We think this ban is wrong. Under the Open Meetings law, meetings held to  Òconduct the peopleÕs businessÓ are open to public review, including the use of electronic recording devices.    We think that NRLIÕs decision to act otherwise is incorrect.

For that reason, we are writing to ask that a review of our concerns be made by your office, and that a formal determination of whether meetings of the North Carolain Woodchip study, and other meetings  hosted by NRLI hosted by NRLI, are subject to the Open Meetings Law.

Thank you for your attention to this issue

Sincerely