« Stage collapse - "$5M in Settlements to be Paid to Indiana State Fair Victims" | Main | Ind. Gov't. - More on "Drug Tests Botched By State Lab To Be Retested" »

Friday, December 09, 2011

Ind. Gov't. - Majority of new toxicology board meets in private with law enforcement officials at a motel in Carmel

Updating a long list of ILB entries on the backlogs and errors at the state toxicology lab, including this one from June 20th that quotes from an Indianapolis Star story reported by Tim Evans and Mark Alesia:

Legal experts and state officials say they are hopeful that pulling the state Department of Toxicology out of Indiana University and making it a stand-alone state agency will lead to the end of long-standing problems at the lab that tests blood and urine samples for criminal cases.

The move comes as a result of legislation approved by the General Assembly in response to complaints about the lab's performance, including long delays in receiving test results and concerns about the accuracy of those results. * * *

The legislation calls for the creation of a three-member advisory board, appointed by the governor, to oversee the department.

Today's Indianapolis Star has this long story from reporter Evans, who writes in a story headed "Private meeting raises outcry: Toxicology board's session with police violated state law":
If the recently created board that oversees the state Department of Toxicology was looking to assure the public that the department's well-documented troubles are in the past, this probably wasn't the best way to start:

The board violated the state's public meeting laws last month when two of its three members -- and therefore, a majority -- met privately with a group of prosecutors and police officers.

No action was taken, but advocates of ethical government as well as defense attorneys say the meeting is of particular concern. That's because one of the long-standing criticisms of the state's toxicology department is the perception of many that it has had an inappropriately cozy relationship with law enforcement -- and especially prosecutors. * * *

That board members would meet with just one side in secret raises two important questions:

Is the board defaulting to what some have argued is the department's past practice of providing deferential treatment to law enforcement -- even when that may go against best-practice science?

Is the new board committed to being open and transparent in its conduct of public business? * * *

Good-government advocates agree and say there is another issue.

"Even if the board did not take any 'official' action, there is real harm," said Gerry Lanosga, a board member of the Indiana Coalition for Open Government and a journalism professor at Ball State University.

"The public in entitled to hear and be a part of these types of discussions. This is not a no-harm, no-foul situation. It is a serious breach."

Indiana's Open Door law prohibits gatherings at which a majority of a public board is present and business is discussed unless the meeting is properly advertised and open to all citizens.


Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 9, 2011 12:51 PM
Posted to Indiana Government