Text

"The public has the right to expect governmental agencies to afford such reasonable opportunity for citizen participation in the operation of the agencies prior to the final decision as may be provided by law."

History

Sources

Drafting

Delegate Proposal No. 38 (Foster):
The public shall have the right to expect government agencies to afford every feasible opportunity for citizen participation in the operation of the government prior to final decision. The legislature shall provide by law points of access and institutional structures to naxiaize such a right.

Bill of Rights Committee Proposal:
The public shall have the right to expect governmental agencies to afford every feasible opportunity for citizen participation in the operation of the government prior to the final decision. “The committee unanimously adopted this section in response to the increased public concern and literature about citizen participation in the decision-making process of government. The provision is in part a constitutional sermon designed to serve notice to agencies of government that the citizens of the state will expect to participate in agency decisions prior to the time the agency makes up its mind. In part, it is also a commitment at the level of fundamental law to seek structures, rules and procedures that maximize the access of citizens to the decision-making institutions of state government.”

Delegate Harbaugh asked for a vote to amend Section 9 to make it more of a specific directive saying agencies, “afford reasonable opportunity” for citizens’ participation. Delegate Burkhardt opposed the amendment, we don’t want a precise, hidebound of inescapable statement that has to be put into statutes.” Delegates also quested the scope of the right to participation.

In response, Delegate Dahood said “What is intended by Section 8 is that any rules and regulations that shall be made and formulated and announced by any governmental agency, which of course are going to affect the citizens of this state and the common welfare, shall not be made until some notice is given so that the citizen will have a reasonable opportunity to participate with respect to his opinion, either for or against that particular administrative action.”

Delegate McNeil moved to delete the word “government” and that, “agency be added in its place to clear up ambiguity. His amendment was adopted via voice vote. Several attempted amendments failed, including one by Delegate Joyce, who moved to delete this section he called “unworkable.” “We elect people to make decisions,” Joyce said. “This section would do more harm than good.” Delegates turned down his motion 54-37. Delegate Blend backed the committee saying, “I am very aware of the antagonism of government to citizen participation. This could bring about an involvement of people in government.”

After extended debate, the Constitutional delegates adopted a section insuring citizens the right to participate in their government on March 7, 1972.

Ratification

In 1972 Official Text with Explanation: New provision creating a right to participate in the decision making process of state and local government.

Documentary History of the Ratification of the Montana Constitution; Newsprint and Historical Texts

The Brown Collection

“ConCon would favor more ‘people power,” published the Billings Gazette, Sunday, February 20, 1972. The author, Daniel J. Foley, reported that “The legislative, local government and Bill of Rights committees in particular are offering “people power” proposals aimed at cutting bureaucratic red tape.” The Right to participation in government is “[T]he idea is to reverse public dissatisfaction with beareaucracies “insulated” from public scrutiny.”

Another headline reads: “Bill of Rights Is Good, but It Could Have Been Better” published March 13, 1972, in the Montana Standard. Frank Adams, Tribune Capitol Bureau reported that political scientist Rick Applegate felt that the phrase “as provided by law” “just recks it (Right of Participation).”

The Daily Clippings Sheet from March 25, 1972 headline reads: “Constitution Would Give Citizens Bigger Voice.” John Kuglin, Tribune Capitol Bureau reported that “Several delegates thought the proposal would create “havoc” in government but Robert Vermillon, D-Shelby argued, “I came here with the idea that the public was the poss” on whether the merits of citizens participation were outweighed by the possible disruption of orderly government by unruly citizens.

The Cambell Collection

This collection contains material donated by convention delegate Bob Cambell. It includes a summary by Professor Richard Roeder, the 1972 Montana Constitution Newspaper Supplement. The supplement provides an “Article by Article Analysis” of the 1972 Constitution from the Convention by Professor Roeder.

The Analysis states: “A Principle vital to a democratic society is the belief that activities of government at all levels should be opened to public examination.” “Those who supported the adoption… believed that they are important in opening government to greater public scrutiny,” and “those who opposed …could not see how they were going to work in practice.”

The Analysis also provided key insight on how the right would be applied. It reads: “The fact of the matter is that we will probably need considerable judicial guidelines before we know exactly how these provisions will be applied in the future.

The collection also includes a pamphlet by Billings Attorney Gerald Neely. In the pamphlet, Neely states:

“The provisions (Art. II, Sec.8, Sec.9) will undoubtedly have ramifications in the area of environmental decisions by branches of state and local government, whereby citizens can gain access to administrative decisions which will in turn trigger the judicial enforcement mechanism of the constitutional and statutory law.”

Neely Collection

This collection contains material made available by Billings lawyer Bill Neely, the author of the pamphlet in the Cambell collection. The collection contains two newsletters edited by Mr. Neely during the convention. In the March edition, Neely states: “This section possibly could have ramifications…whereby citizens can gain access to administrative decisions…in turn trigger judicial enforcement…in the laws of this state.” The Gallatin Voice, a pamphlet discussing the Constitution, a headline reads “Constitution is Flexible” by R.L. Ames reporting on Delegate Melvin’s address to the members of Trout Unlimited. Melvin said, “[T]he proposed constitution provides the people with greater access t th government and allows greater participation by the people.”

Neely’s collection also contains newspaper articles from smaller papers. The Daily Inter Lake reported on March 4, 1972 an article titled “A Delegate Examines The Proposed New Constitution” interviewing former legislator and convention delegate Marshall Murray. In the article, Murray says, “[T]he legislature has, in the past, taken government away from the people.” “We have tried to maintain the open form of government while instilling in the people some faith in government.

Interpretation

Commentary