We commend Mayor Scott Matheson and Valdosta City Council for doing public business in public. 

That’s the way it should be. 

In fact, it should never be any other way. 

Matheson and the council openly discussed the city’s response to Lowndes County’s Service Delivery Strategy proposal when they met Thursday.  

We agree wholeheartedly with senior Councilman Sonny Vickers who commended his peers for hosting an open debate in front of the public.

We do not believe such an open, candid discussion with dissenting voices would have always taken place in front of the public. 

We are glad that it did this time. 

Actually, we believe Matheson has set the right tone, and we hope that we will continue to put the public first and not revert to doing things “the way they’ve always been done.” 

We encourage mayor and council to not take the word of the bureaucrats or even the lawyers when it comes to executive sessions, closed meetings and even one-on-one talks about elected officials. 

Let the public hear its own business deliberated, candidly and unscripted. 

Finding some legal loophole, stretching the law or even ignoring the state’s Open Meetings Act is a disservice to the voters and disrespects the office to which they have been elected. 

The state of Georgia has said every exception to the state’s open government laws must be interpreted narrowly. 

Attorney General Chris Carr has shown a willingness to investigate and prosecute officials who violate the state’s open government laws. 

City, county and school board officials must not permit hired professionals or lawyers to convince them to hide the people’s business with broad interpretations. 

There are essentially three exceptions to the Open Meetings Act. Local government can go into private closed-door sessions to discuss strategy in current or pending litigation, the terms of a real estate transaction and certain specific personnel issues. That’s pretty much it. 

Even those few privileges must be interpreted narrowly.

Perhaps more important is the fact that even for litigation, real estate transactions and personnel issues, the state does not require or mandate closed meetings. It just allows them. 

Local officials have the discretion to discuss all these things out in the open, and in the vast majority of cases, we think they should. 

This open public discussion about a Service Delivery Strategy proposal and a possible end to a years-long standoff between city and county government is a perfect example of doing public business in the right way. 

Openness and transparency are always the right thing for pubic servants.

So, once again we commend the mayor and council for openness. 

Now, keep it up and keep it open.