Government meetings are secret – and legal

State law mandates that local legislative bodies conduct their business in public. But a loophole allows elected officials to caucus in private, and a new report finds that many legislative bodies do.

The Erie County Legislature is among those that not only caucus, but discuss public matters, according to a new study released by the New York Coalition for Open Government

These “secret meetings” held behind closed doors throughout the state’s local governments “completely gut” the Open Meetings Law, leaving the public in the dark, according to the report. 

“The public meeting becomes just a show or just a sham. And I don’t think enough people are aware of this,” said Paul Wolf, the coalition’s president.

The coalition’s study, released Jan. 26, was based on a survey of 57 county legislatures to determine how many conducted private caucus meetings. Fourteen counties responded; the coalition obtained information on an additional 13. Twenty-three of the 27 acknowledge holding private caucus meetings.

Erie County’s Legislature admitted to discussing public business during political caucus meetings, according to the coalition’s results. Greene, Otsego, Seneca and Steuben counties also admitted to the practice. 

However, Erich Weyant, the Erie County Legislature’s chief of staff, said public matters are not discussed during the legislature’s caucus meetings. He said he is unaware who responded to the coalition’s survey.

Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter


Regardless, Wolf believes the lack of transparency in government throughout the state is a disservice to its citizens.

“Whenever politicians go in a back room to talk about public business, that’s not a good thing,” Wolf said. “There’s just no way to monitor what’s occurring, why they’re doing things.”

Local governments, however, are not breaking the Open Meetings Law. 

County legislatures, city councils and other government bodies are shielded by an amendment to the law made in 1985. The amendment states political parties may meet in private “without regard to (i) the subject matter under discussion, including discussions of public business.”


Donate to support our nonprofit newsroom


In Erie County, the majority party — seven Democrats — has the ability to discuss public matters behind closed doors before legislative meetings without including the other four other members of the Legislature, three Republicans and a Conservative.

“Preceding full legislative meetings, each party holds a caucus to review agenda items,” the Erie County Legislature’s website says. “The caucuses are presided over by the leaders of the respective parties.”

These caucus meetings are separate from the legislative work sessions that are open to the public. During work sessions, each party combines in a “joint caucus.”

The coalition pointed out that this loophole has led to public representatives “holding private closed door meetings, where everything is discussed and worked out prior to any public meeting.”

The 1985 exemption allows for “deliberations of political committees, conferences and caucuses.”

Wolf said: “When they do that behind closed doors, we’re completely left in the dark as to what’s really going on.” 

“The state Legislature certainly made [the exemption] for themselves,” Wolf said. “And the state legislature will frequently exempt themselves from laws that they require others to follow.”

The exemption allowing private political caucuses has drawn criticism and lawsuits, including a 1992 lawsuit by The Buffalo News against the Buffalo Common Council. 

That same year, a bill was proposed in the state Senate that would “repeal” the political caucus exemption and “open the decision making process up to public scrutiny both at the state and local level.”

The legislation didn’t pass. 

However, when Democrats on Buffalo’s Common Council — that is, all of them — caucus before a voting session, those meetings are open to the public and broadcast live on Facebook. The Erie County Legislature’s party caucuses, meanwhile, remain closed and none of its meetings are broadcast on any platform.

Wolf’s outlook on the possibility of eliminating the law’s exemption does not waver.

“Our hope is, with this report, we can shine a light on this, build some momentum to make some changes and correct this,” he said.

The post Government meetings are secret – and legal appeared first on Investigative Post.

Related articles

House Republican Rips Lindsey Graham: ‘He Should Have His Oval Office Credentials Revoked’ 

Rep. Kat Cammack struck a disapproving note regarding the influence Sen. Lindsey Graham appears to be having on President Donald Trump.

The post House Republican Rips Lindsey Graham: ‘He Should Have His Oval Office Credentials Revoked’  first appeared on Mediaite.

Trump breaks military recruitment vows as he arrests and deports veterans



The Trump administration has initiated deportation proceedings against 34 former military members over the past year and arrested 125 others for immigration violations, representing a dramatic reversal of previous policies that shielded service members and their families from enforcement action.

Federal data obtained by The New York Times reveals that immigration authorities also placed 248 relatives of former military members into deportation proceedings after the Trump administration rescinded Biden-era guidance giving service members preferential treatment in immigration enforcement decisions.

The shift marks a significant departure from longstanding practice. The Biden administration and prior administrations made military service members and their relatives lower priorities for detention and deportation, particularly when criminal convictions were involved.

The policy change directly contradicts military recruitment pledges. U.S. military recruiters continue promoting citizenship pathways for immigrant service members and promising temporary protection for their family members. Green-card holders joining the military have historically accessed expedited citizenship processes, and relatives can apply for temporary permission to remain in the country.

However, federal data shows the number of green-card holders applying for citizenship after military service declined significantly during Trump's first term. Currently, nearly 27,000 active duty immigrants and about 20,000 reserve and National Guard members serve in the military, with 115,000 immigrant veterans in the broader veteran population as of 2022.

Family members of service members now fear applying for temporary protection benefits, concerned that such applications will target them for deportation.

A prominent case illustrates the policy's impact. Sae Joon Park, a Purple Heart recipient who served in Panama in 1989, self-deported to South Korea in June despite living in the United States since childhood. After struggling with PTSD and drug addiction following his service, Park had fought earlier deportation orders and was allowed to remain in the country on the condition he avoid further legal troubles. An immigration officer nonetheless informed him in May 2025 that he faced deportation unless he left voluntarily.

Lawmakers have criticized the policy as both ineffective and disrespectful to service members.

"Donald Trump's way of thanking our veterans for their service is by targeting and deporting them and their families," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).

The Department of Homeland Security defended the policy, stating that no one should be exempt from immigration law consequences. The agency did not respond to questions about whether any detained veterans were ultimately deported.

Senator Gillibrand press conference

https://www.youtube.com/embed/uoJZJyQikso

CPAC moms say Barron Trump should enlist and ship out if his dad sends boots on the ground



In an interview with MS NOW’s Rosa Flores, two women attending the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, claimed they first resisted Donald Trump’s war on Iran and have now come around to his point of view, and later added that Barron Trump should enlist and ship off to Iran if the president puts boots on the ground.

One unidentified woman explained to Flores, “I started off pretty upset with the war. I have an 18-year-old son, so that really hit close to home. We had to get him registered for the Selective Service and everything, and so I wasn't happy about it. But then I saw these three boys that were publicly hung in Iran. That regime has been threatening Americans and has been killing Americans for years. If my son was called to go, I would still support the war.”

After the previously filmed clip was over, Flores added, “Now, Chris, I asked that mother, what about Barron Trump? She was there with her friend, and both mothers agreed that if soldiers were sent to war, if this woman's son was sent to war, they both agreed that Barron Trump should also serve in the military. And I said, ‘Well, do you think that he would actually do that?” And they said, well, they think that he would do the right thing.”

- YouTube youtu.be