P. Security, national and/or state, of buildings, personnel or other

A meeting of a governmental body may be closed to discuss security plans, procedures, assessments, measures, or systems, or the security or safety of persons, structures, facilities, or other infrastructures, including, without limitation, information concerning critical infrastructure, as defined by federal law, and critical energy infrastructure, as defined by federal law, the public disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to be detrimental to public safety or welfare. Ala. Code § 36-25A-7(a)(4).

There is no statute or case law addressing this issue.

Not expressly exempted from open meetings by any Arizona statute.

Because these matters are not exempted by statute, the meeting must be open to the public. However, the FOIA’s open meetings requirement generally applies only to a “governing body” of an entity subject to the act. The FOIA’s personnel exemption applies only when individual employees are being discussed and thus would not reach a meeting to consider matters such as building or personnel security that affect all employees. See Ark. Op. Att’y Gen. Nos. 91-070, 77-144 (personnel exemption does not apply to general salary matters, an across-the-board pay increase, or overall performance of employees).

Under the Bagley-Keene Act, the Board of Corrections may hold a closed session when considering reports of crime conditions under Penal Code Section 6027. Cal. Gov't Code § 11126(c)(12).
Under the Brown Act, a body may hold a closed session to meet with the Attorney General, district attorney, sheriff, chief of police, or their respective deputies, agency counsel, security consultant or security operations manager on matters posing a threat to the security of public buildings or a threat to the security of essential public services, including water, drinking water, wastewater treatment, natural gas service and electric service, or a threat to the public's right of access to public services or public facilities. Cal. Gov't Code § 54957(a).

Closed. A public body may by two-thirds vote go into executive session to discuss specialized details of security arrangements where disclosure of discussions might reveal information that could be used to violate the law or avoid prosecution. Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 24-6-402(3)(a)(IV) (state) and 24-6-402(4)(d) (local).

An executive session is allowed in some instances. See Conn. Gen. Stat. §1-200(6). Meetings Outline at I.E.3.

Such meetings might be closed depending on the subject of the meeting.

A meeting, or portion of a meeting, may be closed to discuss and take action regarding specific methods and procedures to protect the public from existing or potential terrorist activity or substantial dangers to public health and safety, and to receive briefings by staff members, legal counsel, law enforcement officials, or emergency service officials concerning these methods and procedures; provided, that disclosure would endanger the public and a record of the closed session is made public if and when the public would not be endangered by that disclosure.  D.C. Code Ann. § 2-575(b)(8).

The Act exempts law enforcement agency meetings. Otherwise, the Act has no specific exception for security exemption.

If the subject matter is sensitive and related to public safety, meetings on these matters may be closed. Haw. Rev. State. § 92-5(a)(6).

There are various types of information held by governmental bodies in Idaho that are exempt from the general statutes dealing with the public’s right to inspect governmental records. The Open Meeting Law expressly permits a governing body to hold an executive session to discuss such records that are otherwise exempt from public inspection under the Public Records Act. Idaho Code § 74-206(1)(d).

A meeting may be closed to discuss security procedures and the use of personnel and equipment to respond to an actual, a threatened or a reasonably potential danger to the safety of employees, students, staff, general public, or public property. See 5 ILCS 120/2(c)) (8).

Executive sessions are permitted for strategy discussions about the implementation of security systems. Ind. Code § 5-14-1.5-6.1(b)(2)(C). To the extent that the meeting would focus on records declared confidential by state statute or by federal statute, an executive session could be held. Ind. Code § 5-14-1.5-6.1(b)(1), (b)(7); see Ind. Code § 5-14-3-4(b)(10), (18), (19), (23) (exemptions to Access to Public Records Act relating to security).

Information concerning procedures used to control disturbances at adult correctional facilities is confidential. Iowa Code § 22.7(15). Documents concerning homeland security are confidential pursuant to Iowa Code § 22.7(45).  Meetings to discuss records which are confidential need not be held in public. Iowa Code § 21.5(1)(a). No other Iowa statutes governing open meetings on the subject of security have been found.

This meeting type may be closed to the public. K.S.A. 75-4319(b)(12).

Portion of a meeting devoted to a discussion of a specific public record exempted from disclosure under Ky. Rev. Stat. 61.878(1)(m), which exempts from the Open Records Act certain “[p]ublic records the disclosure of which would have a reasonable likelihood of threatening the public safety by exposing a vulnerability in preventing, protecting against, mitigating, or responding to a terrorist act …”

A public body may hold an executive session to discuss a report, development or course of action regarding security personnel, plans, or devices. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 42:17(A)(3).

Deliberation on security matters may be in closed session so long as the discussion involves information contained in non-public records.  1 M.R.S.A. § 405(6)(F).

Meetings to discuss public security, if the public discussion would pose a risk to the public or public security, including discussions of the deployment of fire and police services and staff, and the development and implementation of emergency plans may be closed. § 3-305(b)(10).

Discussion of "deployment of security personnel or devices" may be closed. G.L. c. 39, § 23B(4).

Not addressed.

No right of privacy is involved in real estate negotiations, so the meetings must be open even if the open session may cause the entity some economic disadvantage.

Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-1410(1)(b) allows public body to meet in closed session for "[d]iscussion regarding deployment of security personnel or devices."

P. Security, national and/or state, of buildings, personnel or other.

The Nevada Homeland Security Commission may meet in closed session to receive security briefings, discuss procedures for responding to acts of terrorism and emergencies, and discuss deficiencies in security. NRS 239C.140(2).

The Statute permits nonpublic sessions for consideration of (1) “security-related issues bearing on the immediate safety of security personnel or inmates at the county correctional facilities by county correctional superintendents or their designees,” and (2) “matters relating to the preparation for and the carrying out of emergency functions, including training to carry out such functions, developed by local or state safety officials that are directly intended to thwart a deliberate act that is intended to result in widespread or severe damage to property or widespread injury or loss of life.” RSA 91-A:3,II(g) and (i). See also RSA 91-A:5, VI.

Discussions regarding "tactics and techniques" to be used in protecting the safety and property of the public may be conducted in closed session, provided that "disclosure could impair such protection." N.J.S.A. 4:10-12b(6).

There is no statutory or case law addressing this issue.

The Open Meetings Law permits a public body to meet in closed session to “discuss and take action regarding plans to protect public safety as it relates to existing or potential terrorist activity and to receive briefings by staff members, legal counsel, or law enforcement or emergency service officials concerning actions taken or to be taken to respond to such activity.” G.S. § 143-318.11(a)(9).

The portions of a meeting which would reveal a security system plan, a public health or security plan, or a portion of any such plan, made exempt by N.D.C.C. § 44-04-24 or N.D.C.C. § 44-04-25, are exempt from N.D.C.C. § 44-04-19 and section 5 of article XI of the Constitution of North Dakota. N.D.C.C. § 44-04-26.

All discussions of security matters must be held in open session, except details relative to the security arrangements and emergency response protocols for a public body or a public office, if disclosure of matters discussed could reasonably be expected to jeopardize the security of the public body or public office. Ohio Rev. Code § 121.22(G)(6). During a declared emergency, R.C. 5502.24(B) provides for an exception to “compliance with time-consuming procedures and formalities prescribed by law.”

A public body may hold executive sessions to discuss investigations into plans, schemes or acts of terrorism, assessments of vulnerability of government facilities to acts of terrorism and/or discussion of plans to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism. 25 O.S. § 307.B.9.

To the extent that such matters involve exempt public records, these matters may be discussed in executive session.

Open; nothing in the Act allows closure if agency business or official action is involved.

Exemption (3) generally excludes all discussion regarding the matter of security.  R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(3).

Discussion regarding the development of security personnel or devices may be held in executive session. S.C. Code Ann. § 30-4-70(a)(3).

No special exemption, but presumably closed.

The Open Meetings Act makes no specific exemption for such matters. But see T.C.A. §  10-7-504(a)(3) (making confidential papers, documents, and papers of the military department that involve the security of the United States or State of Tennessee, including national guard personnel records, staff studies, and investigations).

The Act permits closing of meetings regarding “the deployment, or specific occasions for implementation, of security personnel or devices.” Tex. Gov’t Code§ 551.076.

Discussions concerning the “deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems” are exempt from the Open Meetings Act. Utah Code § 52-4-205(1)(f).

Closed if the disclosure could jeopardize public safety.  1 V.S.A. § 313(a)(10).

Discussion of public safety relating to terrorist activity or cybersecurity threats is a permissible ground for a closed meeting. Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3711.A.19.

An agency may close a meeting to consider matters “affecting national security.” RCW 42.30.110(1)(a).

The statute permits closed meetings to discuss "[m]atters of war, threatened attack from a foreign power, civil insurrection or riot," W. Va. Code § 6-9A-4(l), as well as the "development of security personnel or devices." W. Va. Code § 6-9A-4(8).

These matters are not addressed by the Open Meetings Law.

A governing body of an agency may hold closed executive sessions on matters of national security, or issues threatening the security of public or private property. Wyo. Stat. § 16-4-405(a)(I) & (iv) (1977, Rev. 1982).