Council meetings versus executive sessions

From January until the first meeting of July in 2024, Becker City Council meetings averaged 31 minutes each and executive sessions averaged 36 minutes.  While the length of a meeting doesn't automatically equate to a level of transparency, I believe there is a correlation between shorter meetings and their deleterious effect on an informed citizenry, especially when many of the issues could be discussed at council meetings.

Here are just some of the topics that were discussed in the 2024 executive sessions - you be the judge - did these topics deserve to be discussed in an open meeting that is broadcast to the public?  Do you support council forming "consensus" on these topics at these meetings that are not broadcast to the public?  (agenda items are reflected in the official minutes of the Becker City Council).

•The possible vacation of Pine Street. 

•Default of the Developer's Agreement at the Fairway Ridge Estates (the city sold 10 acres of land to the developer for $1 and now the agreement is in violation).

•City Council "consensus" to have an attorney draft language for City Code Enforcement (this affects every city resident).  A later meeting included a zoning code presentation and noted that "any public engagement would focus on educating the community on what the project was" and they "hoped" to have an Open House in the future.

•$53,800 in spending discussed - one agenda item at an executive session.

•A Public Works facility study (needed, as some of the Public Works buildings are in disrepair).

•Funding for Mississippi River crossing (bridge) alternatives.

•Discussing a major Capital Improvement Plan with a price tag of $425,000 and discussing it at an executive session rather than a council meeting due to the "ongoing nature of the project and the price tag associated with it."  Again, "consensus" was being sought.

•Executive session agenda item relating to City Hall renovations "requested council provide direction on how to move forward".  

•Whether or not to "include in the bid documents" 2 alternates with expected costs of $200,000 or $575,000 - not final approval, but "consensus" to include these in the bidding documents.

•A water comprehensive study that identified 3 options: building a water treatment plant, a ground storage tank or a new water line to the Northeast of the city to loop to Tower #3.

Again, you be the judge- do we need to add a dose of the "sunshine clause" to our meetings?