When the MSU Board of Trustees closes itself away in a secret meeting at a yacht club in Petoskey and bars access to the press, it doesn't look good.

It doesn't even matter what's on the table for discussion - either trivial or of vast importance - it looks underhanded and makes people distrust their elected public servants. It makes for really bad public relations.

The doubt that closing a meeting can cast on the public's mind could be avoided entirely. The argument that trustees need to talk openly, among themselves without the hindrance of the media is illogical, especially coming from a board that regularly holds public meetings and knows how to interact with reporters.

It's hard to conceive of a board meeting void of any discussion on how to spend tax money. It is this lack of public representation, in affairs using the taxpayer's money, that is troubling. Most, while open to the suggestions of those around them, already have a good idea how their going to vote - trustees aren't any different than the rest of us.

Although no decision can be officially come to at a closed meeting, it is hard to imagine any member of a public board not already having decided their vote - before the official meeting.

Yes, the trustees' closing of retreat is, by technicality, legal in Michigan. But it erodes some of the basic trust essential to democracy on any level - especially locally.

If people can't see what the trustees are doing, their trust in them is gone. They are, after all, deciding issues that involve tens of thousands of students and university employees.

The case law that allows the MSU Board of Trustees this meeting - Federated Publishers., Inc. v. MSU Board of Trustees - applies to the election process for a college president. Closed meetings - if utilized at all - should directly involve that issue.

If a closed meeting were held on campus, it would draw visible protests. Changing venue shouldn't be used to distract from what would otherwise be seen as democratic wrong.