In theory, representative government is built on an expectation: Elected officials will look out for the people’s interest. And some do.

But the only way to be sure is to keep the doors of government ajar and the windows open so the people can watch for themselves.

That openness is being tested in Olympia, where state Rep. Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam, has introduced legislation making it harder for governing bodies to abuse the discretion that lets them, under specific circumstances, meet in secret. Merely getting a hearing for the measure has been a struggle.

That should not be.

Kessler is the majority leader of the House, where she has served for more than 15 years. She sponsored House Bill 3292 at the request of Attorney General Rob McKenna, a Republican, and state Auditor Brian Sonntag, a Democrat. She has the co-sponsorship of Minority Leader Richard DeBolt, R-Chehalis.

A hearing is scheduled for Monday, although the chairman of the House State Government Committee, Rep. Sam Hunt, D-Olympia, is unenthusiastic. Sen. Darlene Fairley, D-Lake Forest Park, chairwoman of the Senate Government Operations Committee, says she doesn’t like it. What doom does this bill threaten that a lawmaker of Kessler’s standing – with the bipartisan encouragement of two state officials known for their good-government convictions – would meet such resistance?

HB 3292 simply requires that when governing bodies go into executive session – that is, behind closed doors – an audio recording be made so a judge can listen to it if members are accused of exceeding the limitations on what they can do in secret.

A similar proposal was part of a measure requested a few years ago by Sonntag. The bill passed only after the recording requirement was removed. Then, as now, associations representing such entities as cities, counties and port districts objected, worrying that what is sometimes said in closed sessions could be embarrassing if it became public. For what it means, Fairley and Hunt are both former city council members.

While the Open Meetings Act recognizes that certain issues (such as strategy planning for legal proceedings or real estate transactions) require a sensitivity that outweighs the value of openness, protecting officials from answering for their own outspokenness isn’t among them. Under Kessler’s proposal, someone who suspected a body such as a city council or school board of going beyond its authority during an executive session could challenge it in court. If the allegation were backed up with “credible evidence,” a judge could listen to the tape in chambers and then, if certain segments were deemed in violation of the law, only those segments could be released.

This measure is no reckless intrusion of justifiable government confidentiality. It is a reasonable assertion of the public’s right to hold government accountable.

Public officials like Kessler, Sonntag and McKenna understand that. How broadly their attitudes are reflected by the Legislature as a whole will become clearer during the final weeks of the 2008 session.