By Jim Raykie
As a taxpaying citizen, and more importantly, as a newspaper editor, I have always believed that any business by public agencies – after all, it’s our money that they’re spending – should be conducted in an open forum without restraint.
I really could care less whether it’s negotiations with teachers, discussion about allegations against someone paid with public money, the settlement figure of a lawsuit, or any other decisions involving taxes.
I believe it makes good sense, don’t you? The only money that government owns is what you end up paying it, and as such, taxpayers should be entitled to watch or be a part of the process of how every nickel is spent.
Unfortunately, it may never get to that point. You may not know in every case how or how much of your tax dollars are being spent or why public employees have been suspended or fired.
But the Pennsylvania legislature last week took a major step in widening access to public records by its citizens with adoption of a new open records law, which on your behalf, the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association has lobbied for since 2006.
Until the passage of this landmark legislation, significantly the first action by the legislature in its latest session, the state was reputed to have one of the worst open records laws in the country.
The philosophy of the proposed bill, which should be implemented in rapid fashion after it was signed Thursday by Gov. Ed Rendell, assumes that records belong to the public and broadens the definition of a “public record” and “public agency” and presumes access by citizens.
I believe two of the major provisions of the new law are the keys. The major one is that the burden of proof about whether information is public falls on the government agency. Until the new law, the burden of proof was on the resident to prove that information should be open. That burden shifts to public officials, and it’s up to them to prove that such information should be private.
The other is the establishment of an Office of Open Records, to which residents will able to appeal, without absorbing the cost of a lawyer, when their request is denied by a public agency or official. I wonder who will compose the office panel, but its establishment nonetheless is a big step in the right direction.
Tim Williams, PNA executive director, lauded state senators and representatives for their long and tedious work on the bill and added, “The bill fundamentally changes the structure of Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law. It begins with the presumption that state and local agency records are open for public inspection and places the burden on an agency denying access.”
I see this changing the way public officials in general and solicitors of governing bodies handle requests for such records. In many cases through the years, editors and reporters from The Herald have asked for information from public bodies or officials, only to be spurned and told that such information was private.
The burden was on The Herald and its lawyers to try to prove the contrary. Now such refusals will carry the burden of proof of why it should be private. The bill provides hope for a brighter future about local and state open records.
But the impact of the law will be determined not only by the press, but by residents throughout the state. Like the Sunshine Law that concerns open meetings, the Open Records Law is for residents who want information, not simply reporters.
While the PNA lobbied hard for its member newspapers, of which The Herald is one of many, this is more than a press law. This is your law. How effective it is will depend in large part on your active participation in asking for information that you believe should be public.
I know that we’ll continue to do our part.
Specter and the NFL
I’m no Bill Belichick fan. I don’t care how many championships he wins, I think the guy’s a jerk. He acts like the world is out to get him, all fueled by the size of his ego. The allegations against him for spying on opposing teams throughout the years have tarnished his image.
The NFL didn’t do him any favors by destroying evidence gathered during its investigation, creating the perception that something was being swept under the rug. But does anyone else think that U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter would be better served worrying about the Iraq War and a host of the country’s other problems rather than sticking his nose into Spygate?
I don’t believe that the NFL or its counterparts like the NBA or Major League Baseball are immune to investigation, but by a ranking member of Congress who vows to continue his full-court press to get to the bottom of the Spygate saga?
I’d feel a lot better if he was having meetings about the state’s unemployment rate, the growing cost of eggs and milk, and the burgeoning problems with the airline industry rather than worrying about Belichick’s videotaping prowess.
Jim Raykie is the editor of The Herald and writes this column on Mondays. His e-mail is jraykie@sharonherald.com
