RSS

Daily Archives: June 23, 2009

Ever wonder what Virginia Courts have ruled in FOIA cases? Or, how FOIA is being changed?

23 Jun

Well, the Virginia Coalition for Open Government is THE place to look. There are 3 blue squares at the top of their screen labeled: Virginia’s FOIA, In the News, and …Etc. Directly under each of these is a description of the offerings held there. Under Virginia’s FOIA there is one section on FOIA opinions from state courts. Click on “Court Opinions” in the dropdown menu and you will be provided with a list of Court opinion links.

Perhaps one of the best know current issues involves BJ Ostergren where it was ruled the person could continue to publish the Social Security numbers of prominent persons, but not private ones. This was done by Ostergren to protest the laws allowing land records containing full social security numbers to be published on the interenet. (One of those good for the goose, good for the gander moments!)

Another link under the Virginia’s FOIA is the 2009 Legislative Roundup. Here is where you can see bills that newly activated, are in front of the Governor for signing, or at the legislature being worked on, that will affect FOIA and your rights.

The Fraud and Abuse Whistle Blower Protection Act – this serves to protect employees that report Fraud and Abuse (bet you figured that out by the title, eh?) Unfortunately, it sees to only apply to people employed by the State. It includes a long list of records that are excluded from FOIA as part of that process. These are specific to the investigation involved and the records that would normally be available to the public are not affected.
Remote access to land records: Prince William County may establish a pilot program assessing fee. This newly adopted Act provides for charges to be attached to the online records by the general public. Not only is there a fee for viewing, there is an additional fee to download images similar to the existing copying fee. (If the internet was suppose to help people get easier access, this one is a real slap in the face to citizens. Sure, all those companies that access these types of things can afford the related fees. Not all citizens can do so. One of the things already keeping people away from documents is the cost. This looks like a great way to insure that big business gets the information that many citizens cannot afford. Healing the digital divide by making information available while then turning around and setting it up so that it replaced by an economical divide is one giant step backwards. One of the biggest reasons to use the internet is because often citizens do not know what it is that they need. It can require hours of looking at information. Having it available on the internet means that that can be accomplished without tying up employees to help for hours or even days at a time, helping the person. How is it saving money, or generating revenue, to charge for something that is saving worker time and money (paper, ink, copy machines all become the cost of the person/group looking rather than the taxpayer). I personally hope this one is put to the curb after the trial period, or significant modifications are made to insure that ALL citizens, regardless of income level, have the same degree of access. A sliding scale fee comes to mind. Ironically, the required report on this pilot study only requires a summary of the level of participation, costs, and revenues. Nothing is in place to determine who now finds themselves without access or how much has been saved in personnel and processing by having the data online in the first place.
Expenditures; annual report thereof provided by school board to be made available to public.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. That § 22.1-90 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as follows:

§ 22.1-90. Annual report of expenditures.

Every school board shall submit at least once each year to the governing body or bodies appropriating funds to the school board a report of all its expenditures. Such report shall also be made available to the public either on the official school division website, if any, or in hard copy at the central school division office, on a template prescribed by the Board of Education.

That is just a sample of some of the information you can find on this website. More discussion is coming. In the meantime, look for yourself. Don’t count on someone just telling you the way things are…check out the facts. (Darn, there I go again, slipping into that Christiansburg Town Council area again. Just wait until after July 4th! I’ve got a lot of time to make up and a lot of articles ready to be posted.)

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 23, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Virgina FOIA Evaluation … more on the low scores.

23 Jun

The University of Florida plays host to the Marion Brechner Citizen Access Project. This is another one of those sites that evaluates states on the basis of how much ‘sunshine or shade’ exist in the government. You can look at the information on a particular state, compare two states or look at one category of the law over all 50 states.

While I was going through all the offerings of this site, I found something so simple that I had overlooked it previously. As I am now in the stage of discussing Virginia FOIA, I thought it might be worth discussing now: the definition of Public Records. This site gives the following definition of Public Records in Virginia:
The Virginia Freedom of Information Act defines “public records” to mean all writings and recordings that consist of letters, words or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostatting, photography, magnetic impulse, optical or magneto-optical form, mechanical or electronic recording or other form of data compilation, however stored, and regardless of physical form or characteristics, prepared or owned by, or in the possession of a public body or its officers, employees or agents in the transaction of public business. Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3701 (2002).

Some interesting features arise when you look at the State of Virginia and how it scored on public access of records. The site uses a scale of 7 to evaluate these.

7 = Sunny – completely open
6 = Mostly Sunny – mostly open
5 = Sunny with clouds – somewhat open
4 = Partly Cloudy – neither more open nor more closed
3 = Cloudy – somewhat closed
2 = Nearly Dark – mostly closed
1 = Dark – completely closed

Some of the lowest scores for Virginia included:

  • Political caucuses of state legislature which are not considered to be openmeetings
  • Hardware and Software Requirements:  policy-makers protect public access to computers when designing government computer sytems
  • Internet, Regulation of Professionals: information about the licensing or regulation of doctors, lawyers, etc. be online
  • Private Schools: no reference to private schools exists within open records laws.

Of particular interest to me was the score of 3 (Cloudy – somewhat closed) on Open Meetings, Informatl Meeting (Public Meetings) that I believe serves as a major loophole for government to circumvent the right of citizens to know.

The gathering of employees of a public body shall not be deemed a “meeting” when the purpose of such a gathering does not include the discussion or transaction of any public business and the meeting was not called or prearranged with this purpose. VA. Code Ann. § 2.2-3701, Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3707 (G) (i) (2007).

Okay, so 3 or 4 Town Council Members meeting to go for long walks or work out together at the Rec Center, when no one else is around are likely to avoid discussing business? Come on…give me a break. All they would have to do to prevent any sense of impropriety would be to be sure that someone else was there????

Forgive me. I digress. I said I would write about FOIA through July 4th, not the Town of Christiansburg, but the Town of Christiansburg government IS subject to FOIA. If state FOIA laws need to be changed in order to prevent this type of perception, then so be it.

It should be noted that out of all the 50 states, Virginia is 7th highest on this score. None of the states scored more than Partly Cloudy (neither more open nor more closed). Nebraska’s law has a bit more strength when it specifically says:

Informal meetings, chance meetings and social gatherings “shall” not be used for the purpose of circumventing the Open Meetings Act. Neb.Rev.St. § 84-1410 (4) (2006).

South Carolina expands on this:

No chance meeting, social meeting, or electronic communication may be used in “circumvention of the spirit of requirements” of the open meetings requirements to act upon a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. Code 1976 § 30-4-70 (c) (2007).

Nebraska and South Carolina are the highest scoring states in this category. The lowest scoring states (Nearly Dark) are Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, and Mississippi.

To get back to Virginia FOIA law itself, our resident experts are (in my opinion) the Virginia Coalition for Open Government. In particular, a great starting place for learning about FOIA and what it can mean to you as a citizen, they post a FOI Citizens’ Guide online. They have a lot of other useful and necessary information available that I will discuss more in following articles.

The FOI Citizens’ Guide provides an overview of the rights of citizens including direct links to the relevant state codes. It also provides information on how to enforce your rights. Take some time to check out this site and while you’re wandering around on the internet, you might want to check out the Citizen Initiative for Transparency site that is now available. You may find some interesting links and resources there as well.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 23, 2009 in Citizen Participation, FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,