RSS

Tag Archives: documents

FOIA and Guesswork about Town Council Meeting

While there were a lot of unusual things occurring at the last Christiansburg Town Council Meeting (open discussion, raising of issues, asking questions, paring the budget), there was one event during the last few minutes that captured my attention because it revolved around my personal pet peeve, FOIA (Freedom of Information Act).

During the last few minutes,  an event occurred which has not been seen in Christiansburg Council Chamber in decades (if not in forever). Read the rest of this entry »

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 17, 2010 in Christiansburg, VA, Citizen Participation, FOIA, Local Government, VA, VA government

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Information Sources for the Budget-wise People.

The Auditor of Public Accounts provides the citizens of Virginia with a way to see what is happening financially, with their specific County, City or Town.

On a website entitled “Commonwealth Data Point: Transparency at Work in Virginia” you can find information about expenses and revenue at the State-wide level or by jurisdiction. For instance, by clicking on the Local Government tab at the top, you get a drop-down menu that allows you to choose from “Expenditures”, “Revenues”, or “Local Comparison Analysis”. Read the rest of this entry »

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

City of Virginia Beach: An example of Government and FOIA working together.

During these last few days of FOIA coverage, I would be remiss if I didn’t take a few minutes to talk about some of the positive steps that I have found where a local government is really working to insure the FOIA is used in their jurisdiction. The City of Virginia Beach is one such jurisdiction.

The City of Virginia Beach formed a committee to assess Internet Access of Public Information. The report they generated is available online and provides a good example of how government can work with citizens and the FOIA to help keep people informed. Although the study focuses on Real Estate issues, it is certainly a format that could be applied in a multitude of areas where the FOIA is concerned.

As with any legitimate study, they looked at the pros and cons, and they looked at what other jurisdictions were doing in order to develop recommendations for their City to apply. Their recommendation include a wide range and even allows for those businesses that utilize that data to be the ones to carry the greater financial burden, rather than taxpayers. The option would provide some special features for those businesses that use the system fairly extensively, but would be a pay option.

One of the interesting things I found was the part of the report where it was noted that under the FOIA, there are more things required to be posted online when the jurisdiction has a website where they conduct routine business. Under this portion of the law, it would appear that the jurisdiction could have what is essentially an advertising website and would not be required to post public documents on the website.

It is this last that brought to my mind the rationale used by Town of Christiansburg government for having a website and the capabilities to handle bill paying online for about 10 years and never utilizing it. Of course, now, the software they purchased for handling online payments is obsolete and new software would have to be purchased in order to add the ‘bill pay online option.

So, taxpayer money was spent to buy software that was never used, that is now worthless, and more taxpayer money will need to be invested if bill paying online is ever to be available for Christiansburg residents. Not only is it the loss of taxpayer money for the purchase of the program, other tax money was essentially thrown away. What was spent in mailing costs, paper, printing, copying, envelopes , staff time, etc. was lost as there was no paperless option available for bills to be sent out automatically via email, or available to citizens through the website, and payments to have been made on the website. Now, in order to save some of that money, the Town will have to purchase new software and start over.

A friend of mine once told me nobody does something for nothing. In this case it rather looks like the Town made a ‘show’ of responding to citizens by setting up a dead website and buying software. Rather than have to post all of those documents online and have them readily accessible to citizens, they elected to let the ‘pay on line’ option and the ‘website’ all but die of neglect. Was it really worth all of that taxpayer money to keep from having to post meeting notices, agendas, minutes, and other public documents online? If so, why? Who benefited while citizens lost? Gotta wonder!

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 27, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

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

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.

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: , , , , , , ,

Open Government Issues around the Nation and Within the State

I spent some more time on the Sunshine Review site mentioned in my last blog and found an interesting area where news is provided that relates to open government and the FOIA: The Sunshine Review – The Bad News. Again, this is a work in progress to which anyone with computer access can contribute. Even though this first page of the section deals with national issues, Bedford County School System seems to be the hottest topic around.

At the bottom of the page, you’ll find a list of states and by clicking on Virginia, you will be taken to a list of the myriad of issues related to government accountability within the State of Virginia. Although labeled The Bad News (and there is a lot of that covered), you can also find some bright spots like this Jan. 17, 2009 entry:

Secrecy breeds distrust

“The most refreshing change in Franklin city government over the past six months has been the City Council’s emphasis on openness, transparency and accessibility.

That collective spirit has begun to restore the broken trust between citizens and City Hall that manifest itself in the May election, when two newcomers running on a platform of greater citizen involvement scored runaway victories.

The City Council’s challenge now is to demonstrate that openness is an ongoing commitment, not an election-year show.”

I will end on that note and hope that more such reports will be found in the future. “Broken Trust” is a long festering wound throughout all levels of government. It will take time to restore. YOU can help speed the process by being an active participant in government. Good government merely begins in the voting booth. Like a garden, it must be carefully tended to be productive. Plant those seeds in the voting booth, but then be prepared to follow through with monitoring and intervening when necessary to grow a good, healthy, and responsive government.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 22, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , ,

How FOIA could have gone wrong!

There is a nice read online:
Freedom of Information: How Americans got their right to know by George Kennedy.

It takes you through a brief history of FOIA but also what COULD have happened to FOIA along the way. A lot of fancy words accompanied the signing of the FOIA. On the surface, the rhetoric would make it appear that Pres. Johnson was happy to sign such a wonderful piece of legislation.

It is clear there was a long and hard battle (starting in 1955) to bring the FOIA to the point of being signed on July 4, 1966. Although a weak and watered down version of what was desired, it was a crucial first step. In the article noted above, it is reported that there were a lot of concerns about the number of exceptions that were likely to be requested and put into place. If enough of them existed, the very document meant to support Freedom of Information COULD have become the law that actually strengthened the government’s right to secrecy!

Fortunately, we had some editors of major newspapers (a highly competitive field) that set aside competition and joined forces to keep pressure on to make FOIA what it was meant to be, a way for citizens to learn what was going on in their government. This drive continued to grow and apply pressue until the FOIA was actually strengthened rather than weakened with the 1974 amendment. Now, with the ‘internet age’ fully upon us, the numbers of those striving to find information, lookiing for truth is expanding. It has the potential to be inside every business, every home, ever vehicle, every backpack, and many phones. (Case in point, the information we are still receiving from Iran despite what appears extraordinary government efforts to stop those leaks of information.)

Virtually nothing happens or is done these days that someone can’t find out about. It seems to me the logical response would be for government to maintain itself as openly as possible to public scrutiny. It is far better to be open with errors and ommissions now than to have them reach out and grab you in the future.

Now, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and some Territories all have their own versions of the FOIA at the state level. Florida was the first to do so in 1967. the “Sunshine Laws” of Florida remain considered some of the best in the country. However, not all state FOIAs are created equal.

Just by moving to another state, you could suddenly find yourself losing rights you had in the state in which you previously lived. In other cases, you could have spent all of your life in a state with limited FOIAs and relocate to a state like Florida where Sunshine has long been the standard.

How can a person keep up with it all? Easy answer – one person cannot do it. It requires many people watching and working to keep the information flow going. However, each person can access some of the information at places like the Sunshine Review Click on Virginia (the word) or Virginia on the map to get information specific to the State of Virginia.

This site, like most of the wiki sites is a work in progress. People are constantly updating the data you find here, so it is a good idea to check back often. Within the Virginia pages you will find: Statewide, School Districts, Counties, and Cities. (Yes, I’ve already written in to request that Towns be included:)

A closing thought:
“A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps, both.” Pres. James Madison, August 4, 1822

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 18, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , ,