RSS

Tag Archives: government

Town of Christiansburg has finally put all of Town Code Chapter 10 on Town website!

15 Jul

A few weeks ago, I noted that the Town of Christiansburg had finally posted all of Chapter 10 of the Town Code on the Town’s website. That was the only chapter of the code that I had found that was not posted in its entirety. I figured that maybe it was because things were being updated.

While the full document has been available at MyVAResources.com for over a year (including all 3 Articles), the Town had only posted Article I (Erosion and Sediment Control. Article II (Stormwater Management) and Article II (Illicit Discharge) were omitted from the Town’s website.

Once the Town loaded the missing sections, I decided to compare it to what I had received to see what changes had been made. There were absolutely NO changes to Articles II and III. Those had just been omitted from the website for months with no apparent reason.

There were, however, a few changes found in Article I which had been previously posted but has now been reposted with those changes included. It appears that some of those changes may have been related to the DCR report I have been writing about. In summary, here are the changes that I found:

Article I. Erosion and Sediment Control

Sec. 10-1 Definitions

Added:

Department means the Department of Conservation and Recreation

Development means a tract of land developed or to be developed as a single unit under single ownership or unified control which is to be used for any business or industrial purpose or is to contain three or more residential dwelling units.

Natural channel design concepts means the utilization of engineering analysis and fluvial geomorphic processes to create, rehabilitate, restore, or stabilize an open conveyance system for the purpose of creating or recreating a stream that conveys its bankfull storm event within its banks and allows larger flows to access its bankfull bench and its floodplain.

Peakflow rate means the maximum instantaneous flow from a given storm condition at a particular location.

Permittee means the person to whom the permit authorizing land-disturbing activities is issued or the person who certifies that the approved erosion and sediment control plan will be followed.

Person means any individual, partnership, form, association, joint venture, public or private corporation, trust, estate, commission, board, public or private institution, utility, cooperative, county, city, town, or other political subdivision of the Commonwealth, any interstate body, or any other legal entity.

Program Authority means the Town of Christiansburg which has adopted a soil erosion and sediment control program that has been approved by the Board.

Runoff volume means the volume of water that runs off the land development project from a prescribed storm event.

Single-family residence means a noncommercial dwelling that is occupied exclusively by one family.

Water quality volume means the volume equal to the first one-half inch of runoff multiplied by the impervious surface of the land development project.

Sec. 10-4. Local program; adoption of state standards and regulations.

Added:

(f) In accordance with, §10.1-561 of the Code of Virginia, stream restoration and relocation projects that incorporate natural channel design concepts are not man-made channels and shall be exempted from any flow rate capacity and velocity requirements for natural or man-made channels.

(g) In accordance with §10.1-561 of the Code of Virginia, any land-disturbing activity that provides for stormwater management intended to address any flow rate capacity and velocity requirements for natural or manmade channels if the practices are designed to (I) detain the water quality volume and to release it over 48 hours; (ii) detain and release over a 24-hour period the expected rainfall resulting from the one year, 24-hour storm; and (iii) reduce the allowable peak flow rate resulting from the 1.5, 2, and 10-year, 24-hour storms to a level that is less than or equal to the peak flow rate from the site assuming it was in good forested condition, achieved through multiplication of the forested peak flow rate by a reduction factor that is equal to the runoff volume from the site when it was in a good forested condition divided by the runoff volume from the site in its proposed condition, and shall be exempt from any flow rate capacity and velocity requirements for natural or manmade channels.

Sec. 10-5. Erosion and sediment control plan—When required; exceptions.

Added:

(h) Variances: The plan-approving authority may waive or modify any of the standards that are deemed to be too restrictive for site conditions, by granting a variance. A variance may be granted under these conditions:

  1. At the time of plan submission, an applicant may request a variance to become part of the approved erosion and sediment control plan. The applicant shall explain the reasons for requesting variances in writing. Specific variances which are allowed by the plan-approving authority shall be documented in the plan.

  2. During construction, the person responsible for implementing the approved plan may request a variance in writing from the plan-approving authority. The plan-approving authority shall respond in writing either approving or disapproving such a request. If the plan-approving authority does not approve a variance within 10 days of receipt of the request, the request shall be considered to be disapproved. Following disapproval, the applicant may resubmit a variance request with additional documentation.

      (I) In accordance with the procedure set forth by §10.1-563 (E) of the Code of Virginia, any person engaging in the creation and operation of wetland mitigation banks in multiple jurisdictions, which have been approved and are operated in accordance with applicable federal and state guidance, laws, or regulations for the establishment, use, and operation of mitigation banks, pursuant to a permit issued by the Department of Environmental Quality, the Marine Resources Commission, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, may, at the option of that person, file general erosion and sediment control specifications for wetland mitigation banks annually with the Board for review and approval consistent with guidelines established by the Board.

Sec. 10-9. Monitoring, reports and inspections.

Added:

(f) Inspection frequency shall be in accordance with 4VAC 50-30-60.

——————————————————-

Those are all of the changes that were made when Article I was updated, but as you will note, they were some fairly important issues. I have added links to the specific codes referenced so that you can look further into the issues if you wish.

The most significant issue all of this (DCR Corrective Action, updating of codes only when forced to) brings to me is one question. How common is this type of issue throughout the Town Code? What other areas are audited and by whom? If these types of changes were initiated by the State years ago and only now being applied (by force) to the Town of Christiansburg, what other issues have been treated the same way?

This disregard for keeping codes current that are so closely related to health, welfare, safety, property values, insurance rates, etc. is unacceptable. Reading the full document, it shows clearly exactly how impotent the Town Council is once a property has been rezoned. Virtually nothing can be done by way of enforcement of these ordinances without the willingness and action taken by the Town Manager. The Town Council has no control except to control the behavior or OR the identity of the Town Manager.

These changes are a least part of the ones that were voted on back in December as updating the ordinance following a DCR audit. It is nice to see that something has finally arrived to show what Town Council voted on at that meeting. But, I can’t help but wonder, given the pattern of behavior here, if there are not possibly other changes the Council voted on at that time that still haven’t seen the light of day.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 15, 2009 in Citizen Participation, Environment, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

FOIA makes it possible for you to know….but why is it important that you know?

03 Jul

Why would people want to know about their government and the decisions that are made by government for them?  The answer to that has nothing to do with the FOIA. Rather, the FOIA is something that may have been strongly influenced by the very drive that people have to want to know the answers to questions that they have.

Think about it for a minute. How many times would you return to a doctor who’s responses were “Yes, you are sick but I have some medicine to make you better.” Me, I would have a few little questions to ask: (1) If I’m sick, what is the ‘sickness’ called? (2) Is it a terminal, chronic, or short term illness? (3) Are the symptoms I have now likely to get better or worse? Will I get new symptoms also? (4) What is the prognosis? (5) This medicine you want to give me, how will it affect me? (6) Are there any other treatment options?

When you talk to your doctor, you know that you are talking about things that have a direct effect upon your life and your family. You, quite naturally, want to know a reasonable amount of what the issues are so that you can begin wrapping your brain around how to deal with things. Well, when you talk to government representatives (elected, appointed, or otherwise) about government issues in your area (city, town, county, or country), you are also talking about things that will have an impact upon your life and the lives of your family, friends, neighbors, and other citizens you do not even know.

It only makes sense to me that asking for all the information that you need to feel comfortable with what is going to happen should be a right that you exercise often. In a May 20, 2009 article on the New York Times Opinion Section, Happy Days, The Pursuit of What Matters in Troubled Times, is an blog article by Daniel Gilbert, What You Don’t Know Makes You Nervous.

The author discusses some of the current issues facing Americans and some historical eras that are similar to what is faced today. Then, he moves into addressing what it is that people are ‘really’ upset about. In paragraph 8 of the blog article, he begins to identify the real culprit:

That’s because people feel worse when something bad might occur than when something bad will occur. Most of us aren’t losing sleep and sucking down Marlboros because the Dow is going to fall another thousand points, but because we don’t know whether it will fall or not — and human beings find uncertainty more painful than the things they’re uncertain about.

Then in the last paragraph, he sums up this theme again:

Our national gloom is real enough, but it isn’t a matter of insufficient funds. It’s a matter of insufficient certainty. Americans have been perfectly happy with far less wealth than most of us have now, and we could quickly become those Americans again — if only we knew we had to.

This ‘not knowing’ or ‘uncertainty’ can exist in all levels of government. The less people are told, the more they are likely to worry about the possible outcomes. We Americans are a pretty tough group. We have survived bad times, tough economic times, war, internal strife, disease, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, the untimely loss of some of most beloved citizens, and a myriad of other challenges. I believe we can survive most anything IF WE KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT!

I understand it is not possible for government to give us clear and concise answers on every issue. Where it is possible to do so, then it should be done. Where it is not possible, then simply be honest enough to say that you do not know, but this is what we are doing about the issue.

Keeping people informed helps to keep people grounded in facts NOT in perceptions that may not accurately reflect the facts. Most of us know that elected officials are just as human as the rest of us and can make mistakes. Acknowledging and owning the mistakes allows all of the gossip and rumors to die off and we can all get on with the business of living our lives to the best of our ability.

Most people that know me know that if I am given a few minutes, I could apply Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to eating a tuna fish salad. I am a firm believer in that Hierarchy and the relationship to was I have just discussed is clear.

In Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, there are established levels of ‘Needs’ that most people have in common. These needs begin at a very basic survival level and progress into the very alturistic. The government (whether town, city, county, state, our federal) is directed by the U.S. Constitution to insure certain of these needs: Health, Welfare, Safety & Convenience. (See Wikipedia’s: Supreme Court Case Mugler V. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887)). (See also: Health, Safety, Welfare & Convenience.)

Citizens not only have a right to know, but it is good for them to know, the good and bad of government. Not knowing leads to uncertainty and fear. Those, in turn, lead to misperceptions, rumors, gossip, and misinterpretations. The more open government is the more likely it will be that citizens will come together and strive to work through any problems that we have. Open government IS good government because it reduces the fear and uncertainty.

Happy Birthday to the Freedom of Information Act! As it has grown, it has now become a tool for everyone, not just the media. FOIA helps to keep government open in much the same way putting a lock on a door protects your home. It serves to keep honest people honest. Just as there will be those who will break into your home regardless of the presence of locks, there will be those who will try to keep things ‘hidden’ from the public. Having some safeguards in place (lock on the door, the FOIA) helps to prevent that scenario from becoming the status quo.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 3, 2009 in Citizen Participation, FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Part 2: Discussion on Bacon’s Rebellion and the Thomas Jefferson Institute’s

02 Jul

June 30th Bacon’s Rebellion Blog article “Establishing Transparency’s Bottom Floor for Virginia’s Localities” is a good followup on the THOMAS JEFFERSON INSTITUTE’S TRANSPARENCY PROJECT. It brings home the fact that the internet has provided a wealth of opportunity for citizen involvement and for governments to be open and empowering of citizens. The internet has opened doors for people to be involved in government in ways that were not dreamed of only a few years ago. Suddenly, access is available to more people, limited only by governments’ efforts to provide the information.

However, there are tremendous differences  between how jurisdictions handle this new era of ‘openness’. I have been looking at various websites around the State of Virginia for more than a year now. Some jurisdictions make it incredibly easy for information to be found. Other jurisdictions make finding some information easy and other information more difficult to locate. Still others, offer a lot of self-promotion to encourage the home buyer or business, but the ‘meat and potatoes’ of local government is all but missing in action.

I believe that the last paragraph of that blog clearly identifies some of the opportunities that are before us and within the hands of our lawmakers:
“If all of Virginia’s counties and school boards met these standards we would be a much more informed and aware citizenry, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Simply following through on these measures, while a significant upgrade over the hodge-podge collection of documents that passes for transparency throughout much of the commonwealth, doesn’t take full advantage of power of the internet. There are a lot of additional things that governments can do that enable their citizens to get much more out of online transparency. From video archives to real time data feeds, innovative governments are making themselves more open and their constituents better informed. Next issue we’ll take a look at what the best practices in this new online world look like.

I am looking forward to that next issue. I have some ideas of my own, first and foremost, that standards should be established for all jurisdictions (state, county, city & TOWN) and that those standards should be developed based, in large part, upon citizen input. Let the people who will be using the devices have a part in determining what is needed, not just the lawmakers. Find out what people want. Oh, yeah. That’s what government is all about anyway, right?

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 2, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Who is watching Transparency in Virginia? (I’m not alone here!)

01 Jul

There’s a kewl blog out there that I read called “Bacon’s Rebellion“. There have been a couple of recent blog articles there that relate to my FOIA focus. (It’s not long before the 4th of July, FOIA’s birthday, will arrive and I will be back on topics of local interest….anybody wondering what my I’ve been working on besides FOIA information:)

Anyway, on June 16, 2009, the blog article “Shining a Spotlight on Transparency” was rolled out. I had to check my audio to be sure I didn’t miss a drum roll because it sure deserved one! The opening two sentences set the tone: The legitimacy of government is based on the consent of the governed. As owners of our state government, every citizen of Virginia is entitled to full and complete information about how their government acts and what their Representatives do.”

Wow! That pretty much says it for the backbone of the FOIA at all government levels. WE are the government. Government is not just elected officials and fancy buildings! It is “WE THE PEOPLE”. The government works for us, not the other way around.

The article then goes on to discuss recent events in Federal FOIA and Virginia FOIA. I really like the way that it is pointed out that accessibility to information alone is NOT enough. That information MUST be in a format that citizens can understand. We do not need tools that we can’t use. We need consistently organized, understandable information. Clothing information (or cloaking, if you prefer) in a manner that make it available but not useable is atrocious.

It is further noted, that the THOMAS JEFFERSON INSTITUTE is initiating an awesome project. They will examine the current FOIA practices of jurisdictions and use that data to develop standards and best practices. This concept could bring a degree of uniformity to jurisdictions that would be a tremendous service to citizens. I know that every jurisdiction wants to keep its “individuality” but there is no reason why they can’t do that while still having uniformity in those areas that all jurisdiction have in common. It’s too bad that the study will not include Towns, but perhaps that is coming.

This has particular interest to me as it could apply to the internet. If every jurisdiction used a certain part of their website that was consisten across all jurisdictions but allowed for independence in other parts of the website. It would make it so much easier for citizens. We are becoming such a mobile society, with people moving several times during the course of their lives. If there were some degree of uniformity, it would be so much easier for citizens to access information.

It could also save a ton of taxpayer’s money! Part of the website would be prepackaged saving development costs and making it easier for employees to use. The remainder of the website could be used as the jurisdiction wishes to promote its unique features and events. It would also make it easier and more cost effective for small jurisdictions to have a website.

The article closes with this: By providing usable data governments allow citizens to improve their quality of life and make government more efficient.” What a wonderful concept! Increase efficiency of government while improving citizen access. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

The 2nd of these 2 articles will be discussed tomorrow.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 1, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Focus on the Virginia Coalition for Open Government

01 Jul

Just a couple of years ago, I was pretty darned ignorant on the FOIA. I knew it was there. I had heard it mentioned somewhere along the way, but it had no real meaning for me. As I became interested, I started looking around on the internet. I really do not intend to ‘plug’ one resource over any others, but The Virginia Coalition for Open Government website and the help they provided via email and telephone, those have been the best resources for me.
The Coalition for Open Government is a non-profit agency dedicated to keeping government ‘openness’ growing. They do not sit back and assume that what is available is enough. They work to expand the parameters of openness, while simultaneously helping to empower citizens in making the current law work for them. They are also a 501c3 organization so any donations made are tax deductible.

If you have never made a FOIA request before, and would like someone to help you through the process, you will find all the resources that you need right here at the Virginia Coalition for Open Government website.

Rather than recreate the wheel, you can use their frequently asked questions (faq) section for some explainations and definitions in plain English (very little ‘legalize’ is used). On the page with the FOIA itself, there is even a copy of the form for carrying your request on to district court if need be (directions for filling it out are also there).

The FOI Citizen’s Guide is where I really got my start. This document pretty well takes you through the process of learning what your rights are under the FOIA. Basically, it provides information on what it is you are entitled to and how/when the government agency is required to respond. It also provides information on what your rights are as pertains to public meetings.

One of the links on their pages will take you to their bank of newsletters. You can find a lot of information. They work hard to provide you with information concerning recent FOIA related events, evaluations of the FOIA process, bills that may be coming up concerning FOIA, FOIA bills in the legislature, and some of the not-so-good things that have happened relative to FOIA.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 1, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Using FOIA resources can save you money!

28 Jun

What would happen if you went to the Town/City/County in Virginia where you live and you asked for certain documents, and you were told that the they could not give you the documents that you requested.

  1. You could do one of several things in response:
  2. You could walk away and just give up. (Free)
  3. You could  read the FOIA codes for yourself to see if you should get access to those documents. (Free)
  4. You could contact the Virginia Coalition for Open Government and request they provide you with some guidance. (Free)
  5. You could contact the Virginia FOIA Advisory Council for an opinion. (Free)
  6. You could simply contact an attorney to see if legal action is appropriate. (Fees are often charged for that initial contact just to find out if you have a case.)

Let us assume you make the decision to get some research done before you invest any money in attorney fees. You take the steps to contact either #4 or #5 above, giving them ALL of the information you can on your situation. Either one (or both) come back with information that reveals that you do not have the right to access to what you have requested. Now, you at least know what you can or cannot do, and it has cost you no more than a little time.

On the other hand, if #4, #5, or both of them advise you that you do have the right to that information, you may now wish to proceed to an attorney and pursue legal actions to obtain the records that you request.

There is one very good reason to do your homework before you jump into a ‘writ of mandamus’ seeking a Court order to have your jurisdiction give you the requested information (provided at the Marion Brechner Citizen Access Project website):

Definition: Attorneys’ Fees, Requestors (Public Records)

Capsule:

If a court finds a public body violated the open records law by denying the inspection of a record, the requester of the record shall be entitled to recover “reasonable” attorney’s fees from the public body. The fees are to be awarded if the requester “substantially” prevails unless special circumstances would make an award “unjust.” A court may, among other things, consider the reliance of a public body on an opinion of the attorney general or a decision of a court that “substantially” supports the public body’s position. VA. CODE ANN. § 2-3713.D (2007).

In other words, if the jurisdiction has violated FOIA, you have the right to have the jurisdiction pay your legal fees. The Court does have the right to evaluate those fees and, if you have gotten a bit exorbinate, hiring Benjamin A. Civilette, whose rate is $1000.00 per hour, I think you can count on the Court reducing the awarded amount substantially.

By using the Virginia Coalition for Open Government website’s Opinions section, you can find out if there are any cases similar that the jurisdiction could be basing their argument on, thus finding  out if there are any cases where the jurisdiction was “substantially supported” in a similar case.

Doing these things will certainly not guarantee that you get your legal costs reimbursed, but you can increase the likelihood of that happening. A little bit of homework could save you a lot of money!

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 28, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

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

27 Jun

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: , , , , , , ,

The Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council.

25 Jun

The Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council is a State of Virginia agency that focuses on Freedom of Information Issues. This source is available to individuals, public officials and the media. They also serve by providing advisory opinions which are published and are a searchable internet resource for anyone with a FOIA question.

Their Advisory Opinions section can be viewed in chronological order or in a searchable database. The chronological order is a good way to review recent trends (if any) while the searchable option allows you to look for a specific topic. Using searchable, I checked under the word “erosion” and found this neat bit of information indicating that when an investigation is performed related to land-disturbing activities where the ‘owner’ has violated some form of the erosion and sediment control laws, the name of the complaintant does not have to be released by the investigating agent. That information can be withheld as part of the records causing the investigation.

Another interesting find there was under the search for “Planning Commission”. This involved the presence of Town Council members at a Planning Commission Meeting who participated in the discussion about business upon which they would likely have to act in the future. In this case, the meeting should have been advertised as a Joint Public Hearing. Another part of the question answered dealt with the appointment of Town Council Members on Planning Commission Subcommittees. Some interesting discussion is found in the document, and some good ideas of what is and is not allowed to happen in public meetings.

Another good one I found deals with Committee Meetings (notice and minutes) and FOIA violations that occurred involving this. The discussion is thorough and sites relevant FOIA laws concerning notice requirements of all committees. It further clarifies that any committee or group formed to perform a delegated function or to advise the town is subject to FOIA. Regular meetings, special, and emergency meetings all require notices. That notice time frame is a minimum of 3 WORKING days (excluding the date of the meeting as well as holidays and weekends) for regular meetings, and at the same time that members of the group are notified of special and emergency meetings. In addition, anyone who has requested notice of meetings should have been noticed. Requesters of notices can be contacted through email or telephone if the requestor agrees to this. (So if you are someone who wants to be noticed, you can get it through the mail, or you could ask the town to call you instead – it is not required that they provide this service but it may be something they will consider for people who do not have internet access but have requested notification and the timeframe is such that mail service just would not work). It also clarifies another question that I have been asked recently. The committees themselves are not required to take minutes except where membership of the committee includes a majority of the governing body.

So there ya have it. A great resource to look up information on FOIA that may be of particular interest to you. If you have a question about the way a meeting was conducted, whether or not you were allowed to be in the meeting, what documents you have a legal right to obtain or view, here is one good place to find an answer.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 25, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

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: , , , , , , ,

← Older posts
Newer posts →