Transparency News, 6/23/25

0 6 . 2 3 . 2 5

All Access

3 items

Local

Richmond election officials appear not to have enforced finance disclosure mandates

Nearly half of the 16 candidates for Richmond School Board last year missed at least one deadline for campaign finance disclosures, according to a review of reports filed with the state Department of Elections. But it does not appear that the city’s Office of Elections took any corrective action. The office issued no citations for late reports, which under state law calls for candidates to be assessed a civil penalty of $100. In some localities, local election officers are sticklers for the rules. They maintain an inventory of reports received, check to see if candidates provide required information about donors (including address, occupation and employer) and double-check the math on the summary pages. After the election, some local election officials contact losing candidates to make sure they understand the requirement to provide a final accounting of their finances. There is no indication there was any such oversight in Richmond during the municipal elections last fall. Of the 16 candidates for School Board, The Richmonder found seven missed at least one filing deadline.

richmonder.org

keep reading

In other states-Massachusetts

Why is so little known about the Boston school bus driver in April’s fatal crash?

More than a month after a contractor driving a school bus for Boston Public Schools struck and killed a 5-year-old boy who just stepped off the same bus, little is still publicly known about the vehicle’s operator — despite warning signs he had difficulty behind the wheel severe enough to pull him off the road for two days prior to the crash. Part of that lack of disclosure, advocates said, is public officials’ interpretation of a 2023 law originally intended to protect the immigration status of drivers while allowing migrants to obtain driver’s licenses. How the law has been carried out has resulted in essentially a public blackout of previously public information, they said, including whether a driver’s credentials are up-to-date and whether they are safe on the roads.

bostonglobe.com

keep reading

I’ve long been fascinated with the military’s naming conventions. More than a decade ago, US Central Command unveiled “Operation Inherent Resolve,” its campaign to defeat the Islamic State. Right after, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with CENTCOM to find out how the military settled on that name. Two years later, I ended up with an incredible set of documents that detailed the discussions that took place between the Joint Chiefs of Staff, experts and top military brass as they debated three different names for the operation. They settled on “Inherent Resolve” because it would cover a broader campaign against the Islamic State, according to the documents. It was also chosen because it translated well into Arabic and was “safe enough for Arab and Western Coalition members,” a CENTCOM official wrote in an email. Fast forward. On March 21, Trump announced from the Oval Office that he directed the Air Force to move forward “with the world’s first sixth-generation fighter jet.” With Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth standing by his side, he touted the new fighter jet’s “speed,” “maneuverability” and “payload,” saying it promises to be something “the likes of which nobody has seen before.” “Nothing in the world comes even close to it,” Trump said. “It’ll be known as the F-47. The generals picked the title. It’s a beautiful number.” You know what I had to do. I filed a FOIA request with the Air Force and asked for an assortment of records referencing the final decisions that led to the new fighter jet’s name.
Bloomberg FOIA Files

“Democracies die behind closed doors.” ~ U.S. District Judge Damon Keith, 2002

Donate