Virginia Coalition for Open Government

Transparency News 12/30/14

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

 

State and Local Stories

Less than two minutes after testimony concluded, a Richmond judge on Monday denied requests to grant permanent protective orders against a city School Board member filed by another School Board member and a community activist. Richmond General District Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland said that neither case rose to the level of threat that warranted a continuation of temporary protective orders that had been in place for more than two weeks. “Protective orders are for people who legitimately fear for their safety,” Thorne-Begland said after hearing nearly two hours of testimony at the Manchester Courthouse on Monday. “I don’t think this is the case.” Thorne-Begland said that the “political process at times can get ugly” but strongly urged everyone to figure out a solution that didn’t involve seeking court protection for what were in essence personal disagreements. Taylor declined to comment on the case. She said she didn’t trust the Richmond Times-Dispatch “to not twist my words.”
Times-Dispatch

Virginia General Attorney Mark Herring has declared as unconstitutional the actions of the Isle of Wight County Fair Committee in regard to its banning an area delegate from setting up a booth at the fair this past September. Del. Rick Morris (R-64) made the announcement in a press release issued late Tuesday afternoon. In July, Morris requested to purchase a booth at the Isle of Wight County Fair so that he may raise money for a non-profit organization for abused and neglected children and disseminate information about state business. The Isle of Wight Fair Committee refused his application and stated that no elected official or political organization will be allowed to have a booth at the fair. Morris requested an opinion from the Virginia Attorney General on the constitutionality of the county’s actions. In the Attorney General’s opinion he stated, “Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and political speech is at the core of the protections offered by the First Amendment.” Additionally, the Attorney General’s opinion stated, “When government regulation of speech is based on the content of speech, the regulations will be strictly scrutinized and the government bears the burden of proving the constitutionality of its actions and it must demonstrate that the regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Tidewater News

The closed-door meeting during which Fort Monroe Authority board chairman John Lawson disclosed a possible conflict of interest with The Chamberlin's expansion plans was convened in violation of state law, the state Freedom of Information Council said.  And because there was no disclosure of the subject to be discussed, as required by state law, it is impossible to say whether board members falsely certified that they only discussed the limited number of matters the law allows them to discuss behind closed doors, council staff attorney Alan Gernhardt added. Fort Monroe Authority officials could not be reached immediately for comment. Lawson has said he felt his disclosure of The Chamberlin's plans ought to be held behind closed doors because it involved a real-estate matter and he wanted to be sure fellow board members knew of his business relationship with The Chamberlin's owners. The Freedom of Information Act allows public bodies more than 170 reasons to choose to close meetings or deny access to records, but disclosure of a public official's potential conflict of interest is not one. Boards can choose to have closed meetings to discuss real estate only when the issue regards a public body's discussion or plans to purchase or sell property, Gernhardt said.
Daily Press

National Stories

The same letter requesting public records was sent to each of Maryland's municipal and county governments, but the responses were quite different. And many municipalities and four counties –– including Wicomico and Worcester –– didn't respond at all within the legally required time frame of 30 days, according to a recently released Maryland-Delaware-DC Press Association report. The report, titled "Maryland Report: Public Information Act compliance and costs," was a result of the press association's freedom of information work group. The work group was looking for information about public records requests handled and processed by local governments, according to the report. While many municipalities and counties provided the requested information for free, Talbot County, for example, estimated a cost of about $7,560 for all of the information.
DelmarvaNow

Paula Lavigne, a reporter with Outside The Lines, dropped a public records request to Tallahassee police in September, asking for all incident reports involving a long list of names that appear to be FSU athletes. Police said they filled that request, and in the process, found one case where they had evidence that was "not immediately processed"—for nearly three years. So before ESPN broke the story, police released the reports from that case, blasting them out to their media list and posting them online. They also released a copy of Lavigne's public records request, essentially tipping off everyone to what she's working on. They also left her contact information in the copy they released.
Deadspin

 

Editorials/Columns

Local government websites tend to combine two shortcomings — difficulty of navigation and paucity of information — to a depressing degree. The result is a lack of transparency that thwarts citizen engagement. (This is one reason we continue to press for the publication of public notices in newspapers.) To its credit, Richmond is taking steps to improve its online presence by placing more public data on its website. Councilman Jonathan Baliles has proposed posting the city’s payment register, permits, crime and real estate information. The proposal complements efforts being made by the administration of Mayor Dwight Jones.
Times-Dispatch

For nearly a year and a half, the Fairfax County police department has stonewalled inquiries about the shooting death of John Geer. Police responded to a disturbance at Geer’s home in Springfield and talked to Geer at some length while he stood, unarmed, on his own porch. Then an officer shot him in the chest. Who was the officer? What (if anything) provoked the shooting? Fairfax officials flatly refuse to discuss the case. Now Circuit Court Judge Randy Bellows has ordered the police department to hand over its files to the Geer family, which has filed a lawsuit over the matter. That’s a decent start. But the public has a right to expect more from the county than grudging disclosure in the course of litigation. For county police to kill an unarmed citizen and then refuse to discuss even the slightest details — let alone tender an explanation — for more than a year is outrageous. That sort of thing might happen in banana republics or Middle Eastern autocracies. It cannot happen here. That Chief Edwin Roessler thinks it ought to shows he is the wrong man for that job.
Times-Dispatch

When Gov. Terry McAuliffe appeared in Virginia Beach recently to announce that his budget will include a $28 million bond package to replace old voting machines across Virginia with state-of-the art equipment, Rep. Scott Rigell joined him. No surprise there. Though McAuliffe is a Democrat and Rigell a Republican, the congressman gained an intense interest in this issue last month because of the threat electronic voting errors can pose to the will of the people — to say nothing of his own wish to stay in office. The plan deserves bipartisan support on the basis of ensuring the integrity of the very pillars that support representative democracy. But if that is too aspirational to be taken seriously in these cynical days, it warrants the support of both parties for no other reason than mutual distrust.
Roanoke Times