Friday, June 19, 2015
State and Local Stories
A Virginia law that allows government officials, from the governor to mayors to college presidents, to shield a wide swath of documents from public view deserves a closer look, a small state committee reviewing Virginia's Freedom of Information Act said Thursday. This "working papers and correspondence" exemption allows chief executives, and members of the General Assembly, to withhold from the public letters, emails and other documents prepared for their "personal or deliberative use." The exemption is meant to protect working, but not final, drafts of a wide range of documents, but open government advocates have long considered it one of the widest and most widely abused loopholes in state public records law. Virginia's exemption is broader than any other state's, according to Megan Rhyne, head of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government. It's also the only one that includes university presidents, she said. On the working papers issue, concerns expressed by members of the press Thursday were much broader than whether the exemption should extend to college presidents. The exemption – regardless of who claims it – has become a catch-all so ingrained in Virginia government that it's a default position for many leaders, Rhyne said. It is so wide that Rhyne said a legislator asked her if the law even allowed him to share his emails with the public. It does, though it also allows him to keep those emails secret.
Daily Press
The Prince William County Board of Supervisors discussed salary increases for themselves behind closed doors on Tuesday afternoon, according to two supervisors who walked out of the session, a possible violation of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. According to the board’s agenda, the supervisors were expected to vote Tuesday on a plan to give themselves pay raises of more than 20 percent next year. But that plan was never discussed or voted on during the open portion of the meeting. Supervisors did, however, discuss the proposed pay raises during the closed session of the meeting, according to two supervisors who walked out of the closed session in protest. And that discussion was probably not appropriate under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, said Maria Everett, an attorney and executive director of the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council, a state agency charged with advising elected officials and the general public regarding Virginia Freedom of Information Act issues.
Prince William Today
Lawrence Mitchell and Joan Montgomery have been appointed to the Martinsville School Board. Martinsville City Council made the appointments late Tuesday night after a closed session held to discuss possible board and commission appointments. Mitchell, of Second Street, and Montgomery, of Corn Tassel Trail, each was appointed by the council in a 3-2 vote. They will fill seats to be vacated June 30 by current board members Robert Williams and Carolyn McCraw, whose terms are expiring. Unlike in many localities, such as Henry County, where the school board is elected by voters, the Martinsville School Board is appointed by the council. According to City Manager Leon Towarnicki, who took notes to prepare the minutes for Tuesday’s council meeting:
Martinsville Bulletin
Despite pleas for leniency, two former BVU Authority executives received substantial sentences Thursday during separate hearings in U.S. District Court. Judge James Jones said the amount of money involved and the violation of the public’s trust were behind his decisions. He also said there appeared to be an “epidemic of corruption” at BVU. Robert James Kelley Jr. was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison plus a year of supervised release. He must also make restitution of $330,510 and forfeit more than $165,000. Kelley was one of three defendants sentenced Thursday who previously pleaded guilty to their roles in an elaborate scheme to defraud BVU and the federal government out of a combined $1 million.
Herald Courier
National Stories
Despite a federal appeals court ruling two years ago ordering the Central Intelligence Agency to be more forthcoming about what records it has related to the use of armed drones to kill terror suspects, a federal judge ruled again Thursday that the spy agency could keep secret nearly all information related to its drone activities and the legal basis for them. U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer also specifically upheld the Obama Administration's assertion of executive privilege to withhold documents recording interactions between executive branch agencies and close advisers to President Barack Obama. The claim could conceivably pertain to President George W. Bush as well, but the details of the CIA's assertion were submitted in a classified court filing and the judge did not elaborate on the situation.
Politico
The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that Texas did not violate the First Amendment when it refused to allow specialty license plates bearing the Confederate battle flag. Such plates, Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote for the majority, are the government’s speech and are thus immune from First Amendment attacks. The vote was 5 to 4. The court’s other three liberal members joined Justice Breyer’s majority opinion, as did Justice Clarence Thomas. “As a general matter,” Justice Breyer wrote, “when the government speaks it is entitled to promote a program, to espouse a policy or to take a position.” Were this not so, he said, the government would be powerless to encourage vaccinations or promote recycling.
New York Times
Evidence from an ongoing Freedom of Information Act trial has shed light on how the Federal Bureau of Investigation handles FOIA requests from the public. The case, Trentadue v. FBI, was filed by Jesse Trentadue in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah after the FBI failed to turn over videotapes of the Murrah Federal Building bombing in Oklahoma City in 1995. In the Reporters Committee's experience, it is rare for FOIA cases to go to trial – cases are usually settled or disposed of though pre-trial motions. David Hardy, the chief of the FBI's Records Information Dissemination Section (RIDS) that manages FOIA requests, and other RIDS personnel testified publicly about how the FBI manages its records. In 2011, the FBI had been sanctioned after a judge determined Hardy had misrepresented the availability of FOIA records to the court.
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Editorials/Columns
In a society where everyone uses the same hook lines, how does one candidate distinguish himself from the others? Each person, of course, answers that he will make a bigger difference, create more high-tech jobs and give more back to the community. It would certainly be refreshing to hear some candidate declare that he is running because he needs the job or because he wants his name written down in the history books. He could even say that the guy in office was not receptive to some problem he had and now he is running against him just for spite. I’ve seen that happen any number of times. But no, that’s the truth—and certainly not the politically correct thing to say. You’ve got to say that you want to make a difference, create high-tech jobs and give back to the community. This is all great campaign rhetoric but the fact is that if you are elected to a county board of supervisors or a town council, you have only one vote and the other five or six members can stop you cold from making a difference.
Donnie Johnston, Free Lance-Star
After reading this article about the Pittsylvania Agriculture Board and the lawsuit brought against them by citizens for FOIA violations, it has become clear that many jurisdictions in Virginia are treating Virginia FOIA as a suggestion rather than the law of the land. Think about this. Since 2007, when the Agriculture Board in Pittsylvania County was created, not a single set of minutes have been taken for a unit of county government. Where is the oversight? Where are the officials who are bound to learn and know the law within two weeks of being elected or appointed?
Only Other Shoe