Transparency News 11/12/19

Tuesday
November 12, 2019

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter
Contact us at vcog@opengovva.org

state & local news stories

VCOG’s 2019 FOI Media Awards Lunch
Get your tickets today!

Free press advocates in Virginia are concerned that a libel lawsuit between Hollywood actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard could set a bad precedent. The Virginia Press Association asked to intervene in a $50 million lawsuit Depp filed against Heard, his ex-wife. Depp says he was defamed by an op-ed piece Heard wrote in The Washington Post in December 2018, in which she never identified Depp by name but referred to herself as a “public figure representing domestic abuse.” Depp has denied abusing Heard and said the article clearly refers to earlier abuse allegations Heard made against him. The press association argued Nov. 8 in Fairfax County Circuit Court that the case could set a bad precedent for cases involving “defamation by implication,” a category of claims that includes Depp’s lawsuit and which the press association says should be only be applied very narrowly. In fact, the press association says some states have entirely banned public figures from making claims of defamation by implication.
Virginia Lawyers Weekly

[This story — and the link to it — about the investigation that roiled Purcellville for months and that was widely covered by multiple online news sources, was removed per the author’s Jan. 13, 2021, requested “Takedown Notice Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998.” You can learn more about the DMCA here.]

A. Reese Peck, the city manager in Bowling Green, Virginia, was publicly censured and permanently barred from future membership by the Executive Board of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) at their October 18, 2019 meeting. Publicly censuring and permanently barring a member is the most severe sanction available to the executive board. Mr. Peck sent nearly 40 emails between the time that he separated from Essex County in 2016 and his resignation from membership in ICMA to Essex County Commissioners. In addition, Mr. Peck submitted a number of public information requests to the county and the executive board determined the unprofessional manner in which he engaged with county staff responding to his requests did not meet the highest ethical standards expected of ICMA members.
RiverCountryNews.com

stories of national interest

Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers’ office is denying open records requests for his emails. The governor’s attorney says the decision saves taxpayer resources; transparency advocates say they’re worried about the erosion of the public’s right to know. “If you want to see what government is up to, you have to see the emails that they are sending,” Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders said. “I don’t think [this denial] is a legal interpretation of our open records law.” In a phone call and subsequent emails, Governor Evers’ attorney said email requests will be denied if they do not contain search terms or wording she can turn into search terms. That is, requests for emails about the budget or containing the word “agriculture,” for example, may be processed; requests for all emails over a specific time frame, no matter how short, will be denied. “It turns public records requests into a guessing game,” April Barker, an open records attorney with Schott, Bublitz & Engel, said, pointing out that requesters will miss crucial information if they need to know what is in the emails before they see the emails.
Fox6 Now

“Requests for emails about the budget or containing the word “agriculture,” for example, may be processed; requests for all emails over a specific time frame, no matter how short, will be denied.”

editorials & columns

“Allow me to clarify that final thought-nugget: Nothing — not one word, syllable or punctuation mark — in any state or federal law bars Radford University from releasing more information about the theft of those papers.”

For seven weeks, the crackerjack, 36-employee Radford University Police Department investigated. Friday, the public got a partial answer as to the whodunit: A “classified” (or low-level) campus employee was the perp who pinched student newspapers from four news racks. Campus cops determined there was no crime because the newspapers were free, according to a letter from Radford University Police Chief David Underwood to The Tartan’s editor-in-chief, Dylan Lepore. That letter also called the probe “an administrative review” to determine whether the theft breached any university conduct or employment guidelines. The review found the employee, whose identity was not released, violated guidelines, Underwood wrote, and he or she has been disciplined. It closed by noting the police department “will make no further comment on this matter since it is considered a Radford University personnel issue, which is not subject to public disclosure.” Allow me to clarify that final thought-nugget: Nothing — not one word, syllable or punctuation mark — in any state or federal law bars Radford University from releasing more information about the theft of those papers. Instead, the loophole-ridden Virginia Freedom of Information Act allows the university to withhold the information. That law also gives administrators the option of releasing it. Apparently, they would rather not.
Dan Casey, The Roanoke Times