CHESTERFIELD COUNTY — Public speakers must stick to the matter at hand when addressing the board of supervisors. Otherwise, the chairman can call a recess and tell the speaker to sit down. When all else fails, the sheriff’s deputies get called in. So far, so good — maybe — if applied in an even-handed way, which means not cutting off just the critics. But Chesterfield citizens won’t see any of this unless they’re at the meeting. The county is one of only two localities in the Richmond area that televises its board meetings, but when somebody violates its rigid public-comment rules, the TV cameras get shut off. “It feels like censorship,” the ACLU’s Kent Willis said. “To simply cut the camera off implies that government has something to hide. Sometimes tempers flare and meetings get contentious. It is probably better for the (TV) audience to see these things instead of trying to hide it.”
CULPEPER — The nine-member town council scheduled its fall retreat 90 miles away, in Richmond. Initially on the agenda was a plan to dramatically increase the cost of sewerage to developments outside the town’s corporate limits. In an editorial, the Culpeper Citizen said, “nothing in state law would allow the council to conduct that discussion behind closed doors. So, moving it out of town might at least deter some from watching.” Councilman Chip Coleman was not happy. “It’s too damn important. Everybody in public office would love to sit in private all the time and talk, but that’s not what we need to be doing. Yes, it’s easier to meet and talk to other elected officials without public involvement, but we are public officials conducting public business. If we don’t like that fact, we should not run for public office.” The retreat was held, but the sewer and water issue got scrubbed from the agenda.
ELKTON — The town’s personnel policy requires formal town council approval before the town manager can hire a police officer. But Town Manager Dennis Donachy wanted an undercover cop, and worried that a public vote would blow his cover. No problem — he had told at least some council members privately the town needed such a position. Some council members could not recall such a discussion, but unless it was one-on-one discussion, it was a clear-cut FOIA violation. As for the personnel-policy violation? Well, Donachy said, that just applied to the hiring of regular police officers, not undercover ones. Eventually the council voted retroactively to hire the officer, but only after talking about it for three hours in a closed-door session that later got billed as a meeting of the personnel committee. Some of the council members said the town manager was just doing his job; others said he exceeded his authority. Either way, a policy discussion should always be in the open.
FAIRFAX COUNTY — In a closed session, the school board agreed to transfer 16 surplus real estate properties to other Fairfax County governing bodies. Details on the plan were not immediately available. Information had to remain confidential, officials said, because making it public could jeopardize negotiations with the county. A discretionary FOIA exempts permits closed-door negotiations, but officials were wrong in saying the information “must” remain confidential. As all public officials should know, the FOIA exemptions are always discretionary, not mandatory. As for the real estate exemption, it’s intended to protect against premature disclosure of a public body’s bargaining position. But should that be stretched to cover deals between governmental entities? Such discussions are not prohibited by law, but citizens should have a say before the “insider trades” occur, not after. Also kept under wraps was a consultant’s report of the properties’ appraised values, making it difficult to determine exactly how much of the public’s land and money was up for sale.
FAIRFAX COUNTY — When a taskforce member’s spouse showed up with a camera to tape the group’s proceedings, meeting moderator Patricia Stevens claimed she had an opinion from the county attorney’s office that it was OK to bar people from videotaping. FOIA, of course, says just the opposite. The confusion, it was said later, resulted from a distinction between the task force’s option not to tape itself, and a citizen’s clear right to record the open deliberations of any public body. Stevens said she worried that the taping might make some people uncomfortable and not willing to be as forthcoming with their opinions about development issues.
FAUQUIER COUNTY — The Water and Sanitation Authority seemed to be batting .500 in complying with FOIA. That’s only half good enough. In its motions for a closed meeting to talk about legal matters, the authority properly disclosed that the matters involved “Brookside developers and Marshall Waterworks.” But the motion invoking the FOIA exemption for personnel matters failed to say anything more, although the law says purpose and subject also must be spelled out in any closed-session motion. WSA’s attorney claimed the code-section reference was sufficient, and did not return a reporter’s next-day phone call to explain his thinking. At another meeting, a member said the WSA was trying to change its image. Unfortunately, his comments came at the same time the authority was refusing to provide draft minutes from a previous meeting. Other FOIA requests were pending.
GRAYSON COUNTY — On the school board’s agenda was a new “requests for information” policy, as recommended by the Virginia School Boards Association. On the surface, said the Galax Gazette, it seemed innocuous enough. In one sentence, compliance with Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act” was affirmed. However, procedures for public access to school board records took three additional pages to detail what members of the public must go through to get access to information — information, the Gazette noted — that belongs to them. The procedures include filling out a form to request information (not required by law, but sometimes a good idea for large requests), presenting a photo ID (not required by law), paying a school official to research the information (not making clear that the charge should be for the lowest-paid employee able to do the search), paying for copies and any incidental costs of assembling records such as phone costs or postage (phone costs?), and examining the information under the eye of the superintendent or his designee (not necessary, except in cases where records might be tampered with). Additionally, the school system fills out a “record of inspection” form that it keeps so that it has a record of what you looked at, how long you spent doing it, when you did it and who watched you do it. As the Gazette said, the “record of inspection” and the entire policy was clearly an attempt to discourage people from seeking information and to intimidate information seekers.
JAMES CITY COUNTY — Frustrated by odd appointments to two committees and what seemed like shoddy treatment from the county staff, planning commission member Jim Kennedy filed a Freedom of Information request to find out how the committees were selected. He got back 750 pages of e-mails along with a bill for nearly $160 in copying charges. The Virginia Gazette said he got his money’s worth. The e-mails showed qualified applicants were passed over for no reason, few black appointees were considered, and none appointed, a developer who used to be a planner seemed to get special favors, press manipulation was being attempted, and staff had a flippant attitude toward county officials.
NORFOLK — In defending a restrictive new media policy, Norfolk School Board member Barry C. Bishop claimed that schools should be run like a business. “If I was running a company, for example, and I had 20 district offices, I wouldn’t have the district office speak for the company,” he told the Virginian-Pilot. But a Pilot editorial reminded him of an important distinction, “one that appears to be overlooked in the board’s urgency for corporate-like efficiency. Schools are public entities, funded by taxpayers, answerable to parents and other stakeholders in the community. In no other public institution is the need greater for openness and accountability than for schools.”
PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY — When the Prince William board heard its spending proposals exceeded available revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars, it yanked the issue from its televised-session agenda. Instead, the supervisors announced they’d take up the issue at an untelevised work session the following week. Such sessions generally are held in a small room without microphones or space for a large audience. The decision to carry over the budget discussion was announced after a closed session, raising questions about what went on behind a closed door. FOIA has no exemption for closed-door discussion about how and when to discuss tough issues. Board insiders said some of the supervisors would prefer not to have the budget conversation in a public setting. Duh . . .
PURCELLVILLE — Purcellville leaders were shocked to find that the school system and the county government charged them $3,860 for documents related to a FOIA request for documents concerning a proposed high school. The county’s bill was $460, but the school system charged $3,400 and said the charges could be greater once the costs of its outside counsel were assessed (the office of the FOI advisory council has said attorneys’ fees can’t be levied). The town council promised to fight the school system’s charges. Councilman Bob Lazaro called the charges “highway robbery.” He also complained that the records the town needed were the very ones that got withheld under the lawyer/client privilege. Town Manager Rob Lohr said he’d been in local government 24 years and “I’ve never been charged for a FOIA by another government.” Staff charges for the records ran as high as $63 an hour. Lazaro also noted that the town got charged $40 an hour for FOIA work by a part-time county supervisor (who is paid considerably less for his board position!).
RICHMOND — Motives for a record request supposedly are never to be questioned. But when an official of the Department of Corrections was asked for information on prison gangs and rehabilitation, he replied in an e-mail, “I cannot respond in any manner to your request without having a better understanding of who you are. Please identify yourself and your status as a researcher.” When the requester pointed out that such a response was inappropriate, the official said he was just trying to be helpful by asking for specifics. At that point, he answered the inquiry anyway, saying the department has about 800 inmates who are considered to be members of street gang, hate group or cult groups, representing 55 different groups or categories. And, he added, no gang rehabilitation program exists, as such. (The requester noted that similar information was available online in a number of other states.)
RICHMOND — A secret exit bonus of $263,000 to an ex-director of the state employees’ pension fund was improperly put in place without consent or oversight by the Virginia Retirement System’s governing board, a report by the legislature’s watchdog agency said. Among the recommendations emerging from the commission’s report: That the attorney general’s office do a better job training trustees and staff in the Freedom of Information Act. Not only was the separation agreement never presented to the board, as FOIA requires, it was marked as confidential, according to the JLARC investigation. The former director said that a JLARC and a representative of the attorney general’s office were present when VRS trustees privately worked on the separation agreement. A former board chairman signed off on the deal, but the VRS board never authorized him to sign the agreement and never approved the final package.
VIRGINIA BEACH — The school board’s hiring process, all behind closed doors, failed to produce any of the desired results. Word leaked out that there were three finalists, none of whom were sitting superintendents. Two were out of work, the other was a deputy superintendent. One front runner soon dropped out, after a criminal investigation was found to be under way. Another dropped out when he got a raise from his current employer. “So far, secrecy has succeeded only in raising doubts about the handling of the most important decision the board has been asked to make on behalf of Virginia Beach,” the Virginian-Pilot said. It recalled that when the board’s $40,000 talent hunter recommended a secret process, “several board members expressed reservations and seemed apprehensive. In hindsight, it’s evident that they should have heeded their instincts.” The Pilot added: “Just because something can be done doesn’t mean it should be.”