Maria Everett: where is the balance between the privacy and government transparency?
http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/opinion/commentary.PrintView.-content-articles-RTD-2008-03-16-0082.html
Striking Public-Private Balance Is a Challenge
Sunday, Mar 16, 2008 - 12:05 AM
By MARIA J.K. EVERETT
TIMES-DISPATCH GUEST COLUMNIST
During the 2008 General Assembly session, several bills were considered to restrict citizen access to public records in order to protect the privacy of certain classes of individuals: those making donations to state universities, those donating or loaning items to public museums, and those who have permits to carry concealed handguns, just to name a few. Regardless of the side one takes, these bills and others like them raise important public policy questions -- where is the point of balance between the privacy of an individual's name, address, and telephone number and government transparency? With many of these bills being referred to the FOIA Council for examination, there is an opportunity to find that balance outside of the press of a General Assembly session.
We all interface with the government in many ways. We pay taxes, send our children to public school, get driver's licenses, and the list goes on. Think for a moment about the amount of information government possesses from just these three examples.
Our names, addresses, and telephone numbers are part of many public records. It is equally true that the same information is a part of many business records. Are you listed in the telephone book? Are your telephone number and address available by dialing the 411 directory? What will a Google search reveal about you? Ever ordered from one catalog only to be inundated with other catalogs?
Maintaining the balance between an individual's privacy and the public's right to know has always been a formidable challenge. Under Virginia's FOIA, records held by government are presumed open to the public; but a request for these records must first be made. In other words, gaining access to public records, whether in paper presumed open to the public; but a request for these records must first be made. In other words, gaining access to public records, whether in paper or electronic form, requires some effort from the requester. In past years, courts have ruled that the privacy of an individual's name and address is in a sense protected by the barriers of time and inconvenience involved in collecting this information from public records -- a concept known as practical obscurity.
Yet today, personal privacy is a growing concern and the solution seems to be to restrict public access to public records. It is somewhat curious in light of the many ways we voluntarily put our names and addresses in the public domain. The real concern seems to be how a requester uses the public records that have been provided courtesy of the FOIA.
The FOIA guarantees the right of access; but does not concern itself with how the records are thereafter used by a requester. There are other laws for that. When the Roanoke Times chose to publish online the names and addresses of all persons who have permits to carry concealed handguns, this use was objectionable to many. But when the use of public records by a requester is found to be objectionable, the first response is to plug the hole -- to prohibit access to public records. Certainly using public records for objectionable or illegal purposes can be prevented by halting public access altogether. But at what cost?
The FOIA is the embodiment of our tacit agreement that an open government is the preferred government. The FOIA is in place so citizens can find out what government is doing and how tax dollars are being spent. It also allows us to find a community of interest, the ability to identify like-minded individuals for social and political activities. It can be grist for capitalism by allowing persons to participate in the market place.
The FOIA Council was once "foia'd" for the mailing list of the individuals who attend the Council's FOIA Workshops. My first reaction was not unlike others -- they didn't sign up for the workshops to become a mailing list for some company to solicit business. True, but what is the harm? We all receive unsolicited offers and have learned to say, "No." Government doesn't get to choose for us, even altruistically, who may contact us or how we will respond.
This is not to say that there are not vulnerable segments of our population that need protection. In the concealed handgun context, protection for the names and addresses of victims of abuse and other crime can be achieved without closing the entire record. It takes balance. Passions on both sides of the privacy-versus-public access issue run high. That's where the FOIA Council can help. It is a forum where all parties have a place at the table to resolve divergent opinions in an environment marked by thorough examination of issues outside of the press of a General Assembly session.
Privacy issues related to the ease of dissemination of information obtained from public records will likely persist. The FOIA Council is a forum to find the balancing point. It is a process we should embrace.
Maria J.K. Everett is the executive director of the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council. She may be contacted toll free at 1-866-448-4100 or through the Web site http://dls.state.va.us/foiacouncil.htm.
Striking Public-Private Balance Is a Challenge
Sunday, Mar 16, 2008 - 12:05 AM
By MARIA J.K. EVERETT
TIMES-DISPATCH GUEST COLUMNIST
During the 2008 General Assembly session, several bills were considered to restrict citizen access to public records in order to protect the privacy of certain classes of individuals: those making donations to state universities, those donating or loaning items to public museums, and those who have permits to carry concealed handguns, just to name a few. Regardless of the side one takes, these bills and others like them raise important public policy questions -- where is the point of balance between the privacy of an individual's name, address, and telephone number and government transparency? With many of these bills being referred to the FOIA Council for examination, there is an opportunity to find that balance outside of the press of a General Assembly session.
We all interface with the government in many ways. We pay taxes, send our children to public school, get driver's licenses, and the list goes on. Think for a moment about the amount of information government possesses from just these three examples.
Our names, addresses, and telephone numbers are part of many public records. It is equally true that the same information is a part of many business records. Are you listed in the telephone book? Are your telephone number and address available by dialing the 411 directory? What will a Google search reveal about you? Ever ordered from one catalog only to be inundated with other catalogs?
Maintaining the balance between an individual's privacy and the public's right to know has always been a formidable challenge. Under Virginia's FOIA, records held by government are presumed open to the public; but a request for these records must first be made. In other words, gaining access to public records, whether in paper presumed open to the public; but a request for these records must first be made. In other words, gaining access to public records, whether in paper or electronic form, requires some effort from the requester. In past years, courts have ruled that the privacy of an individual's name and address is in a sense protected by the barriers of time and inconvenience involved in collecting this information from public records -- a concept known as practical obscurity.
Yet today, personal privacy is a growing concern and the solution seems to be to restrict public access to public records. It is somewhat curious in light of the many ways we voluntarily put our names and addresses in the public domain. The real concern seems to be how a requester uses the public records that have been provided courtesy of the FOIA.
The FOIA guarantees the right of access; but does not concern itself with how the records are thereafter used by a requester. There are other laws for that. When the Roanoke Times chose to publish online the names and addresses of all persons who have permits to carry concealed handguns, this use was objectionable to many. But when the use of public records by a requester is found to be objectionable, the first response is to plug the hole -- to prohibit access to public records. Certainly using public records for objectionable or illegal purposes can be prevented by halting public access altogether. But at what cost?
The FOIA is the embodiment of our tacit agreement that an open government is the preferred government. The FOIA is in place so citizens can find out what government is doing and how tax dollars are being spent. It also allows us to find a community of interest, the ability to identify like-minded individuals for social and political activities. It can be grist for capitalism by allowing persons to participate in the market place.
The FOIA Council was once "foia'd" for the mailing list of the individuals who attend the Council's FOIA Workshops. My first reaction was not unlike others -- they didn't sign up for the workshops to become a mailing list for some company to solicit business. True, but what is the harm? We all receive unsolicited offers and have learned to say, "No." Government doesn't get to choose for us, even altruistically, who may contact us or how we will respond.
This is not to say that there are not vulnerable segments of our population that need protection. In the concealed handgun context, protection for the names and addresses of victims of abuse and other crime can be achieved without closing the entire record. It takes balance. Passions on both sides of the privacy-versus-public access issue run high. That's where the FOIA Council can help. It is a forum where all parties have a place at the table to resolve divergent opinions in an environment marked by thorough examination of issues outside of the press of a General Assembly session.
Privacy issues related to the ease of dissemination of information obtained from public records will likely persist. The FOIA Council is a forum to find the balancing point. It is a process we should embrace.
Maria J.K. Everett is the executive director of the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council. She may be contacted toll free at 1-866-448-4100 or through the Web site http://dls.state.va.us/foiacouncil.htm.
