Transparency News 3/2/17
Thursday, March 2, 2017
State and Local Stories
State and Local Stories
Federal judges will have to take another look at how the General Assembly redrew lines for 11 House of Delegates districts in 2011, including two on the Peninsula, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled. The high court found that the majority on a three judge panel of the U.S. District Court in Richmond used the wrong legal standard when it ruled that the redistricting did not violate the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause, which prohibits racial discrimination. The underlying issue was the legality of the House of Delegates goal of ensuring a voting age population that was at least 55 percent African American in 11 districts, and one other where the Supreme Court upheld the district court ruling. The high court ruling accepted the contention of challengers, including Golden Bethune-Hill of Newport News, that the panel gave too much weight to the arguments of House Speaker William Howell and the House that the other factors legislators looked out meant that race was not improperly considered.
Daily Press
Two members of Bristol Virginia City Council took umbrage this week with some social media commentary about them and their families. Councilman Kevin Mumpower began Tuesday’s meeting by voicing displeasure with many of the comments he has read in the wake of recent council meetings. Councilman Doug Fleenor also chimed in, saying he had been the victim of many of the attacks. “I’m embarrassed for the city. I thought this city had better character than that,” Mumpower said. “When I’ve read some of the things I’ve read, I wouldn’t share it with my 4-year-old. Personal attacks, calling people names, inflammatory comments. That’s not right. I don’t care who you are.” “I’ve been the victim of a lot of this,” Fleenor said. “If anybody wants to say anything about me or my family, don’t do it on social media. I’ll meet you outside. Any time, any place — any of you.”
Herald Courier
National Stories
Are emails and text messages about government business on California officials' personal phones and accounts public records? The California Supreme Court is set to decide that question on Thursday in a ruling that could clear up a murky area of law in the Golden State. The use of private email accounts by public officials has faced scrutiny in recent years. Hillary Clinton was sharply criticized during the presidential campaign for using a private email account while at the State Department. In a survey by The Associated Press two years ago, Gov. Jerry Brown, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and other top elected officials in California acknowledged using personal email accounts to conduct government business.
McClatchy
A measure to guarantee access to public records in a digital format advanced Wednesday in a Colorado Senate committee, but not before a flurry of late amendments dramatically changed the scope of the bill. The most significant of the changes adopted Wednesday would require the judicial branch to comply with the Colorado Open Records Act, bringing it in line with other state and local agencies. Another amendment, requested by the state attorney general’s office, would add a new exemption to the open records law, allowing for records to be withheld from the public if their release is “reasonably likely” to compromise someone’s safety. The combined effect of the two amendments ultimately may cause the bipartisan coalition that had supported the bill up to this point to unravel.
Denver Post
Emails, texts and other communications between Idaho lawmakers would be considered private and exempted from public disclosure under a proposal introduced in a House committee Wednesday. But House Speaker Scott Bedke told reporters later that the bill predominantly was “borne out of frustration” from lawmakers buried in multiple public records requests. He said he would “probably not” support it. The measure from Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens, would rewrite state public records law to shield most communications between and among Idaho lawmakers and their staffs. It would also redact identifiable information about private citizens in their communications with lawmakers. Communications between lawmakers and lobbyists would not be exempted.
Idaho Statesman
Some of the animal welfare documents that were abruptly purged from a Department of Agriculture database early this month were restored last week, days after animal rights groups filed a lawsuit to make the records public again. The documents that were restored to the database include inspection reports for research institutions and certain federal labs that work with animals. Similar reports on the treatment of animals at zoos, breeding operations and animal transporters — which represent the vast majority of facilities that the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service oversees — are still unavailable.
Sentinel Source
Editorials/Columns
When it comes to matters of liability or exoneration, freedom or incarceration, even those of life and death, it’s critical that the process moves deliberately. That’s the most promising path to conclusions deserving of confidence and free from lingering doubt. There is a point, however, where the plodding pace of an inquiry is itself a problem. Jamycheal Mitchell, a 24-year-old man from Portsmouth, was arrested in April 2015 on charges of petty theft and trespassing. There are reasons why Mitchell died. They dwell in that “unknown etiology” of the medical examiner’s assessment. And it is why the case continues to command attention and demand answers. That is why Portsmouth Commonwealth’s Attorney Stephanie Morales on May 10 called for a formal investigation by the Virginia State Police to determine if there was any criminal wrongdoing. On Dec. 2, the VSP completed its work and submitted the totality of its findings. Since then, there has been nothing from the commonwealth’s attorney — no decision about whether charges will be filed or whether the report clears those associated with the case. Certainly Morales and her staff want to make sure they act appropriately and that no stone is left unturned. But there’s a cloud hanging over those under suspicion, and the inexplicable death of young man in the state’s custody demands answers. The commonwealth’s attorney’s office needs to complete its process and make public its overdue findings.
Virginian-Pilot
Daily Press
Two members of Bristol Virginia City Council took umbrage this week with some social media commentary about them and their families. Councilman Kevin Mumpower began Tuesday’s meeting by voicing displeasure with many of the comments he has read in the wake of recent council meetings. Councilman Doug Fleenor also chimed in, saying he had been the victim of many of the attacks. “I’m embarrassed for the city. I thought this city had better character than that,” Mumpower said. “When I’ve read some of the things I’ve read, I wouldn’t share it with my 4-year-old. Personal attacks, calling people names, inflammatory comments. That’s not right. I don’t care who you are.” “I’ve been the victim of a lot of this,” Fleenor said. “If anybody wants to say anything about me or my family, don’t do it on social media. I’ll meet you outside. Any time, any place — any of you.”
Herald Courier
National Stories
Are emails and text messages about government business on California officials' personal phones and accounts public records? The California Supreme Court is set to decide that question on Thursday in a ruling that could clear up a murky area of law in the Golden State. The use of private email accounts by public officials has faced scrutiny in recent years. Hillary Clinton was sharply criticized during the presidential campaign for using a private email account while at the State Department. In a survey by The Associated Press two years ago, Gov. Jerry Brown, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and other top elected officials in California acknowledged using personal email accounts to conduct government business.
McClatchy
A measure to guarantee access to public records in a digital format advanced Wednesday in a Colorado Senate committee, but not before a flurry of late amendments dramatically changed the scope of the bill. The most significant of the changes adopted Wednesday would require the judicial branch to comply with the Colorado Open Records Act, bringing it in line with other state and local agencies. Another amendment, requested by the state attorney general’s office, would add a new exemption to the open records law, allowing for records to be withheld from the public if their release is “reasonably likely” to compromise someone’s safety. The combined effect of the two amendments ultimately may cause the bipartisan coalition that had supported the bill up to this point to unravel.
Denver Post
Emails, texts and other communications between Idaho lawmakers would be considered private and exempted from public disclosure under a proposal introduced in a House committee Wednesday. But House Speaker Scott Bedke told reporters later that the bill predominantly was “borne out of frustration” from lawmakers buried in multiple public records requests. He said he would “probably not” support it. The measure from Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens, would rewrite state public records law to shield most communications between and among Idaho lawmakers and their staffs. It would also redact identifiable information about private citizens in their communications with lawmakers. Communications between lawmakers and lobbyists would not be exempted.
Idaho Statesman
Some of the animal welfare documents that were abruptly purged from a Department of Agriculture database early this month were restored last week, days after animal rights groups filed a lawsuit to make the records public again. The documents that were restored to the database include inspection reports for research institutions and certain federal labs that work with animals. Similar reports on the treatment of animals at zoos, breeding operations and animal transporters — which represent the vast majority of facilities that the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service oversees — are still unavailable.
Sentinel Source
Editorials/Columns
When it comes to matters of liability or exoneration, freedom or incarceration, even those of life and death, it’s critical that the process moves deliberately. That’s the most promising path to conclusions deserving of confidence and free from lingering doubt. There is a point, however, where the plodding pace of an inquiry is itself a problem. Jamycheal Mitchell, a 24-year-old man from Portsmouth, was arrested in April 2015 on charges of petty theft and trespassing. There are reasons why Mitchell died. They dwell in that “unknown etiology” of the medical examiner’s assessment. And it is why the case continues to command attention and demand answers. That is why Portsmouth Commonwealth’s Attorney Stephanie Morales on May 10 called for a formal investigation by the Virginia State Police to determine if there was any criminal wrongdoing. On Dec. 2, the VSP completed its work and submitted the totality of its findings. Since then, there has been nothing from the commonwealth’s attorney — no decision about whether charges will be filed or whether the report clears those associated with the case. Certainly Morales and her staff want to make sure they act appropriately and that no stone is left unturned. But there’s a cloud hanging over those under suspicion, and the inexplicable death of young man in the state’s custody demands answers. The commonwealth’s attorney’s office needs to complete its process and make public its overdue findings.
Virginian-Pilot
Categories:
