Transparency News 12/18/19

 

VCOG LOGO CMYK small 3

Wednesday
December 18, 2019

spacer.gif

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

divider.gif
 

state & local news stories

quote_1.jpg

"When there’s a quid pro quo for some of these gifts and grants, I think the public has a right to know."

Two Democratic state delegates in Virginia say they are working on legislation that would pry open the fundraising activities of entities like the George Mason University Foundation. They were responding to a Virginia Supreme Court decision last week upholding a ruling that shields the foundation from transparency rules. Revelations that major donors, including the Charles Koch Foundation, had undue influence over academic affairs sparked the lawsuit. Del. David Bulova of Fairfax said he has drafted two proposals that would apply transparency rules, including the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, or VFOIA, to non-profit foundations affiliated with state and public institutions of higher education. A second Democrat, Del. Marcus Simon of Falls Church, said he would be drafting legislation “this session or the next, but more likely this session.” Del. Simon said he would be cautious in his draft bill to keep an option for donors to remain anonymous while still shedding light on how their gifts could influence academic life. “We don’t want to create a scheme where it’s impossible to solicit donations,” Simon said. “It may be appropriate to keep the names and identities of the donor a secret … but when there’s a quid pro quo for some of these gifts and grants, I think the public has a right to know.”
WAMU

Attorneys representing the Warren County Board of Supervisors are seeking for a petition calling for the supervisors’ removal from office to be dismissed from court. The petition argues that the supervisors – Tony Carter, Archie Fox, Tom Sayre, Dan Murray and Linda Glavis – should be removed from office due to their lacking oversight of the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority and its former Executive Director Jennifer McDonald. McDonald and four others have been criminally indicted stemming from alleged misappropriation of the EDA’s funds. The EDA has also filed a civil lawsuit alleging $21.3 million worth of thievery and questionable deals. Jim Cornwell, the supervisors’ attorney, said the petition supports the request for dismissal. The petition, he noted, outlines the actions of McDonald, a person he said the supervisors had no control over as she was an employee of the EDA board. He said the supervisors cannot be removed for neglecting a duty they did not have and the petition was filed as the result of a “misconception by the public.”
The Northern Virginia Daily

The superintendent of Riverside Regional Jail remains on the job after the facility’s governing board took no public action against her following two closed sessions of more than four hours to discuss “employee matters” and an investigative report of her management practices. During a special meeting in November, and again at a regularly scheduled meeting this month, the Riverside Regional Jail Authority spent nearly the entirety of both gatherings in executive session — which is closed to the public and the press — to discuss the management practices of Col. Carmen DeSadier and her command staff, as well as the findings of a report by an outside law firm. The board has declined to make public the law firm’s investigative report. “The written work and advice of the law firm leading this process is protected by attorney-client privilegein addition to being covered by the personnel records exemption from mandatory FOIA disclosure,” said Jeffrey Gore, an attorney who represents the Riverside Regional Jail Authority.
Richmond Times-Dispatch

divider.gif

stories of national interest

Public oversight of the ski industry has become a casualty of the battle between Vail Resorts and Alterra Mountain Co. As the competition between the ski companies has heated up, the amount of information the U.S. Forest Service will share about ski areas’ use of public lands has diminished. The Forest Service administers permits and oversees ski resorts that use public lands for their operations. For several years, the agency publicly disclosed permit fees paid by individual ski areas, such as the 11 in the White River National Forest, which includes Pitkin, Eagle and Summit counties. But the Forest Service unceremoniously reversed its policy on release of the permit fees paid by individual resorts after Vail Resorts objected in December 2017, according to information The Aspen Times obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. Now, the Forest Service will only share aggregated permit fee information for the ski areas in the White River National Forest. No individual permit fees are being shared on a forest, state, region or national level. Chris Jarnot, executive vice president of the mountain division for Vail Resorts, claimed disclosing the permit fee its four Colorado ski areas paid to the federal government would compromise its competitive position.
The Aspen Times

There’s no question — the U.S. election system is vulnerable. In fact, it’s even more vulnerable than originally reported following the 2016 election. Government executives at all levels know, and they’re working on the problem, focusing on cybersecurity, inter-agency communication, paper trails and  audits.  And the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) is working another angle: In mid-November, it launched  #TrustedInfo2020, an education campaign that aims to fight election misinformation by encouraging citizens to “look to their state and local election officials as the trusted sources for election information,” according to the press release.
Governing
 

 

quote_2.jpg"Vail Resorts claimed disclosing the permit fee its four Colorado ski areas paid to the federal government would compromise its competitive position."

divider.gif
 

editorials & columns

quote_3.jpg"When we talk about transparency, we’re not talking about politics; we are talking about governing."

It has to be said that access to public information is not a political issue, that it is neither left-leaning nor right-leaning. I call it good-government-leaning. When we talk about transparency, we’re not talking about politics; we are talking about governing. People from across the political spectrum agree, government must be open, transparent and responsive. And there are reasons why, in a democracy, we have to assume the responsibility of knowing what our lawmakers are up to. The concept is that in a free society, it is imperative to have an informed citizenry. Those of us who see great value in keeping this grand experiment of enlightened self-government going for the next 250 years need to impress upon our fellow citizens the importance of knowing what government, all government, is doing.
Juli Bunting, The Seattle Times

divider.gif
Categories: