Transparency News, 9/25/20

 

Norfolk Public Schools has decided to tell the public when staffers test positive for the coronavirus after all. After initially saying last week the district wouldn’t disclose whether it had cases to protect employees' medical privacy, spokeswoman Barbara Hunter said this week officials changed their minds. For the first two weeks of school, there were no reported cases, she said. Norfolk was the only Hampton Roads school district that would not disclose even citywide data on the number of reported cases. But no others are naming the schools where staff have tested positive, despite citing no legal rationale for withholding the information. The unwillingness to disclose even district-wide case numbers angered some Norfolk parents, prompting one to create a petition criticizing the secrecy and asking for more transparency. “I know that that aggregate data can be disclosed,” parent Michele Gardner said. “The lie really bothered me because then it’s a trust issue ... And you’re asking me to trust you with the most precious people in my life.”
The Virginian-Pilot

Voters already have started to cast ballots to decide whether to give the green light to the Pamunkey Indian Tribe and their billionaire backer to build a casino along downtown Norfolk’s waterfront. And now a committee opposed to the referendum has gone public — a revival of the same group that waged a petition battle to undo the city’s deal with the tribe this time last year. This time, they’re getting a little outside help. But from who, nobody really knows. As initially reported by WAVY-TV, a D.C. public relations firm that’s helping the casino opponents won’t say who’s funding its work. One of the residents working to defeat the casino, Jackie Glass, said she doesn’t know either. But she said it’s irrelevant because the money is helping even the playing field between the grassroots opponents and the casino bid, which is backed by Tennessee billionaire John Yarbrough. Earlier, in a similar vein, the Pamunkey tribe’s own PR firm created what looked like a grassroots pro-casino group, complete with a website that listed supportive citizens — and made no mention of the tribe being behind it.
The Virginian-Pilot

Rappahannock County taxpayers aren’t off the hook by any stretch despite Judge Designate Jeffrey W. Parker awarding attorney David Konick a mere $6,250 of the $132,769.46 in attorney’s fees he claimed he was owed in representing Marian Bragg v. The Board of Supervisors of Rappahannock County. That said, the lawsuit filed by Bragg could have been far more costly to taxpayers. While an exact dollar amount has yet to be calculated by the Rappahannock County government, Treasurer Debra Knick said this week, it is safe to assume the county has already paid $50,000-plus in outside attorneys’ fees to defend itself in the FOIA-related case, which doesn’t include hundreds of hours both the county attorney and deputy county attorney spent in defending the charges.
Rappahannock News

 

 

 

Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan received a national award this week — but it's likely not the kind of honor a big city mayor would clear space for on his desk. Investigative Reporters and Editors, a national journalism organization with more than 6,500 members, awarded Duggan and the city of Detroit on Wednesday with its "Golden Padlock Award," a dubious distinction given each year to the country's most secretive publicly funded agency or individual. Duggan and the city earned the award for concealing and deleting public records tied to Make Your Date, a maternal health organization that partnered with the city to fight infant mortality. A Free Press investigation in 2019 showed how the city directed $358,000 in grant funds to Make Your Date and devoted city staff to raise money for the organization, which is led by a woman who had close ties to Duggan. When the Free Press submitted a public records request for emails tied to Make Your Date, the city's initial response left out a key email, one that ultimately showed that Duggan ordered a top city official to fundraise for Make Your Date. At first, the city claimed the file was corrupted. It was only after the Free Press pressed for an explanation that the city produced the revelatory email.
Detroit Free Press

The King County (Washington) Prosecuting Attorney’s Office has agreed to pay The Seattle Times $70,000 and changed a policy for public records requests after a judge ruled police files from a sexual assault investigation were illegally withheld from the newspaper. The legal settlement involved a request by The Times earlier this year for a 521-page summary of the Clyde Hill Police Department’s 2018 investigation into an alleged gang rape by Eastside Catholic high school football players. The file had previously been released, with the names of the alleged victim, suspects and witnesses redacted. But the prosecutor’s office gave notice to the players’ families, giving them the opportunity to intervene in court earlier this year and block disclosure. The Times sued the prosecutor’s office, alleging the delays violated the state public records law. During the suit, the prosecutor’s office disclosed that, after releasing the police files to TV station KING 5 in 2018, it made a deal to give players’ attorneys so-called third party notice of any additional requests.
The Seattle Times
 

What would seem one of the easier questions put before the legislature was in the form of a bill by state Sen. David Suetterlein, R-Roanoke County, which would require that votes of the Virginia Parole Board be made public. According to the Virginia Coalition for Open Government, there appear to be just two Virginia boards that are exempt from making their votes public— the parole board and the Virginia Crime Commission, whose stated purpose is to “study, report, and make recommendations on all areas of public safety and protection.” The difference is that the crime commission does, at least, meet in public so people can see who votes which way. By contrast, the votes of the five-member parole board (whose members currently include Roanoke Mayor Sherman Lea) are not made public — only the final decision. Thus we don’t know if the votes are 5-0, 4-1, 3-2 or what. Suetterlein’s bill would have changed that. It passed the state Senate 29-10 (all 10 opposed were Democrats). This week, when it got to the House of Delegates, a House committee effectively killed it (for now) by referring it to further study. What study is required? Should the votes of Virginia boards and commissions that act in our name be made public or should they not be? In every other instance, we have decided yes. Why is the parole board so different? 
The Roanoke Times