Transparency News, 3/23/2022

Wednesday
March 23, 2022

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

state & local news stories

"She said it’s also been concerning that agencies are invoking the exemption on behalf of the governor."

Since Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s inauguration in January, the Mercury has made more than half a dozen Freedom of Information Act requests related to some of his biggest policy decisions, from revised guidance on masking in schools to a report on “divisive concepts” in K-12 education. The governor’s office and multiple state agencies have withheld hundreds of pages of documents in response, citing exemptions to Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act. In February, for example, the Virginia Department of Health refused to disclose 54 emails and attachments — a total of 855 pages, according to FOIA analyst Cristina Keener — that are responsive to the Mercury’s request for communications between the department and the Office of the Governor regarding new school guidelines.  The Youngkin administration’s frequent denials have underscored many of the weaknesses within Virginia’s law. It’s an issue that experts think is unlikely to change. The law is discretionary, meaning that record-holders have a choice on whether to withhold information under the exemption. Over the years, though, it’s been used by governors of both parties to shield documents, often on controversial subjects. The frequent overuse of the exemption is important context, said Megan Rhyne, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government and an occasional Mercury contributor. Still, she said the Youngkin administration’s response to FOIA requests has presented some concerns early into his governorship.  “What has me concerned is the very broad interpretation being given,” Rhyne said. State agencies cited the working papers exemption in response to every one of the Mercury’s requests, withholding hundreds of documents despite language instructing officials to interpret the statute narrowly. She said it’s also been concerning that agencies are invoking the exemption on behalf of the governor.
Virginia Mercury

Prince William County school officials are pressing charges against a Woodbridge man for trying to disrupt two recent School Board meetings. On Feb. 18, two misdemeanor warrants for disorderly conduct and one for trespassing were issued against 29-year old Nathan Archer, according to court records. One charge stems from an attempt to use a bullhorn to disrupt the Sept. 15 School Board meeting that was temporarily cleared for security concerns. The other is for trying to gain entry into the Feb. 2 board meeting via an employee-only back door entrance. In both cases, charges were filed without police involvement through citizen’s complaints made by James Cox III, an investigator with the school division’s security services department.
Inside NoVa

Will a slaying suspect's relation to a Staunton City Council member impact his ability to get a fair trial next week? Daniel D. Mead has been in jail for almost two years since his arrest in the knifing death of a Raphine man at the Springhill Apartments in Staunton. Mead, 35, of Staunton, is charged with first-degree murder in the 2020 killing of 28-year-old Bradley A. Maurice, and a four-day jury trial is scheduled to begin Monday in Staunton Circuit Court. However, there's still a chance the murder trial could be nixed and moved to another jurisdiction because Mead is the son of Staunton Councilwoman Brenda Mead, and there are concerns that community anger toward the councilwoman and the rest of the city's council could impact the selection of a jury, court records show.
News Leader

The Pound Town Council’s recessed Tuesday meeting was two hours of training and less than 10 minutes of paying bills. Town attorney Greg Baker put all five council members through a two-hour closed session for training and legal advice on complying with the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and proper conflict-of-interest procedures. Tuesday’s meeting marked the second of three consecutive weeks of March meetings after council held its first full-quorum meeting on March 15, when Baker offered his pro bono service as town attorney and parliamentarian.
Times News

The firing of Superintendent Mark Miear is sparking speculation, including from some Montgomery County supervisors who questioned a school official about the situation Monday night. MCPS Assistant Superintendent of Operations Tommy Kranz, who attended the meeting to address questions related to the schools, responded to Blevins’ comments, saying he’s not authorized to speak on the matter at the moment. “I think there’s a lot of misinformation out there … There is misinformation that’s sitting out there,” Kranz said. The top district official said he’ll be glad to share information when it’s appropriate, but would need to wait on approval from the school board before doing that. Kranz said in response he’ll notify the school board chairwoman about the matter raised by supervisors. Both MCPS staff and school board members declined to divulge the reasons behind Miear’s termination after the elected body made the decision last week. The unanimous vote was taken following a closed session Thursday.
The Roanoke Times

Four days before her lawsuit against the Spotsylvania County School Board will be heard in court, Makaila Keyes, 19, said she was feeling “pretty anxious and nervous” but also “very excited to see where things go.” Keyes’s lawsuit alleges that School Board Chair Kirk Twigg, Vice Chair April Gillespie and members Lisa Phelps and Rabih Abuismail violated the Virginia Freedom of Information Act multiple times during a board meeting Jan. 10. The lawsuit is expected to be heard in Spotsylvania General District Court at 10 a.m. Friday, and win or lose, it is the first of multiple legal actions Keyes said she intends to bring against the School Board. Her goal is not to be punitive, but to “bring back trust” between the Spotsylvania community and the School Board.
The Free Lance-Star
 

editorials & columns

I submitted questions to the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council concerning FOIA open meetings requirements applicable to local government sessions discussing contracts with unions. I received a very prompt and thorough reply. The following is the response of Alan Gernhart, Esq., Executive Director. My general understanding is that such negotiations would normally be carried out by representatives rather than by the public bodies themselves, and therefore the open meeting rules generally would not come into play until the representative brings a proposal to the public body for its approval. (In other words, the public body’s representative meeting with the union representative normally would not be a “meeting” subject to FOIA since the public body would not be directly involved at that stage.) (more)
James C. Sherlock, Bacons Rebellion