Transparency News, 10/17/2022

Monday
October 17, 2022

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

state & local news stories

Really! You can still sign up for the NFOIC's annual FOI summit. It's all online for the next 3 days and there are dozens of panels.* Bonus: it's only $30!
REGISTER HERE


*doxxing, enforcement, polarization, criminal investigative files, public-records reporting, much more.

A General District Court judge in Richmond ruled on Friday in favor of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, finding that the Youngkin administration had to describe the subject matter of withheld emails. In August, RTD reporter Charlotte Rene Woods submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the governor’s office for emails sent and received by March Bell during that month. The administration produced some emails but withheld what Denise Burch, an executive assistant, termed “approximately a ream of paper” — or about 500 pages — worth of correspondence, citing an exception in FOIA law known as the “working papers” exclusion. It applies to records prepared by or for the office of the governor, including Cabinet secretaries, for their personal or deliberative use. However, in withholding emails sent or received by Bell, the administration failed to describe “with reasonable particularity” the subject matter of the withheld emails as required by FOIA. Judge Mansi Shah ruled that the administration will need to provide that information by Friday.
Richmond Times-Dispatch

In a report required by Norfolk City Council, Hampton Roads Ventures, the for-profit development subsidiary of the city’s housing authority, says that it has met with representatives of several Norfolk projects including a shared kitchen, a grocery store, and a health and wellness center, but has not completed deals to invest in them. HRV also transferred $1.5 million to its parent, the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, in August, by far the largest contribution since it was formed in 2003. But the company has yet to assemble a marketing plan targeting Norfolk projects, nor has it changed the “About Us” page on its website that calls it a rural development entity. A spokesman for the housing authority said Ronald Jackson, the authority’s executive director, was close to announcing an HRV deal with a local nonprofit, but he would not disclose the details until the agreement was signed. Jackson did not respond to a list of questions emailed to him, nor did Delphine Carnes, the lawyer for HRV who is also the authority’s counsel. Representatives of HRV have repeatedly declined interviews and refused records requests under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, saying the subsidiary receives no government funding. Norfolk Mayor Kenneth Alexander has said he thinks HRV should subject itself to the public records law.
Virginia Mercury

In its efforts to hire Mark Taylor as superintendent, the Spotsylvania School Board took the unusual step of engaging officials from the state Department of Education in the process. Leadership at the Virginia Department of Education, including State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jillian Balow, communicated with Spotsylvania School Board members throughout the hiring process. Such involvement is uncommon, according to a recent former state secretary of education, three former Spotsylvania School Board members and the director of the Virginia Association of School Boards. Emails obtained by The Free Lance–Star from the state Department of Education through requests under the Freedom of Information Act show a senior adviser to Balow and Elizabeth Schultz, assistant superintendent of public instruction, were early points of contact for School Board members. That adviser, Jon Russell, is now the Spotsylvania school division’s manager of executive communications. Gina Patterson, executive director of the Virginia School Board Association, said the state Department of Education typically has little involvement in the process beyond granting licensure.
The Free Lance-Star

Working in the newspaper industry, it’s a fact that things change. But it’s less common that the changes can be seen in an instant, like at 12:56 a.m. Saturday, when the Daily News-Record’s freight-train whir of the offset web printing press that stretches at least 40 feet from end to end came to a halt for the last time. The newspaper closed its printing press and ceased in-house printingand inserting operations after printing its final Saturday issue, the Oct. 15 edition. Printing operations have moved to the company’s regional printing plant. The move ends a tradition going back over a century.
Daily News-Record

Disallowing residents from speaking during a special meeting of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors was unfair and a blight on the democratic process, said the president of the Pittsylvania County NAACP. “It was just a horrible thing to do, to deprive people of their fundamental right, the First Amendment,” Anita Royston said during a news conference in front of the historic Pittsylvania County District Courthouse in Chatham on Friday afternoon. The issue arose from a special meeting held Wednesday to give the applicants for its open Banister District seat a chance to provide a presentation to the board. The point of contention centered on what’s known as a hearing of the citizens, something half the board members were against. Supervisor Ron Scearce, along with Chatham-Blairs Supervisor Bob Warren and Staunton River Supervisor Tim Dudley, opposed allowing residents to speak during the special meeting and wanted to hear from applicants seeking the Banister seat instead. The meeting wasn’t able to get underway because members — in a constant 3-3 split vote — couldn’t agree on the agenda.
Danville Register & Bee

stories of national interest

"Many seek to strike a balance between the public’s right to know and the need to keep some information secret in order not to throw fuel on the fire."

When state and local IT systems get breached, there’s a balancing act to be struck. How much can and should the public be told? Some advocates of transparency and accountability say anything that happens in the public realm ought to be public knowledge. On the opposite extreme, some IT leaders worry that anything they disclose can and will be used against them by the bad actors: Better to say little or even nothing about a cyber incident. Some are ready to codify the latter view. Recent legislation passed in Georgia, for example, puts limits on what government has to share about cybersecurity incidents. It provides for “certain information, data and reports related to cybersecurity and cyber attacks to be exempt from public disclosure and inspection.” That’s vague, and possibly ominous: state legislatures telling IT leaders what they can and can’t say about a breach. Pushing in the other direction are trends in the private sector, things like the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022, which requires companies to report significant cyber incidents and offers protections incentivizing them to report. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) likewise encourages information sharing, saying it is “essential to the protection of critical infrastructure and to furthering cybersecurity for the nation.” Between the extremes, there is the vast murky middle ground where state and local IT leaders actually live. Many seek to strike a balance between the public’s right to know and the need to keep some information secret in order not to throw fuel on the fire.
Governing