|
|
It’s been more than three years since the legal battle between a local dentist and the city began, and it appears to be far from over. Last week, the state’s highest court agreed to weigh in on the latest argument in the case: whether the city can refuse to provide details on how it spent $340,000 in legal costs while fighting Dr. Allan Bergano in court. Bergano filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out those details after he won a case against the city last year. A Virginia Beach dentist sued the city over a relocation battle. This week, he won. “They’re saying, ‘We don’t have to tell you or the citizens exactly what we’re spending your money on,’ even when they’re using that money to fight a taxpayer,” said Brian Kunze, an attorney for Bergano. The city claimed the information was protected by attorney-client privilege, and Virginia Beach Circuit Judge Thomas Padrick agreed when asked to rule on the matter, Kunze said. Bergano appealed the judge’s ruling to the Virginia Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case. The entire seven-member court will rule on the matter, Kunze said. It will mark the first time that the court will consider how attorney-client privilege applies in a Freedom of Information Act case, he said.
The Virginian-Pilot
Several practices by state agencies make it difficult to independently review prison inmate deaths in Virginia. First, it’s the Virginia Department of Corrections itself — not an outside agency such as the Virginia State Police — that investigates prison deaths. Second, though the State Medical Examiner’s Office performs autopsies, its findings are based at least in part on what the DOC says took place. Moreover, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act — instead of ensuring transparency into such investigations — shields the death reports from the public. Prior to a new law that took effect last year, not even families had the right to review suicide death reports done by law enforcement agencies.
Daily Press
The Culpeper County School Board on Monday put to rest the issue of public prayer before its meetings and expressed support of its current moment of silence, preferring, as several members said, education over litigation. Nate Clancy (Catalpa District) made the motion to include a prayer or invocation prior to the board’s regular meetings, seconded by Marshall Keene, representing Stevensburg. Clancy and Keene supported the proposal, which fell 5-2. “I don’t think it’s a bad thing,” Clancy said, likening the board to other legislative bodies that open with prayer. “Seeking wisdom is good. We’re not educators, we’re not in the classroom every day.” Betsy Smith, representing the Cedar Mountain District, said she’d deeply struggled with the decision. “Prayer is the foundation of my life,” Smith, a children’s minister at her church, said. “I don’t think I could survive without it.” But when the time to vote came, Smith adopted a cautious approach. “I don’t think it would be a good use of our allotted dollars to end up in litigation,” she said.
Culpeper Star-Exponent
|
March 16, 2018
“Put the power you already possess as an American citizen to good use and fight for good, open government. Make James Madison proud.”