Transparency News, 8/15/2022

Monday
August 15, 2022

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

state & local news stories

"City officials didn't have to put forward accusations of a mass shooting plot, but because they did, evidence showing such a plan should have been shared with the public."

A Front Royal Town Council member who recently quit in protest now seeks to withdraw his resignation. Councilman Joseph McFadden resigned at a work session on Monday after three council members and the mayor voted to terminate Town Manager Steven Hicks’ employment agreement 20 months into the administrator’s tenure. On Friday, McFadden sent a letter to the Town Council and the mayor stating that his resignation did not follow proper procedure. McFadden said by phone on Friday that he felt relieved by resigning. Then he started receiving calls and text messages from people, some persistent, urging him to reconsider and find a way to stay on the council. Some council members also asked him to return to the council, he said. In the letter, McFadden admits he “acted rashly” at the meeting where he stood up, told the council he resigned, then walked out of the conference room.
The Northern Virginia Daily

U.S. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, a former Richmond mayor and a city resident, said "the community is owed some answers" about an alleged mass shooting plot that police claimed targeted a July Fourth event at Dogwood Dell. The Richmond Police Department has faced increased scrutiny over its response to the alleged plan since a city prosecutor said there was no evidence pointing to any specific target. After the city's top prosecutor contradicted the police's account, Richmond police chief Gerald Smith told reporters the department was "closing all discussion about the planned Fourth of July mass shooting." On Friday, Sen. Kaine addressed the alleged plot at an event in Richmond. When asked about the questions he had, Kaine said city officials didn't have to put forward accusations of a mass shooting plot at Dogwood Dell but because they did he felt evidence showing such a plan should have been shared with the public.
WRIC

Charlottesville residents will soon be able to express pleasure and displeasure with their police department online or put their comments on a card and contact a supervisor. The Charlottesville’s Police Civilian Oversight Board is launching a new online complaint portal for alleged misconduct by city police employees, which would go directly to the board for investigation. The website would also allow citizens to request board review of police internal affairs investigations, submit recommendations to improve the department’s or the board’s services and submit compliments to police officer. The website will allow residents to track progress of complaints or requests and access to data relating to the number of complaints submitted in previous years, types of complaints and disciplinary outcomes. The board is developing videos explaining how the portal will work and how to use it. The site is accessible at charlottesvilleva.siviltech.com.
The Daily Progress

Is it an effort to merely streamline the process, or a plot to curtail independent voices from reaching the public at Arlington County Board meetings? You make the call. Before leaving on their summer hiatus, County Board members made a small but not necessarily insignificant change to the rules governing the public-comment period that kicks off Saturday board meetings. Previously, an individual could show up at the 8:30 a.m. meeting (either in person or “virtually”) and submit a speaker form prior to the last public-comment speaker wrapping up comments, usually something that occurs about 9 a.m. or slightly later. Under the new rules, sign-ups must occur before 8:15 a.m. to make the cut. “This is completely in keeping with the spirit of our public-comment rules,” County Board Chairman Katie Cristol said during the board’s July meeting, when the switcheroo was approved on a 5-0 vote. Cristol indicated that the change would assist the two staff members designated to process speaker requests both for the public-comment period and for public hearings later in the meeting. But her words seemed to suggest that closing the registration period before speakers started would cut down on those who were inspired (or irritated) by one speaker and wanted to add their own comments.
Sun Gazette
 

stories of national interest

News media and government transparency advocates have asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to reconsider its recent decision that dramatically weakened the state's open records law. The July ruling adopted a new definition of what it means to prevail in a lawsuit to obtain public records from a government office or agency, and therefore be entitled to having legal fees reimbursed by the reluctant agency. The court ruled the requester doesn't become eligible for reimbursed costs unless there's a "judicially sanctioned change in the parties' relationship." Previously, the requester was considered to have prevailed in the lawsuit if the government decided to turn over the records after being sued, but before a judge's ruling.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

 

editorials & columns

"Richmonders should not have to postulate about the plot details."

The push for transparency on the alleged Dogwood Dell plot took another step backward this past week. At a Monday press briefing, Richmond Police Chief Gerald Smith told reporters he no longer would talk about the case. It was another lackluster response by the city’s top cop. Like it or not, Richmond residents’ trust and confidence in government and law enforcement is in the hands of Chief Smith and Mayor Levar Stoney. There’s no shame in admitting some details changed, such as the purported location.If that’s the case with the city’s handling of the alleged July Fourth plot, leaders need to provide clarity sooner rather than later. Richmonders should not have to postulate about the plot details. They should expect that their mayor and police chief can present and explain a matter of public interest, including its location, without hesitation or error.
Richmond Times-Dispatch

Should the government be free to dig into the records, notes, phone logs and emails of journalists or subpoena them into federal court to catch a leaker?  In almost all states, the answer is “no.” Most states, including Virginia, and the District of Columbia have a law to shield journalists from being forced to disclose their sources. The federal government has no such law, despite the broad public benefits of journalistic exposures of wrongdoing and malfeasance at the national level demonstrated time and again with healthy disclosures, from the Pentagon Papers, to Watergate, to the investigations into the January 6, 2021, Capitol assault. Admittedly, it is not easy for law enforcement to engage in an all-out pursuit of a leaker, while keeping hands off the journalists who know the person’s identity and whose telecom accounts in the cloud contain enough digital crumbs to lead back to the source. But this is a balance that must be managed, as the members of the Judiciary Committee recognized.
Rick Boucher and Bob Goodlatte, Cardinal News