passopenrecords.org

• If you think the dispute over whether Penn State should be covered under the state’s new open-records law (it is not under the current one) is only about Joe Paterno’s salary, read on:

Open records and Old Main

Need I say that a stronger state open records law which finally covers Penn State might – just might – improve the county’s relationship with Old Main.

In particular, it should keep disputes out of court.

Penn State should have to share leases, not keep them from the county, in an open fashion. Of course now the university can keep them under wraps, sparking this latest lawsuit.

We’re talking about leases that cover Medlar Field, for example. Allow me to remind Penn State officials, when they say nothing has changed since 2005 and wonder what the county is messing with, that Medlar Field is new and should be subject to fair taxation.

Sorry, but that should be the reality – and the lease should be out in the open. Instead we have court battles over protected information.

Let’s hope the Legislature, as it moves toward a stronger open records law in Pennsylvania, keeps its eyes on this taxation battle here in Centre County.

• Once again, Pennsylvania ranks at the bottom of the class in open-records accessibility and transparent government. We are one of only four states that do not allow the public to follow roll-call votes on line. It is time for the Keystone state to step into the modern world, both technologically (the process does not seem too difficult) and politically (transparency in government is an idea whose time has come . . . in fact, it came long ago).

These are just some of the reasons that Pennsylvania Newspape Association is sponsoring its open-records challenge. Contrary to the comment of Walt Tilley, this is not a game. It is part of a strong – and bi-partisan effort – in the legislature, as well as among the media and the general public, for fundamental reform . . . and that reform begins with a new official attitude and a “flipped presumption” about open records.

[New Hampshire, Massachusetts and New Jersey] are among the 46 [states] nationwide that offer legislators’ individual voting records online. Lacking a national standard, states employ varied approaches in presenting voting records to Web users.

Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Mississippi and New Mexico do not offer roll-call votes online.

Of the 46 states’ Web sites reviewed, New Hampshire deserves notice for the pro-public manner in which open records are exhibited. A trip to the Granite State’s home page followed by a link to a legislator’s site gets you started.

In other words, two clicks and you’re in.

“We get good comments from people,” said Dave Nadeau, assistant manager and senior software engineer for New Hampshire’s general court information systems. “People seem to think it’s friendly.”

A change in attitude allowed voting records to be offered on the Web in 1999.

“There was some opposition to it for quite a while as far as being allowed to show the votes on the ‘Net,” Nadeau said. “[Legislators] were a little bit protective … in the past.”

• Open records law: Accountability at last (from the Erie Times-News) . . . yet one more reason why we need to challenge the current system of making records available.

Even if you never go to City Hall for a copy of the general fund budget, open records are important to you. And even if you never go to a school district office to see a copy of the payroll records to find out how much a certain school principal is making, open records are important to you.

Open records create clear accountability for the public officials who work for you.
In Harrisburg, the bipartisan reform commission created by House Speaker Dennis O’Brien held a public hearing to review a bill from Rep. Tim Mahoney, D-Fayette. This bill is the key to the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association’s effort to toughen the state’s Sunshine Act on behalf of residents.

This bill would shift the burden from the public to state and local government agencies to explain why public records and public documents should remain secret.

So if you want to go to City Hall or another government office to see a public document that actually belongs to you, no bureaucrat will be able to say, “Why do you want to see this record?”

In the recent state-budget compromise, legislative leaders declined to reveal how $360 million in the legislators’ “walking-around money” slush fund would be used in the legislators’ home districts.

Excuse us, please. Whose money is this? This is not the Legislature’s money. It’s your money.

This change in law would make lawmakers more accountable to you.