Public “Protection”
Oct 1st, 2007 by JamieB
The headline of a recent editorial in the Washington Observer-Reporter says a lot about why we are trying so hard to change the state’s open records law . . . and why that change is so desperately needed.
An IQ test to see a public record?
The editorial, as Dani reported last week, tells the story of a reporter who asked for a state-funded report on a power plant that is being developed in Robinson Township. Gary Stokum, the executive director of the Washington County Conversation District, refused Scott Beveridge’s request on the grounds that, since the reporter was not a trained geologist, he could not possibly understand the contents of the report. It was only after the intervention of County Commissioner Bracken Burns – who told Stokum that an IQ test is not a prerequisite for looking at a public document – that Beveridge got the report. But even then, the newspaper was charged $219.23, about 10 times what should have been the cost of copying the 40-page report.
Where have we seen this kind of thing before?
Well, remember when the secretary of PennDOT refused to make public information on the condition of the Commonwealth’s bridges? That was less than a couple of months ago – and just a a few days after the fatal collapse of the bridge in Minneapolis.
At the time, PennDOT spokesman Joe Struzzi said that it could be dangerous to make information on Pennsylvania’s bridges public . . . . because ordinary people might not understand the intricacies of the state’s numerical ranking system for bridges.
“There’s a fear that the general public might not understand what those numbers mean,” Struzzi told the newspaper. “It might set off undue concern.”
Let’s see. These people work for us, the citizens and taxpayers of Pennsylvania. They are paid by us. They report to people who are elected by us. But somehow, they are not accountable to us . . . presumably because we just aren’t tuned in enough to be trusted with all the information they are hoarding. They are not really our employees. they are our handlers.
Some folks at PHEAA are still claiming that we don’t really understand how that agency works, and that is why we made such a ridiculous fuss about they way they spent all that money on junkets to expensive out-of-state resorts. Penn State insists we don’t understand why all their highly confidential records – like Joe Paterno’s salary – are state secrets. (Well, with Penn State falling to 3-2 after losing to Illinois on Saturday, let’s just hope that Joe gets paid more than Charlie Weis, whose Notre Dame team fell to 0-5 after its loss to Purdue.)
The list goes on.
Sometimes they turn our requests down outright. Sometimes they spoon feed us a little bit of what we asked for . . . the stuff they think we should see. Sometimes they stand beside us while we read it and watch us try to take notes. Sometimes they charge us exorbitant fees to produce it. All, of course, for our own good.
They do all these things because they know better than we do and they want to protect us from ourselves.
The only thing is, the records belong to us.