passopenrecords.org

“PassOpenRecords.org asks if letters from Governor Rendell promising state funds to a variety of projects would be considered open records. They are looking for readers to comment on that question….”

First a quick review:

• Here’s what Gov. Ed Rendell said: “I have no problem if these become open records in a new law. . . .No, not at all, you know, it’s expenditure of funds.”

• Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R-Chester) (who is also the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 1), said: “If the current version of Senate Bill 1 becomes law, Gov. Rendell’s letter . . . would be a public record,” adding that both the House and Senate versions presume “that all records of the executive branch and local governments are public and then lists a number of exceptions to that general rule. Because none of the exceptions would cover this letter, it would be a public record.”

•Rep. Josh Shapiro (D-Montgomery), a strong backer of open-records reform, has also said the letters should be part of the public record.

So, not to answer a question (and in this case, my own question) with a question, but . . . if those major players believe the letters should be public records, then why have they been kept secret, often for years, not only from the public, but from the lawmakers in the legislature?

The best answer I can give is that this is the difference between the “old” thinking and the “new” thinking. Before pretty nearly everyone in public life signed on to “flip” the presumption, the party line (of both parties, by the way) was that the government was the ultimate arbiter of what the public got to know. These were presumed to be government records, after all. So, of course, the governor would keep those letters private. They were about pending deals, they were written to potential vendors, so naturally you wouldn’t want to show your hand. Even, it turns out, to other parts of the government.

Now, suddenly, everyone is saying these letters are and ought to be part of the public record.

There does seem to have been a sea change in perception, even by the politicians themselves. That may be the best news to come out of this yearlong process yet.

People really do seem to be thinking differently about public records.

But before we get too giddy, we had better read the fine print in the bill the House and Senate send on to Ed Rendell – hopefully before the end of this month. For as we have seen, and as we will continue to point out, some records that are open under the old law would be closed under the pending version of SB 1.

Go figure.