Reports from the Region
Mar 28th, 2008 by JamieB
… We want to know what our politicians are doing and, of equal import, why they are doing it. That’s why journalists and community activists alike remain ever vigilant on the lookout for attempts to revise state laws to allow more secrecy and for efforts to skirt the existing law. …
Locally, this newspaper’s most recent test of open records laws was a comprehensive look at public employees’ salaries. Our work revealed that many rank-and-file government employees are underpaid and that some at the top reaches of government are earning handsome sums that may or may not be justified.
Without access to public records, these stories could not have been written. But getting the records wasn’t easy. A significant number of local governments ignored the requests or provided partial or incomplete data. Many had to be contacted multiple times and threatened with litigation. Now, imagine that a regular citizen is attempting to gain salary data or any other public record. The obstacles placed in their path, whether in a deliberate effort to thwart the law or through ignorance, would discourage all but the most adamant record-seekers.
Until all politicians wake to the realization that open government is the best way to do business, we’ll be watching closely and shining a light on any transgressions that we uncover. Keep government in the sunshine.
Two New Jersey legislators are looking to boost public access to government by overhauling current laws.
“This new law will bring open public meetings into the 21st century and make sure they are uniformly conducted across the state,” said Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen).
The measure would make gatherings of public officials through e-mail, instant messaging or text messaging a “meeting” subject to public records requests.
It would require that government meetings be audio recorded and the records kept for seven years and made available to the public. It would also require that governing bodies post meeting notices on their Web site if one exists.
Penalties for violations of the law would increase ten-fold, from $100 for the first offense to $1,000, and from $500 for the second offense to $5,000. An appointed member of a public body could also be removed for two or more violations of the public meetings law under the measure.
A second bill would cap the cost for copies for most government documents requested under the Open Public Records Act at 10 cents for a letter-size copy and 15 cents for a legal-size copy.
Assemblyman Joseph Cryan (D-Union), the bill sponsor, said the problem of excessive fees came to his attention when a couple were charged $1 a page for copies at a county office to get information to prevent foreclosure of their home.
Open government advocates such as Wayne Tarus said while some achievements have been made in the realm of open government, more must be done.
“The war is far from over,” Tarus said Tuesday. “Unfortunately we also have our public officials that tend to feed at the public trough. … To them, ignorance is bliss.”
So much for that so-called “transparency” (I hate that stupid word) promised by the much-touted bipartisan government headed by Republican James R. Matthews and Democrat Joseph M. Hoeffel.
My colleague Carl Hessler last week came across a grievance hearing held on behalf of a county employee axed last June for, among other reasons, alleged sexual harassment.
County officials, miffed that Hessler not only found the hearing but stayed to cover it, later told him he would have to get the final ruling from someone else because they are prohibited from speaking about “personnel” matters.
Taxpayers have a right to know that all is not cream and sugar with the county, particularly when it could cost them extra tax dollars later in legal fees.
Rather than being forthright, the county is choosing to hide its dirty linen behind that old secret personnel door.
Guess the only things that are transparent are their empty campaign promises.