There They Go Again
A few days ago I wondered why certain controversies in state government were reported without seeking or printing any comment from the Governor's office. The example I used came from Washington Post and Richmond Times-Dispatch articles on the current flap over management in the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.
Now the RT-D is at it again.
Today their front page is again about Game and Inland Fisheries, but this time with a Freedom of Information Act focus. A couple waged a long battle with the agency for information and along the way picked up indications of questionable expenditures and activities, including the now infamous safari to Zimbabwe.
Once again, no comment from the Governor's office and no indication that the Governor's office was even aware of the long-running battle, including lawsuits, involving citizens and an executive agency.
Am I crazy to think that the Governor's views on this might be relevant? Why doesn't anyone ask?
One person I hope to hear from on the FOIA angle is our own Becky Dale.
posted by Will Vehrs @ 12:45 PM
5 comments
links to this post
5 Comments:
Political spin on future Warner campaign bumper stickers: "Sportsmen for Warner" who safari in Zimbabwe.
Better yet, "Sycophants for Warner" ...
Good catch, Will. The more we in the blogosphere jump on lazy reporting, the more they'll do their jobs.
Blue Dog:
Thank you, finally someone brings up guns. Isn't the gun issue enough to kill Kaine by itself?
Here's the FOI Council opinion on one of the disputed charges on the records he sought:
http://dls.state.va.us/groups/foiacouncil/ops/04/AO_04_04.htm
What's significant in the December court case is the judge's determination that in charging for copies public bodies may not charge per page and then also tack on other labor charges. (I understand he didn't write an analysis in his court order, just denied DGIF's claim, so his ruling has limited value as a court decision.) It looks like DGIF was charging 50 cents a page. It's supposed to be actual cost of copies. Does it cost anyone 50 cents to make a copy? I did a cost analysis once on paper and toner and service and staff time at $15/hr and it worked out to more like 2 cents. Agencies charging a per page cost should have substantiation for the price they charge. And if it costs them 50 cents per copy, maybe we should inquire into what kind of gold-leafed paper they're using.
In Mr. Albright's case he wasn't necessarily asking for copies, sometimes he asked just to inspect. There should be no cost to inspect records.
This is straying a bit from the original post, but I think Becky makes an excellent point. State and local officials have no justification for charging so much for copies. I'm convinced that they do it to deter people from filing FOI requests. I can understand that they would want to deter frivolous requests, but there must be other ways to do that.
Becky, you should contact Tom Silvestri, the new publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, and suggest that the T-D take on this issue as part of its new open-government initiative.
Times Dispatch is a tremendous supporter for open government. They challenge questionable closed meetings, they take public bodies to court, they support other newspapers that are fighting for open government in court. Craig Merritt, their lawyer, is superb, always on his toes, and really knows the ins and out of FOIA.
Several years ago I suggested to FOI Council that they take a position on costs of copies, issue some guidelines that public bodies could use to help them determine actual cost. I even had a draft they could use. Nothing was done.
I don't know if cost of copies is really an issue for newspapers. It is for individual citizens. One thing people can do is take their own copier to the agency, if they have a small portable one, and make their own copies.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home