Despite this unexpected burst of quasi-winter weather, its Sunshine Week in South Carolina. <\/p>\n
Now, folks who believe this nonsense about the press being the enemy of the people may dismiss concerns about the Freedom of Information Act. They might think its just whining by the Fourth Estate. But its not. <\/p>\n
Sunshine Week is about the peoples right to know what the government is up to. Anyone who has ever invoked FOIA to extract information from a police department, state agency or city council knows what a pain that can be. <\/p>\n
Bureaucrats often delay requests for months and then charge unreasonable, unfathomable copying and research fees that are seemingly meant to deter people from access to information that, technically, they already own. <\/p>\n
As a front-page story today notes, when reporters Lauren Sausser and Tony Bartelme asked to see emails regarding an incident at MUSC, they were given a bill for $275,000. <\/p>\n
That is exactly why South Carolina needs more Sunshine not for the tourists, for the transparency. <\/p>\n
The only people who can control this particular sunshine, however, are state lawmakers. And now they're getting push-back from state bureaucrats. <\/p>\n
So they need to know this matters not only to the press, but to voters. <\/p>\n
For more than four years, the General Assembly has tried to pass meaningful FOIA reform. <\/p>\n
The House actually passed it in a previous session, and the Senate was ready to follow suit when those efforts were derailed by the objections of one senator. <\/p>\n
These bills are not a huge sea change from what government is already supposed to provide, which is easy access to public documents and information. All this legislation does is set reasonable copying fees and turn-around times for requests, and establish a dedicated administrative law judge to quickly review disputed requests. <\/p>\n
You know, when state officials don't think they should have to turn over certain documents. <\/p>\n
This is common sense stuff, but over the years there has been some wrangling over the public's right to see autopsy reports, police car dash cams and officers body camera footage. One insidious bill in the hopper right now would even exempt nonprofits and chambers of commerce from the FOIA. <\/p>\n
Sorry, but any group that takes public money must show how it is spent. <\/p>\n
The real problem right now is a fiscal impact statement from the state Revenue and Fiscal Affairs office which suggests it will cost state agencies about $800,000 to comply with the law. Which they are already supposed to be doing. <\/p>\n
A half-dozen state agencies have claimed it would take of an average of $150,000 each to supply the manpower needed to honor FOIA requests in a timely fashion. <\/p>\n
That could cost FOIA reform some support, even though many lawmakers believe those numbers are padded or agencies aren't complying with the law now. <\/p>\n
Either way, it's a flimsy excuse to deny citizens' right to know how their taxes are spent. <\/p>\n
State Rep. Weston Newton, the FOIA reform bill's primary sponsor, believes freedom of information is one of the fundamental duties of government. People have a right to know how their money is spent and what their elected officials are doing. <\/p>\n
He's right. <\/p>\n
Newton believes FOIA reform will pass this year, but state agencies have muddied the water a bit. <\/p>\n
\"The bill we have has been through a multi-year, multi-level vetting and it's a good bill,\" he says. \"I am disappointed that a handful of state agencies have come in at the 11th hour to say it's going to cost taxpayers significantly more to do that which they are already supposed to be doing.\" <\/p>\n
Cynical people might think elected officials, being politicians, would be the ones most opposed to complete transparency in government. Turns out it's the bureaucrats. <\/p>\n
This is probably no conspiracy; state agencies are not likely hiding rampant malfeasance. The sad truth is they probably just don't want to be bothered with pulling the records and providing the information and being forced to get it done on a deadline. <\/p>\n
The problem is their cries of added cost could result in some lawmakers wavering in their support. After all, these folks aren't real keen on spending money. <\/p>\n
But let's keep this in perspective. This isn't just a media issue, it's meant to protect the people and their money. Frankly, regular citizens have the toughest time navigating FOIA red tape. <\/p>\n
And they don't have First Amendment lawyers on speed dial. <\/p>\n
These days a lot of folks are politically active and waste no time calling elected officials to voice their opinion. So maybe it's time they add Freedom of Information Act reform to their weekly calls. <\/p>\n
Let state legislators know this isn't about the press it's about transparency. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Link:<\/p>\n
Hicks column: Tell South Carolina lawmakers you believe in open records, meetings - Charleston Post Courier<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Despite this unexpected burst of quasi-winter weather, its Sunshine Week in South Carolina. Now, folks who believe this nonsense about the press being the enemy of the people may dismiss concerns about the Freedom of Information Act. Continue reading