Tribune-Review (Greensburg), Oct. 12

Lawmakers pledge expanded access to records

By Richard Robbins
TRIBUNE-REVIEW

State Senate Democrats vowed Oct. 11 to pass an expanded Right-to-Know Law by the end of the year
in an attempt to win back public confidence in state government after a series of abuses involving backroom deal-making and hidden expense accounts.

Sen. Richard Kasunic, a Fayette County Democrat and chairman of his party's policy committee, said the public is demanding "more accountability and transparency" from state and local governments.

"We think the public has the right to access public records," Kasunic said at a policy committee hearing in Uniontown on open records legislation. "We are very serious about this. It is our intent to make sure we have one of the best open records laws in the land."

Without specifically saying so, what some lawmakers have in mind is allowing the public to draw back the curtain on information that for years has been under wraps in Pennsylvania. These range from the bonuses and salaries paid to legislative aides to the expenses run up by members of state and local authorities and the decisions and actions of state-related universities.

Presumably, anything not specifically exempted would be open to public scrutiny under any new legislation.

Kasunic said an open records bill could be on Gov. Ed Rendell's desk sometime in December. Asked about this prediction after the hearing, Sen. John Wozniak, of Johnstown, shrugged his shoulders.

"I don't know. I'm not in charge. It would be nice."

Sen. James Ferlo, the author of one of two Senate bills aimed at broadening the public's right to know, said, "It's time for us to clean up state government."

Ferlo, a Pittsburgh Democrat, touted his bill, which he said would reverse years of practice in Pennsylvania and make public access to government records a right, not a privilege dispensed by state government bureaucrats or elected officials.

"As it currently stands, the person seeking access must prove that he or she has a right to that access," Ferlo said in prepared remarks to the policy committee. "In most states, however, the burden is on the agency to show that specific information is not public under the law."

"Providing access to public records is an essential function of government agencies and an integral part of the fundamental duties of public officials and employees," Ferlo said.

Ferlo's bill would create an Office of Access to hear appeals from citizens and others denied access to public records. He said the office should be funded to the tune of "$4 (million) to $5 million."

The Ferlo legislation is one of three open records bills before the General Assembly. The chief sponsor of a second Senate bill is Sen. Dominic Pileggi, a Delaware County Republican. Fayette County Democrat Tim Mahoney has introduced legislation in the House.

Ferlo said the Pileggi bill was "fundamentally flawed" because it does not presume the public's right to know.

The Web site of the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association said Pileggi has "pledged to revise" his bill to include language similar to Ferlo's. Pileggi was not immediately available for comment.

Mahoney told the policy committee his bill is aimed at satisfying taxpayers that state government is on the up-and-up. He said, "It's like we're laundering money" in Harrisburg, he said without further explanation.

The committee heard from two outside witnesses, Douglas E. Hill, executive director of the County Commissioners Association, and Teri Hennings, general counsel for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association.

Hill noted that while his group is not opposed to a reversal of the burden of proof issue raised by Ferlo, he said this position was conditioned on a "comprehensive definition of records that are open to access."

He urged lawmakers to be specific both about what is open to the public and what may be redacted or withheld entirely.

"We believe it to be imperative that open records legislation strike a balance between the public's right to know and the individual's right to privacy," Hill said.

Each bill that has been introduced includes a list of exceptions to the general rule that government records should be easily accessed by the public. The exemptions range from individual medical records and Social Security numbers to the telephone numbers of nonelected public employees, drafts of bills, deliberations by the governor and proprietary information submitted by a private business to a government agency.

In her prepared remarks, Henning told the panel "the goal is to create a list of exemptions that is written as clearly as possible to protect certain, necessary categories of records. The question shouldn't be: 'Can we withhold this record?' It should be: 'Is there a reason why we can't or shouldn't provide access?' "

[BACK TO HEADLINES & DEADLINES HOME PAGE]