Herald-Standard (Uniontown), April 8

State Senate should slow down on change

Currently in Pennsylvania public agencies - including county and local governments, and school districts - are required to advertise "in a newspaper of general circulation" their upcoming meetings, proposed ordinances and contracts being put out for bid. These traditionally run in the "legal notices" section of established newspapers, a well-known repository for such information.

But a a bill afoot in the state Senate would dilute public access to such information, by enabling public agencies to place legal notices in "community papers," which can be loosely translated as the pennysavers or shoppers that you can pick up at the grocery store or which come in the mail.

This may save public agencies some money, while simultaneously depriving real newspapers of an advertising revenue stream, but senators should ask the same question as you: Which medium best ensures that citizens have a good, reliable and steady source of information regarding what their government is up to?

If your school board schedules a special meeting to hire a new superintendent, would you rather check the newspaper's legal advertising section every day to find that out, or would you rather have the school district tell you it was in last week's pennysaver that came in the mail?

If the county commissioners are looking to award a contract for gasoline for the county fleet, are you more comfortable with that bid notice (and its related specifications) being in the daily newspaper, or in the shopper available for free at the local drug store?

What about the zoning hearing on the proposed stone quarry or windmill in your neighborhood? Would you rather take comfort in knowing a standard section of the daily newspaper will keep you informed of that event, so you could know to attend? Or are you better served by having that vital information available somewhere in a publication you may not even know to check?

Senate Bill 428, introduced by Sen. Robert Wonderling, R-Montgomery, would authorize the change. It passed the Senate Appropriations Committee 23-0 on March 18, meaning almost half the state Senate already has voted in support of the measure.

The Pennsylvania Newspaper Association is opposed to the bill, for the same reasons as us: It makes tracking government activity an even more dicey proposition. Given that we still have some levels of government that, by design or ignorance, sometimes fail to advertise meetings in the newspaper as required, making it easier to mask their activity is a step in the wrong direction.

The state Senate should think long and hard before bringing the Wonderling bill up for a full vote. At stake is much more than letting local government save some bucks.

[BACK TO HEADLINES & DEADLINES HOME PAGE]