Guest editorial: Sunshine week

By Ian Marquand

For the Montana FOI Hotline

Arlene Braun isn’t your stereotypical open government advocate. She’s neither a journalist nor a media lawyer. She’s not a conspiracy theorist or an angry citizen demanding government accountability.

Rather, as President of the Missoula League of Women Voters, she simply believes that knowledge is strength.

“The League’s purpose is to get people to participate in their government. They need to be able to vote and they need information,” Braun said. “People need accurate information to be able to vote intelligently and participate in what government is doing.”

On March 8, Braun and other League members from across the state gathered at the state Capitol in Helena to celebrate International Women’s Day. In between meetings with legislators, they handed out postcards promoting what has become an annual event among open government advocates ”Sunshine Week.”

This year, Sunshine Week runs from March 11-17 and includes founding father James Madison’s March 16 birthday. For many years, news media organizations and other open government advocates have chosen Madison’s birthday as a time to take stock of what generally is known as our “Freedom of Information.” In March of 2002, Florida newspapers launched “Sunshine Sunday” in response to various assaults on that state’s open government laws.

That initial effort caught on with national organizations and now is a week-long observance. Among other things, it’s a time to remind Americans about the laws that allow us to keep watch on government at all levels; to attend meetings, offer comments and criticisms, watch the legal system at work, inspect documents and records and, in the words of the First Amendment, “petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

What will 2007 bring? Here are some things to watch:

Thirteen months ago the Montana Supreme Court, in Fleenor v. Darby School District, ruled that people must be directly impacted by a government decision in order to challenge its validity. That decision sets a higher threshold for citizens (or news organizations) who seek to overturn government decisions they believe were made in violation of open government laws.

At present, the court has before it a case that could impact Fleenor. In that case, Helena attorney Mike Meloy represented the Cut Bank Pioneer Press, which sought information about how the local school board dealt with an incident involving students and BB guns. “The court doesn’t have to deal with Fleenor,” Meloy said. “But if they want to clean it up, they’ll do it.”

At the legislature, a bill to fix Fleenor died in the Senate. SB109 by Sen. Rick Liable (R-Victor) would have allowed anyone to challenge a decision made by a public body, as long as the person resided in the area served by the body. The Montana Newspaper Association opposed the residency requirement, since it would have precluded newspapers (among others) from challenging open meetings violations or illegal decisions in an adjacent city or county.

Still alive is SB 177, which would relax the time limit for citizens to challenge government decisions. The bill, by Sen. Carolyn Squires (D-Missoula), would start a 30-day clock from the time that the petitioner (or the public) learns of the decision, instead of from the moment the decision is made. That bill has been sent to the House, along with SB 242 by Sen. Jim Elliott (D-Trout Creek). Elliott’s bill would open corporate income tax records to public inspection, allowing legislators and others to see how much income tax major corporations pay in Montana.

On the House side, representatives have approved HB 132 by Rep. Jon Sesso (D-Butte) to insure that state reports will be available to the public, even if they are not issued in paper form.

Starting next year courts across Montana will have a uniform set of rules for public access to court records. The rules were developed by a committee appointed by the Supreme Court. (Full disclosure-I was a committee member, representing the news media.) The rules should leave no doubt about the public’s right to inspect the vast majority of court records while spelling out clearly what kind of private or personal information should remain out of public view.

In addition, the rules anticipate courts’ ability to place their records on the Internet. When that happens, the rules will treat paper, electronic and virtual records equally. In other words, if new records are available at the courthouse, they also will be available on the Internet.

On the federal level, the OPEN Government Act, hailed as the most significant and positive revision to the Freedom of Information Act in a decade, is progressing nicely through Congress. In addition, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) believes this could be the year that his long-frustrated efforts to open federal courts to photographers and video cameras will bear fruit.

Challenges remain, however, as some members of Congress work to expand the blanket of executive secrecy that has been a hallmark of the Bush administration. Major news media organizations and other open government advocates will continue to oppose those efforts.

Closer to home, citizens need to recognize their legal and Constitutional ability to participate in government decision-making and actively monitor, question and, if need be, challenge government action.

For Arlene Braun and the League, it’s an issue that resonates from coast to coast.

“It doesn’t matter what state you’re in,” Braun said. “It’s very important that information is available and people don’t get hassled trying to get it. And that meetings are open so people can understand how a decision has been arrived at.”

Amen.

(Ian Marquand is chairman of the Montana Freedom of Information Hotlineand is Special Projects Coordinator at KPAX-TV in Missoula.)