Published: June 10, 2007 11:45 pm         

Local lawmakers favor reforming open-records law

Area lawmakers say they are in favor of reforming the state’s Right-to-Know law to make it easier for residents to access records and learn how the government spends taxpayers’ money.

Gov. Ed Rendell also is behind the push for wider public access to information.

Currently, proposals in the Senate and House would provide greater access to government records beyond a list of specific exceptions.

Exceptions that would be barred from public view could include police investigative materials, personal medical records and Social Security numbers. The debate is drawing interest from lobbying groups, state and local governments and the media.

Melissa Melewsky, a lawyer with the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, said that under current state law, records are not presumed to be public. Someone seeking information must prove the record exists and that it fits the narrow definition of a public record.

In most other states and the federal government, Melewsky said, the reverse is true.

“They presume records are public unless the government can show that a record is exempt,” she said.

“By reversing the presumption (in Pennsylvania), you give power to the people.”

Still, she added, there always will be legitimate reasons to withhold information, such as when revealing that information would jeopardize a criminal investigation.

Deborah Musselman, director of governmental affairs for the association, said two proposals are before the Senate and one is in the House.

She said that while each bill has its strengths, the bill introduced by Sen. Dominic Pileggi will be stronger after it is amended. His revamped proposal would create the presumption of openness the association is recommending, she said.

Last week, Pileggi, R-Dela-ware, the Senate’s majority leader, threw his support behind a proposal to drastically change the law.

Locally, state representatives Ed Wojnaroski, D-Johnstown; Tom Yewcic, D-Jackson; Bob Bastian, R-Somerset; and Gary Haluska, D-Patton, said they favor opening more records.

“We have a weak open-records law, and we are trying to correct it,” Wojnaroski said.

He said government records belong to the people and that the public is entitled to see the documents unless there is a legitimate reason to withhold them.

Because of that, he added, the language of any new law should include penalties for officials who fail to respond in a timely manner to requests for information.

Wojnaroski and Yewcic said the pay-raise debacle of 2005 triggered the movement to reform the Right-to-Know law.

Yewcic said that fiasco also started a discussion about term limits and prompted lawmakers to make rule changes to stop the practice of presenting legislation or amended legislation for a vote at the last minute. He was in favor of the rule changes and favors term limits.

“The public has the right to know what their government is doing,” he said about the open-records law. “It’s as simple as that.”

Information should be more readily available, he added.

With current technology, Yewcic said, people should be able to get all the information they need from the Internet instead of having to drive to Harrisburg.

Bastian said reforming the open-records law should have happened long ago.

“It’s the age of reform, and this is good reform,” he said.

“You need transparency in any transaction that spends tax dollars.”

He said some exceptions will be fashioned, including personnel matters concerning state employees.

Haluska agreed, saying “Anything that deals with tax dollars is public information, and the people should have the means to see where the money is going.”

He said the same goes for the 14 state-owned universities and the four state-related universities. Taxpayers’ money is being spent there as well, he said.

He believes that personal information such as home telephone numbers and addresses should not be made available to the public.

     

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.