From the Idaho Statesman

Hours of court testimony that took place behind closed doors a year ago are now open to the public.

The documents describe, among other things, emails in which local hospital executives talk about a “monopoly model.”

A group of news organizations, led by the Idaho Statesman, sued last year to get access to court proceedings and exhibits from the trial, which is now before a federal appeals court.

The trial pitted St. Luke’s Health System against its main competitor — Saint Alphonsus Health System — and the federal and state governments, who accused St. Luke’s of violating antitrust laws when it bought Nampa’s Saltzer Medical Group, creating a near-monopoly over primary care in Nampa.

U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled against St. Luke’s and ordered it to divest Saltzer. His ruling is now before a federal appeals court.

THE ‘M’ WORD

Among other things, the documents show lawyers questioning St. Luke’s executives Randall Billings and Geoffrey Swanson about emails they exchanged in 2011.

From the Swanson deposition:

Q: Further down, “No. 3. Scenario Planning,” reads, “A monopoly model.” What is that in reference to?
A: I don’t know.
Q: And below that, romanette number 4, “FTC risk”? Do you have an understanding of what that means?
A: I’m not sure if that has enough context for me to understand what that might mean or what we were talking about at that particular point in time.

Billings in his deposition tells lawyers he does not remember the email or know of any conversations about a “monopoly” at St. Luke’s.

During the trial, lawyers vaguely referenced an “M word” document while the courtroom was open to the public.

MORE BECOMES PUBLIC

Reporters and the public, including hospital employees, were ushered out of the courtroom for long segments of the trial and weren’t allowed to see or hear much of the evidence.

District Judge B. Lynn Winmill said he wanted to protect trade secrets and signed off on the closed-door testimony and sealed documents. He later heard arguments from the news organizations, then agreed to review each piece of the trial that had been kept from the public.

He ordered everyone involved in the lawsuit to release documents months ago. The release has been delayed as businesses asked Winmill to reconsider small parts of his order.

The Idaho Attorney General’s Office filed the documents into the federal court record this week, after the news organizations pushed once more for access.

“We take openness and transparency in government and the courts seriously, and we’re pleased to help make available for public consumption the transcripts and testimony from this important case,” said Todd Dvorak, spokesman for Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden.

From the Idaho Statesman

From the Coeur d’Alene Press

Editorial from The Spokesman-Review

Idaho typically elects conservative officeholders with skeptical views of government and then allows them to lower the blinds on public information.

One would think voters would want the government closest to them to be the most open, but that’s not how it works in the Gem State.

Last spring, Gov. Butch Otter named an ombudsman for public records so more transparency and accountability would be brought into the process. After four months on the job, Cally Younger has some ideas for improvement, but she will need the Legislature’s help with statutory changes. It would help if the public pushed for reforms, too.

The Idaho Statesman published a package of articles last Sunday in which Younger discusses what she’s learned and what actions might be needed.

For starters, her office needs a broader mandate and an enforcement mechanism. She has jurisdiction over state agencies only, which puts school boards, law enforcement agencies, city councils, county commissions and other local entities out of reach. Plus, enforcement of the state’s public records law is weak. Neither the attorney general’s office nor the ombudsman can compel compliance. It is solely up to citizens to make sure agencies are following the law, and that means hiring legal counsel and taking the matter to court – a step many people can’t afford.

Other states offer less onerous avenues of dispute resolution. Utah has an admirable setup: a public records commission made up of people from the public and private sectors. It settles disagreements and can enforce its findings.

Although imperfectly realized, a voter-approved initiative in Washington public records law states the goal nicely: “The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created.”

But keeping tabs on Idaho agencies can be a chore because of the welter of exemptions and inconsistent policies. The state tells local governments what records they must retain and for how long, but the law doesn’t do the same for state agencies. For instance, the governor’s office lets each employee decide how long to keep emails, while the Department of Correction has a blanket six-month rule. So a request that involves both agencies is up against different rules.

To say the least, this isn’t customer-friendly. It certainly violates the spirit of open government.

Younger says she is surveying agencies to pinpoint irregularities so she can formulate reforms to take to the Legislature. Otter deserves credit for creating a position that embraces the perspective of record requesters, but the state has a long way to go.

Lawmakers can show they embrace open government by giving the ombudsman leverage over all public institutions – not just the state-level ones – and a way to compel compliance. This will give the office the stature it needs to push for other needed changes.

Conservative lawmakers say government can’t be trusted. Let’s see if they help raise the blinds.

Editorial from The Spokesman-Review

Editorial from the Idaho Statesman

In Idaho and the Treasure Valley there is no shortage of public information officers, public affairs officers, communications directors and specialists.

There are more combinations of these words – and we didn’t even mention the platoons of lawyers who pore over information requests. Dozens and dozens of people throughout the state are paid millions of dollars collectively to broker and serve as information conduits to media and citizens. The proliferation of this class of public employee would lead one to expect the utmost transparency and access to public information, right?

Well, that’s not always the case, as the package of stories published Sunday by the Statesman’s Cynthia Sewell made clear. Though we all welcomed Gov. Butch Otter’s appointment of an ombudsman at the state level earlier this year – and we can note progress amid disappointments – there is room for improvement in providing access to the public and the media when it comes to getting records and information which, with few exceptions, citizens have a right to obtain on demand.

Though Idaho has a public records law, Otter’s ombudsman, Cally Younger, does not have jurisdiction or sway over all levels of government in the state.

Too often the default for the media and the public to obtain information has to pass through a tunnel of litigation or face a gantlet of gates and variable processes and costs to obtain records. That doesn’t seem to square with the transparency that all of these Idahoans running for office in November seem to embrace.

Rather than dwell on what’s wrong with the system, one set of rules and hoops should apply to all state, county, local and school district information requests – with an independent ombudsman’s office providing oversight.

How do we get there? By focusing on best practices used in certain corners of Idaho state government, and by adopting a structure similar to Utah, which follows the Government Records Access and Management Act.

The Idaho Legislature would have to give authority over all levels of government to its state ombudsman’s office. But that burden could be lessened if more Idaho agencies adopted practices already being used at places like the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality and the State Controller’s Office.

DEQ’s streamlined policies make accessing records easy. The Controller’s Office offers transparent.idaho.gov for anyone interested in information on such things as the state workforce, expenditures, the budget and other financial reports.

Other things that need fixing include uniform pricing for attaining information and adopting consistent procedures for record retention. Some agencies hold on to supporting records, such as emails, longer than others.

All new transparency initiatives must respect privacy issues. Idaho can do that while empowering an ombudsman to establish organizational norms and responsibility.

Editorial from the Idaho Statesman

From the Idaho Statesman

Four months as Idaho’s public records ombudsman has taught Cally Younger that more work needs to be done to clarify and strengthen Idaho’s public records process.

Most of her time is spent answering questions by phone – she’s received just two written complaints – and trying to figure out what needs to happen to the state’s public records law to make it work better. She’s surveying state agencies and meeting with stakeholders in advance of the 2015 Legislature, and recommending potential changes to her boss, Gov. Butch Otter.

She’s found examples of what works really well, such as the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality’s streamlined process. But she’s also found shortcomings, such as vague statutes and a lack of modernization and enforcement.

Citizens are supposed to have unfettered access to the records of public agencies in Idaho, but the reality is that navigating exemption rules, privacy laws, retention guidelines and individual agency policies can make accessing public records an onerous endeavor.

And the law’s only enforcement mechanism is a citizen-initiated lawsuit. If a journalist or other citizen disagrees with the government’s denial of a record, it’s up to that citizen to go to court to enforce the law.

“I think the biggest shortcoming is that litigation is the only remedy for a requester, which in many cases can be cost-prohibitive to pursuing withheld records,” Younger said.

LIMITED AUTHORITY

In April, Otter took a step to improve Idaho’s public records process by creating the ombudsman position, which he called “a kind of relief valve for the process.”

Otter worked with the Newspaper Association of Idaho to create the position. But before Otter announced it, the plan was revised to limit the ombudsman’s powers. Additionally, Younger may not order a state agency to release records. And her oversight does not extend to city or county governments.

Changing the public records laws to give an ombudsman power to review denials by state agencies or other levels of government would require legislative action, Otter’s advisers concluded.

Otter tapped staff attorney Younger to fill the role, which she said has been taking about a fourth of her time. In addition to ensuring that public records policies and practices are consistent, she is surveying state agencies to identify issues and ways that legislation could reduce conflicts and improve transparency.

Younger is compiling concerns and complaints from individuals about agency policies, processes and decisions, and will report that information to the governor annually.

“It is the first step in the right direction,” said Jeremy Pisca, lobbyist for the Newspaper Association of Idaho.

OUTSIDE HER JURISDICTION

The two written complaints Younger has received came from a citizen trying to obtain records from a Boise charter school and a citizen seeking records from the Clearwater County sheriff’s and prosecuting attorney offices.

She told the complainants that those agencies were outside her jurisdiction.

“Your situation highlights the need to examine this process and work towards improving access and transparency to public records,” Younger wrote to one in May.

But Younger said she benefits from learning about the public’s experiences with other agencies.

“It gives me insight into things that may need to be changed legislatively,” she said.

CITIZENS’ UNFUNDED MANDATE

In Idaho, citizens are solely responsible for enforcing the state’s public records laws. If an agency wrongfully denies access to a public record, the Attorney General’s Office does not have the authority to prosecute violations. If a state, county, city or other local government denies access to public records, a citizen’s sole remedy is a lawsuit, which can be a costly and intimidating process. And if the court determines that a request or a refusal to provide public records was frivolously pursued, it can award costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party – another risk a citizen takes.

The deck is stacked in favor of agencies that want to deny or censor records, said Bill Manny, the editor who supervises the Statesman’s government coverage. While a citizen has to hire a lawyer and go to court to get a government agency to comply with the law, the government controlling access to information usually has a lawyer – or a team of lawyers – on staff, at public expense.

“So the newspaper or the citizen has to decide which battle is worth fighting – and paying for,” said Manny, who noted that the Statesman has been denied records as basic as county telephone numbers and contracts for landfill garbage-burning plants.

The newspaper also has been denied draft city ordinances based on lawyer-client privilege, he said. And he said information released on crimes, victims and accidents varies widely from police agency to police agency, depending on department policies.

Manny pointed out that most records conflicts originate at the city and county level, where even an ombudsman with broad state agency authority would have no say or sway.

Younger said she’s aware of the concerns over enforcement and would like to investigate an alternative to litigation, including possible legislation to establish an independent review process.

“That is one of the biggest issues that I am going to look into,” Younger said. “I think it is important.”

KEEPING RECORDS

Record retention is another gray area. State law says which records cities, counties and other local governments must retain and for how long. But there is no umbrella law that dictates state agencies must retain certain records for a specific amount of time, said Idaho State Historical Society Executive Director Janet Gallimore.

Each agency sets its own guidelines, which are not compulsory or enforceable.

For example, the Idaho Department of Correction keeps emails for six months, but the governor’s office lets each employee decide which emails to archive. The attorney general does not have a time-driven policy for keeping general correspondence in that office, but it does for correspondence related to legal work with clients.

SAME LAW, DIFFERENT OUTCOMES

All state, county, city and other local governments operate under the Idaho Public Records Act, but flexibility within the law means policies vary.

“So if a citizen makes requests across several agencies, the prices, the response time and the way in which the records are provided may be different,” Younger said.

“Many citizens making requests get confused about what types of records they can actually obtain and what types of records agencies realistically keep.”

The principle behind the law is that processing requests is part of the public business and already funded by taxpayers, according to the attorney general’s office and its Public Records Law manual.

Agencies may not charge for the first 100 pages of copies or for the first two hours of labor processing a public record request. For copies or labor in excess of these limits, agencies set their own fees – and those vary. The city of Boise and the governor’s office charge 5 cents per copy; Ada County charges 1 cent. Some agencies charge per page even when providing documents via email or disc.

Labor fees also vary. The law says they must be charged at the per-hour pay rate of the lowest-paid employee qualified to process the request.

Some agencies, such as the state controller’s office, charge rarely if at all for public records.

“It is the citizens’ information. It is their money,” said Chief Deputy Controller Dan Goicoechea.

Controller Brandon Woolf noticed that many of the public records requests his office was getting were for state employee salary information. So shortly after taking office in 2012, his office created a website – transparency.idaho.gov – with all state employee salary information.

A TRANSPARENT ENVIRONMENT

Younger, too, wants to modernize the public records process, making it easier to request and receive records electronically. She and Pisca cite the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality process as a possible model for other agencies.

“It is all automated, so if somebody made a record request, it got routed to appropriate agency personnel, and most of them were responded to within three days,” Pisca said. “Because it is all automated, the charges are minimal to nonexistent.”

Younger recently sent a 20-question survey to all state agencies and met with members of the Newspaper Association of Idaho to identify potential problems and any necessary legislative tweaks.

“We are in the preliminary stages of trying to identify what all those problems are and the best way to go about correcting them,” said Pisca.

“Rome wasn’t built in a day,” he cautioned. Any changes would need to be incremental and the process could take years.

“My hat is off to the governor’s office for taking this step,” he said, “because they certainly did not need to do it.”

From the Idaho Statesman

From the Idaho Mountain Express

Judge Robert J. Elgee issued a ruling on Tuesday denying a Cable News Network request for a 15-year-old Blaine County police report involving the Bowe Bergdahl family.

Elgee’s ruling followed a hearing on July 21 in Blaine County 5th District Court wherein counsel for CNN argued that the report was subject to public disclosure and the Blaine County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office argued that release of the document would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

CNN, represented by Boise attorney Deborah Kristensen, claimed the report was releasable under the Idaho Public Records Law because it resulted from a closed police investigation. Blaine County, represented by Tim Graves, chief deputy for the prosecuting attorney’s office, argued that the document was protected from disclosure by Idaho Code 9-335, a statute pertaining to documents exempt from public disclosure and specifically exempting documents that would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

The hearing followed a lawsuit seeking public release of the document that was filed by CNN on June 25 against Blaine County. Earlier in June, in response to a CNN public records request, Blaine County Sheriff Gene Ramsey released three police reports involving the Bergdahls but declined to release a fourth report from an investigation conducted on Nov. 4, 1999.

None of the four investigations resulted in criminal charges being filed against anyone.

In his ruling, Elgee further determined that the document in its entirety is not subject to disclosure because any part of it would reveal the nature of the investigation. CNN had requested through its court filing and arguments that the document be redacted if necessary to exclude non-releasable personal information.

Elgee reviewed the document before making his decision. The document, which was presented as Exhibit A at the hearing, is now included in the case court file but is sealed and not available for public review.

“I was pretty confident that the court would see it our way, and I’m pleased that the court took the time to review and analyze it and agreed with my decision to withhold it,” Ramsey said Tuesday. “This is not something I took lightly, but with the concurrence of legal counsel I decided it was the right thing to do.”

Kristensen referred questions regarding Elgee’s ruling to CNN Communications.

“We won’t be commenting further on the judge’s ruling at this time,” Bridget Leininger, of CNN Communications, wrote in an email to the Idaho Mountain Express. “I hope you understand, as I don’t want it to be interpreted as a stern ‘no comment.’”

Bergdahl, a U.S. Army sergeant from Hailey, has received national and international news media attention since his capture in Afghanistan in 2009. News media attention focusing on Bergdahl and his family has intensified since his release by Taliban forces on May 31.

Bergdahl is currently working at an Army base in Texas, where officials are investigating the incident of his capture.

From the Idaho Mountain Express

From AP/Eye on Boise

Sen. Dean Mortimer, R-Idaho Falls, has been pushing to let lawmakers review reports from the Legislature’s Office of Performance Evaluations in closed meetings and suggest changes before they’re released publicly, the AP reports. The OPE conducts detailed and often controversial investigations into how state agencies operate and points to savings, efficiencies or improvements; its director, Rakesh Mohan, staunchly opposes any such change in the rules because it would alter the office’s  independence and credibility.

“What happens in executive session is not public,” Mohan told the AP. “How easy would it be for me to say no if they want something changed? They are my bosses. I am willing to say no, but does the public know that?”

Mortimer is the co-chairman of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee, which oversees OPE; it’s a bipartisan panel. Rep. Shirley Ringo, D-Moscow, the other co-chair, told AP reporter Kimberlee Kruesi that she doubts its rules will be amended. “We don’t want to do anything that steps on the independence of the reports,” Ringo said. Click below for the full AP report.

Idaho government evaluators cautious about change 
By KIMBERLEE KRUESI, Associated Press

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — Armed with a small staff given the rare authority to critique Idaho’s governmental actions, Rakesh Mohan describes his work in one word: dangerous.

Mohan is the head of Idaho’s Office of Performance Evaluations, a legislative agency approved by state lawmakers 20 years ago. The nonpartisan office is designated to review state agency activities and evaluate government accountability.

It’s an agency that hasn’t always been well-known outside the Statehouse. However, after producing multiple reports that have not only revealed millions of savings in taxpayer dollars but also influenced department budgets, the office’s profile has risen.

Yet as demand for the office’s evaluations increase, so have attempts to sway what information is put together and presented to the public.

“These things happen in a political environment,” Mohan said. “The lawmakers who created this office knew about the danger of this work …. It’s always been there, in very subtle ways.”

Since 2003, the office’s evaluators have produced 93 reports. Of those, 43 have been evaluations of a department or program, while 54 reports have been follow-up reviews on how state officials chose to adopt the evaluators’ recommendations. Those reports have pinpointed nearly $60 million in one-time savings and an additional $9 million of annual savings.

Key reports include the 2013 teachers’ workforce study where the report noted that there was “an undercurrent of despair among teachers.” Shortly after the report’s release, Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter embraced 20 aggressive recommendations to help reshape public schools as well as to attract and retain teachers.

In 2011, analysts found more than $11 million could be saved within five years if the Idaho Transportation Department worked more efficiently. It also found $20 million in one-time savings by restructuring how it bonded for projects; and more than $6 million in annual savings after five years if the rest of report’s recommendations were implemented.

Yet calls for change continue to pop up.

Most recently, Republican Sen. Dean Mortimer of Idaho Falls has voiced an interest in improving how state officials adopt the findings of reports from the Office of Performance Evaluations. But one suggestion included giving the committee private previews of reports before they are released publicly.

Mortimer did not return multiple phone messages left on multiple days by The Associated Press.

Mortimer serves as co-chairman of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee, which is an eight-member panel that determines what evaluations the Office of Performance Evaluation conducts. The committee reviews nearly 20 evaluation requests a year but approves on average three or four.

At the committee’s meetings in February, Mortimer requested that the panel consider changing the rules so that the committee meets in executive session before a report is released. That way, he said, members could decide whether an evaluation needs tweaking before going public. During July’s meeting, Mortimer suggested the committee contemplate meeting more often, as well as expanding its numbers.

“Is there a role this committee could play without getting into the political intricacies, a role OPE and JLOC can take in suggesting legislation?” Mortimer asked during the July 14 meeting. “I don’t know, but I do think it’s worth talking about.”

It’s a subtle change, but one that could damage the office’s independence and credibility, Mohan said in opposition.

The office’s reports are closed off to the public until the committee votes to release them. If findings were first released in executive session, members could ask Mohan to alter the report or delay the release.

“What happens in executive session is not public,” he said. “How easy would it be for me to say no if they want something changed? They are my bosses. I am willing to say no, but does the public know that?”

The last time Mohan’s office had to fight to maintain its independence was in 2007. Back then, committee member and former Republican Sen. John McGee of Caldwell suggested that Joint Legislative Oversight Committee approve the scope of the office’s reports. The office is currently in control the outline of what a report will question and review, Mohan said. Handing that over to the committee could open reports up to political influence as committee members attempt to control or protect certain programs, agencies or individuals.

Maintaining credibility will be critical for Mohan’s office during the next few months as his evaluators prepare to release what he considers two of the most contentious reports to come early 2015.

The first is taking a closer look at the efficiency of Idaho’s school data systems, one of high interest for Mortimer as he sits on the Senate Education Committee and is likely to take over as chairman when the Legislature begins in January.

These data systems are supposed to provide real-time student information that can guide instruction, but the rollout has been uneven.

If evaluators have enough time, the office will also look at the troubled Idaho Education Network broadband project, which received $11.4 million in bailouts from the 2014 Legislature. The study will be done only if analysts have the resources to do it.

Joint Legislative Oversight Committee co-chair and state Rep. Shirley Ringo, D-Moscow, said she doubts the rules will be amended. Instead, she believes that committee members should take a stronger stance on making sure reports are making the biggest impact as possible.

“We don’t want to do anything that steps on the independence of the reports,” Ringo said. “Our business has been to give the agencies and the governor’s office the report and then send them on to the germane committee and hope from that someone adopts the findings. Now it might be that there are some things that don’t get done, and I think we can make that better, really monitor what that follow through, and see if the committee needs to take more responsibility in pushing legislation.”

From AP/Eye on Boise

From the Idaho Mountain Express

Judge Robert J. Elgee will review a 15-year-old police report involving the Bowe Bergdahl family before making a decision if the report should be released to Cable News Network.

Arguments regarding release of the report were made Monday afternoon in Blaine County Fifth District Court by CNN attorney Debora K. Kristensen, of the Boise law firm Givens Pursley, and Tim Graves, chief deputy for the Blaine County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.

Monday’s hearing followed the filing by CNN on June 25 of a lawsuit against Blaine County pertaining to a June 11 CNN formal public records request to the Blaine County Sheriff’s Office for all police reports involving the Bergdahls. In response to the request, Sheriff Gene Ramsey provided CNN with three reports but declined to release a fourth record from 1999, claiming that release would constitute an “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

CNN claims the report is releasable under Idaho Public Records Law, while Blaine County claims that the document is protected by Idaho Code 9-335, a statute pertaining to documents exempt from public disclosure and specifically exempting documents that would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal property.”

Elgee, who had not seen the disputed document prior to Monday, was given the report as Exhibit A at the conclusion of the hearing. Elgee’s review of the report for a determination of its possible release came at the request of Graves.

“The record in question is clearly exempt from disclosure,” Graves told the judge. “I’m satisfied the court will see the reason if it reviews the document.

“We ask that you find that the sheriff was justified in not releasing the document.”

Kristensen argued that a police investigative report, once an investigation is finished, is releasable to the public under Idaho law.

“What we are entitled to is non-active investigative records,” she said. “With respect to public documents, the legislature has set rules as to what is releasable and what is not releasable.”

“We the media, the public, are entitled to know what’s going on with their government,” Kristensen said. “The public has the right to know the basis—what happened.”

Bergdahl, a U.S. Army sergeant from Hailey, has received national and international news media attention since his capture in Afghanistan in 2009. News media attention has intensified since his release by Taliban-affiliated forces on May 31.

Ramsey, who did not attend the Monday hearing, told the Idaho Mountain Express earlier that the report in question involved the Bergdahls in an investigation on Nov. 4, 1999. He said no criminal charges were filed as a result of the investigation.

The three reports Ramsey provided to CNN were redacted, with personal information omitted, and involved investigations concerning the Bergdahls in March 1998, January 2013 and August 2013. None of the investigations led to criminal charges against the Bergdahls or anyone else.

Elgee said during the hearing that the case poses a problem for him in that if he declines to release the report it will be difficult for him to explain why he deemed it not releasable. The judge explained that providing a reason for why the report couldn’t be released might in effect disclose what the investigation concerned.

“I have no idea what this record involves,” Elgee said. “These are the things I worry about: If I decide you don’t get the record, how do I write a decision as to why you don’t get the record? How do I write a decision that says I can’t tell you because I can’t tell you?”

Elgee did not say how long it would take before he renders a decision.

From the Idaho Mountain Express

From the Idaho Statesman

Idaho news groups win access to redacted items from the St. Luke’s antitrust trial.

Almost 900: That’s how many witness statements, internal emails, hospital prices and other documents U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill pored over in the past couple of months, sorting out what should be kept secret from what the law requires him to make public. More than 500: That’s how many items Winmill has now ordered to be unsealed by participants in the St. Luke’s health care lawsuit last year. More than 350: That’s how many records he deemed so sensitive that they’ll never see the light of day. The records, to be disclosed within 30 days of last Thursday’s order, will offer a behind-the-scenes look at physician pay, negotiations between Idaho health insurers and Idaho hospitals, the price of medical care at Treasure Valley and Magic Valley hospitals, and internal discussions about bidding wars between hospitals and a “monopoly model.” Winmill declined to order the disclosure of competitive information such as formulas for pinpointing the best location for a Treasure Valley clinic, specific employment offers and salaries, strategy documents or testimony, and records that could harm a doctor’s reputation or reveal personal or medical information. The testimony and documents come from the closely watched lawsuit over St. Luke’s Health System’s purchase of Saltzer Medical Group in Nampa – a buyout that St. Luke’s competitors and state and federal antitrust-enforcement agencies said was illegal. Winmill presided over the trial last year. He concluded that St. Luke’s did break antitrust laws and must undo the deal. St. Luke’s is appealing. But during the trial, Winmill allowed everyone involved in the litigation – plaintiffs Saint Alphonsus Health System and Treasure Valley Hospital, as well as third-party witnesses such as Blue Cross of Idaho – to limit certain documents or testimony to “attorneys’ eyes only,” meaning they weren’t open to the public. Several Idaho news organizations intervened, suing for access to the private courtroom testimony and documents. They included the Idaho Statesman, The Associated Press, the Idaho Press Club, the Idaho Press-Tribune in Nampa, the Times-News in Twin Falls, the Lewiston Tribune and the Moscow-Pullman Daily News. “In large part, the court cannot find compelling reasons to justify maintaining the sealed status for most of the courtroom testimony now under seal,” the judge wrote. Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, who was among those suing St. Luke’s, said his office is reviewing the 70-page order. “But it appears that quite a bit more information will be made available to the public because of this decision,” he said. “We intend to work with the parties to put the ruling into effect.” Winmill said about 120 items may be redacted. In a few cases, just names will be removed. “We think they will probably show what we’ve known all along about charges and other things,” said Treasure Valley Hospital CEO Nick Genna. “We’re comfortable with it and will welcome more information out there for patients and for patient choices on health care. We’re good with all that.” Blue Cross of Idaho was not a plaintiff but was “a very active participant in the trial” and gave information that “was crucial to the court’s decision and to the public’s understanding of the case,” so more of its information will be disclosed, the judge said. “We fully support his decision,” said Blue Cross of Idaho spokesman Josh Jordan. “We’re still reviewing to know exactly what the implication is to Blue Cross of Idaho. … We’re all in favor with providing information to the public. What we don’t want is for competitors to have access to information that would give unfair advantage, because we don’t have that information about them.” St. Luke’s Health System said it is reviewing the order piece by piece. Saint Alphonsus declined to comment. The Lewiston-based lawyer who represented the news organizations said Winmill did “a conscientious job” in reviewing the records. “This is all that we wanted,” said Brown. “We don’t expect all documents to be open to the public’s view, but we wanted this type of analysis.” From the Idaho Statesman