From the Idaho Statesman

Advocates say the bill’s requirements are easy for officials to interpret.
BY KATHLEEN KRELLER – kkreller@idahostatesman.com
Published: 04/02/09

Idaho’s open meetings law just got a little tougher under Senate Bill 1142, which passed the House on a 59-10 vote on Wednesday and now goes to Gov. Butch Otter.

Under the bill, boards, councils and commissions could face fines of $50 if they make a simple mistake and close a meeting or alter an agenda without proper action. They could correct a mistake afterward to avoid the fine.

An elected official now must “knowingly” violate the Open Meeting Law to face civil penalties – a high legal hurdle. The bill eliminates the requirement that the first offense to be a “knowing” violation but lowers the fine, currently $150. It raises the fine for subsequent offenses to $500 from $300 for officials shown to be “knowing” violators.

A 2007 Idaho Supreme Court ruling that the Ada County Commission had not “knowingly” violated open meeting rules when they gathered behind closed doors to discuss a proposed housing project spurred open government groups to change the law.

“What we are doing is adding to protections,” said Rep. Lynn Luker, R-Boise.

Advocates also say the bill puts its requirements in clear, laymen’s terms for small boards and commissions that can’t afford attorneys to interpret the law.

Opponents, like Rep. Judy Boyle, R-Midvale, argued that a provision in the bill allows public commissions and boards to make last minute changes to agendas, which doesn’t serve the public.

“I think the press needs to be wherever they want to be when they want to be, except in our caucus,” said Rep. Lenore Hardy Barrett, R-Challis. “If they want to follow me home after the meeting and check on the color of my pajamas, I’m fine with that. … Our concern is our county commissioners post the agenda on the courthouse door.”

Kathleen Kreller; 377-6418

From the Idaho Statesman

From the Idaho Statesman

Eight years after opening party caucuses, Democrats meet privately on fuel taxes.
BY DAN POPKEY – dpopkey@idahostatesman.com
Published: 04/01/09

A Statesman reporter was denied entry to the brief closed caucus held Tuesday, but Caucus Chairman Bill Killen later apologized and said the party’s open-door policy has not changed.

Killen, D-Boise, said he was unaware of the reporter’s request to observe the caucus. “I’m sorry you got locked out,” Killen told the reporter. “For what it’s worth, the vote was to stick to the caucus position.”

Democrats asked for a five-minute recess just before the House was to vote on an amendment to increase the fuel tax by 4 cents a gallon, up from 2 cents in the original bill. The 18 Democrats entered a room just off the floor and closed the door.

Upon a knock by the reporter, Rep. Phylis King, D-Boise, opened the door and was asked, “Is this caucus open?”

“No,” replied King, shutting the door. The meeting broke up within minutes and Democrats returned to the floor to reaffirm their opposition to fuel-tax increases.

Just three of 18 Democrats supported the 4-cent increase, which was widely defeated. Democrats oppose GOP Gov. Butch Otter’s fuel-tax increase proposals because of the recession and their objection to raising transportation taxes while schools are suffering budget cuts.

In 2001, as majority Republicans were under fire for closed caucus meetings, Democrats opened their doors. Typically, party caucuses are announced on the floor and held during more extended recesses.

Dan Popkey: 377-6438

From the Idaho Statesman

From the Twin Falls Times-News

Measure would make language ‘cleaner’ while strengthening safeguards against violations

By Jared S. Hopkins
Times-News writer

BOISE – Idaho’s open-meeting law would be revised for the first time in 17 years, under a measure backed by Idaho Secretary of State Ben Ysursa, Attorney General Lawrence Wasden and media groups.

Supporters said the bill will make the 35-year-old law clearer for public officials to understand while strengthening the safeguards against violations. It passed the Senate unanimously last week and is expected to receive a hearing soon in the House State Affairs Committee.

“The public’s business should be conducted in public,” Secretary of State Ben Ysursa told lawmakers in a committee hearing.

Due to the size of Idaho and its scattered population, lawyers for the hundreds of governmental agencies vary in their familiarity with the law, said Deputy Attorney General Bill van Tagen. For example, the clarity needed in small sewer districts or recreational districts might differ from issues in bigger areas like counties or even on the state level like the Public Utilities Commission.

“We try to make things as clear as we can,” said van Tagen. “You need to come up with something to provide balance for all of them.”

Among the provisions:

• Fines up to $50 to governmental bodies who violate the law, regardless of intent.

• A civil penalty of as much as $500 against public bodies who knowingly violate the law.

• As much as $500 civil penalty for those who violate the law twice within 12 months.

• Instances where public officials go into executive sessions – closed door meetings – must be cited in meeting minutes. It would also require a governmental agency to list the specific reason for entering the executive session – currently agencies may list only a general description.

The measure has generally been well-received in the Legislature.

“All the Sunshine laws I’m positive on,” said Sen. Chuck Coiner, R-Twin Falls. “We needed the clarification.”

Rep. Bert Stevenson, R-Rupert, the only Magic Valley lawmaker who sits on the State Affairs Committee, said he didn’t know enough about the bill yet to comment on it.

Alleged violations of the law and efforts to better follow it have made headlines in recent months in the Magic Valley.

The city of Twin Falls is currently streaming all council and advisory committee meetings through the city’s Web site, as well as increasing the number of meetings broadcast on the city’s Cable One public-access Channel 17. The City Council has ruled against requests from the golf and the airport advisory commissions, which wanted to keep meeting away from city offices.

Meanwhile the Idaho Attorney General’s Office recently investigated complaints that the Burley City Council had violated the open meeting law by awarding a sewer line bid without proper notice. The AG determined that no violation had occurred. In an unrelated move, Burley Mayor Jon Anderson removed City Councilman Jay Lenkersdorfer from committee assignments, saying he had violated the law by holding committee meetings without proper notice.

Betsy Russell, president of the Idaho Press Club and co-president of the Idahoans for Openness in Government, a statewide nonprofit coalition, said the bill clarifies the law.

Russell filed a complaint last year against the State Board of Education, prompting Wasden to determine the board may have violated the law. However, he said he could not prove the board “knowingly” did so, as required under a Supreme Court interpretation of the law.

“The Idaho Open Meeting law is broken because of a 2007 Idaho Supreme Court decision that made it almost impossible to enforce,” said Russell, who is a newspaper reporter for the Spokesman-Review. “This bill fixes it.”

From the Twin Falls Times-News

From the Associated Press

BOISE, Idaho (AP) – The Idaho Senate has passed a bill to toughen the state’s open meeting laws.

Boise Republican Sen. Kurt McKenzie said Thursday the bill will be easier to understand and will have punishments that can be enforced. The bill, SB 1142, was approved unanimously. It now goes to the House.

A 2007 Idaho Supreme Court decision hampered enforcement of the law, backers said. Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden proposed the reforms after consulting with media groups, local government interests and others.

Under the bill, if boards including city or county commissions simply err and hold an illegal closed meeting they face a fine of $50. Still, they would be allowed to mend mistakes. In more egregious violations where boards flout the limits, however, fines could run to $500.

Among those endorsing the bill are Idahoans for Openness in Government, the Idaho Association of Counties, the Association of Idaho Cities, the League of Women Voters and Idaho Secretary of State Ben Ysursa.

From the Associated Press

From the Idaho Press-Tribune

Wednesday, March 18, 2009 – 11:00 am

This is Sunshine Week across America. It began in 2002 as an effort by the Florida Society of Newspaper Editors to draw attention to state legislators’ attempts to create exemptions to Florida’s public records law.

It’s really great to see local government providing so much easily accessible light on records these days. Nampa city and now Canyon County are opening up their financial records to the Idaho Freedom Foundation and the public. Read the details here.

I also want to thank Canyon County’s commissioners for taping the meetings now. We editorialized on it earlier this month after new Commissioner Kathy Alder suggested it, and the commissioners instantly made it happen!

The Idaho Legislature can make a huge difference in the Open Meetings Law this session as well. Boise Weekly News Editor Nathaniel Hoffman gives a super report on the proposed changes here.

The revisions, supported by the Idaho Attorney General’s Office as well as the Idaho Press Club — and the Idaho Press-Tribune — have been in the works for three years.

Here’s the bill.

Here’s the statement of purpose: This legislation proposes changes to the states Open Meeting Law. The legislation would amend four sections of the Open Meeting Law. It addresses how notice is given to the public by public agencies that are subject to the Open Meeting Law, as well as how amendments to meeting agendas are to be made. The legislation also covers the subject of minutes pertaining to executive sessions and discusses the manner and method for a governing body of a public agency to go into executive session. The bill provides that an executive session is an exception to the states Open Meeting Law and, as an exception, is to be narrowly construed. Finally, the bill addresses violations to the Open Meeting Law, modifying penalty provisions found in Idaho Code 672347. This legislation provides a provision for governing bodies of public agencies to cure violations of the Open Law by following steps set forth in a new subsection (7) to Idaho Code 672347.

This would be a super — and much needed — enhancement to the current law. It needs to pass — unanimiously.

From the Idaho Press-Tribune

From the Idaho Statesman

By Kevin Richert
Idaho Statesman
03/18/2009

Not all is cloudy on the Sunshine Week front.

Earlier this week, I wrote about Idaho’s lackluster efforts in making public records available online. I researched the issue on behalf of Sunshine Week, a national organization that spotlights the value of public access to government records. Idaho wound up tied for No. 40 in a national ranking of online records access.

Now to a double serving of good news from Monday’s Senate State Affairs Committee meeting. The committee introduced a bill that would require elected officials to file financial disclosure reports, and approved a bill to put some teeth into the open meetings law.

Idaho, a state that prides itself on a citizen’s Legislature, is also one of just three states that doesn’t require lawmakers to disclose who they work for, or where they have business interests. It’s a fundamental disconnect. Senate Majority Leader Bart Davis, R-Idaho Falls, and Senate Minority Leader Kate Kelly, D-Boise, have collaborated on a bill to fix it.

Kelly has been pushing this idea for years, but has run into resistance in the Republican-controlled Legislature. That’s why it’s encouraging to see Davis on board, along with Senate leadership from both parties. With the backing of the Senate’s most influential players, this idea has more momentum than ever.

Why, one of these days these reports might be public record, and easily accessed online. We can only hope.

Attorney General Lawrence Wasden’s office has taken the lead on the open meetings bill.

The most important part of this bill tightens up a gaping loophole in the law, as the state Supreme Court has interpreted it. An elected official now must “knowingly” violate the Open Meeting Law in order to face any civil penalties — a legal hurdle that is all but impossible to prove.

The rewrite revamps the penalties.

A first-time violation, willful or inadvertent, can result in a civil penalty of up to $50. The law now sets the fine at $150.

Repeat offenders — or any officials found to “knowingly” flout the law — can face a $500 civil penalty. The law now calls for a $300 fine for a repeat violation.

This change makes the law more enforceable, especially for first-time offenders who could now plead ignorance of the law. It encourages elected officials to understand their legal obligations to conduct the public’s business in public view. That’s in everyone’s interest.

Granted, media groups have been active on this issue. And, by way of full disclosure, I am vice president of the Idaho Press Club, one of the groups working on this bill. The club supports this rewrite.

But open government serves the citizenry, not just the media. That is the underlying message of Sunshine Week. And it’s why, for anyone who cares about transparent government, Monday was a very promising day in the Senate State Affairs Committee.

From the Idaho Statesman

Editorial from the Idaho Statesman

By Kevin Richert
Idaho Statesman
March 16, 2009

We’re No. 40. When it comes to online access to public records, we could do better.

For Sunshine Week — an annual celebration of the importance of public records — I was handed an intriguing homework assignment. I was told to look for 20 public documents on Idaho¹s Web site, everything from comparable school test scores to a searchable database of state purchases.

I found eight out 20, which puts Idaho in a tie for 40th. Texas headed the list, scoring 20 out of 20. Mississippi came in dead last, with only four documents out of 20.

Here’s the key sentence from the Sunshine Week assignment: “Our goal is to demonstrate not just whether information is posted, but also how easy — or difficult — it is for the average person to find these records on state government sites.”

I tried to follow that instruction to the letter. Rather than calling contacts at the agencies to ask if the information was online, I wanted to see if I could find it readily through a simple search. If I could, I figured any reasonably Internet-savvy person could do likewise.

Some answers were easy. I knew from experience that the Secretary of State’s Office is great about posting up-to-date campaign finance reports — which are easily found on the office’s election page. I also knew Idaho is one of only three states that doesn’t require legislators to file financial disclosure reports, so there was no point trying to find them on the Net.

What I found — behind our low ranking — was a state that could significantly better, without a lot of extra effort.

* The Idaho Transportation Department does a good job of posting links to its construction projects, but doesn’t link to the contracts. The ITD has a Web page for its bridge division, which conducts biennial inspections. The inspection reports, however, are nowhere to be found.

* The state’s district health departments offer timely inspection reports for day-care centers and restaurants. The catch is, you have to remember to go to the districts, rather than going to the Department of Health and Welfare. If you’re looking for hospital and nursing home inspections, good luck. I couldn’t find them.

* The Board of Medicine has a nice search option that allows patients to review a doctor’s license status. A newsletter lists disciplinary actions but, unfortunately, this hasn’t been updated since last spring.

The state ought to do better. And not just to stay ahead of Mississippi. Easy online access to records helps people make better consumer decisions, and provides taxpayers with a better sense of how their government functions.

Editorial from the Idaho Statesman

LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS TREASURE VALLEY
IDAHOANS FOR OPENNESS IN GOVERNMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Kip Winter

Date: March 12, 2009 208/794-7688

Shine Light on Openness in Government

On his first day in office, President Barack Obama directed his Administration to develop
recommendations for an “Open Government Directive” that moves government towards being
“transparent,” “participatory” and “collaborative.”

To bring this message home and look for ways that local and state government can also become more collaborative, the League of Women Voters Treasure Valley and Idahoans for Openness in Government will hold a public meeting on March 20 from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Star City Hall Council Chambers, 10769 West State Street, Star.

The meeting is a nationwide webcast broadcast by OpenTheGovernment.org. It is part of national Sunshine Week March 15-2l. The webcast allows citizens to participate in the crafting of the President’s “Open Government Directive.” Sunshine Week is a national initiative that brings together print, broadcast and online news media, civic groups, libraries, non-profits, schools and others interested in the public’s right to know.

During the webcast, individuals who are intimately involved in formulating the Administration’s policies and agendas will explain the initiative’s goals, receive feedback by phone and email from the audience, and let members of the public know how they can continue to participate in the discussion.

Whether it is to track how federal stimulus dollars are being spent or to attend a local government meeting where land use decisions are being made, “Sunshine Laws” afford us access and create government transparency.

Because of the increasing need for public access to governmental decisions and policies, the members of the League of Women Voters Treasure Valley and the Idahoans for Openness in Government will continue working for the community in monitoring the use of these Laws.

League of Women Voters is a nonpartisan group that studies public issues and works to enact them into law. League never supports a political party or a political candidate.

Idahoans for Openness in Government, or IDOG, is a broad-based, non-profit coalition for open government. Like similar coalitions in more than 40 other states, IDOG’s mission is to promote open government and freedom of information.

Sincerely,

Kip Winter, President, League of Women Voters Treasure Valley

Betsy Russell, President, Idahoans for Openness in Government

From the Twin Falls Times-News

Counties vary in accepting e-mailed public records requests
By Nate Poppino
Times-News writer

In 2006, Idaho legislators caught the state’s public records law up with the Internet, inserting that “a request for a public record – may be conducted by electronic mail.”

But the optional language, while giving public agencies the control they need over requests, has resulted in a patchwork of records policies and at least one county – Jerome – where some departments no longer accept them in digital form.

The changes, said former prosecutor and current deputy prosecutor Mike Seib, were made to solve problems with receiving and responding to some requests. E-mails sent to the part-time county commissioners, for example, were only read two days out of the week. And another official didn’t realize that a request sent to several officials was meant for him.

The new policies for the county clerk and planning and zoning department were tested in court last fall as part of a larger case brought by resident Lee Halper.

Although Halper argued state law required the county to accept his e-mailed request, 5th District Judge G. Richard Bevan stopped short of ruling on the statute as a whole, approving the request only for that specific case.

Deputy Attorney General Bill Von Tagen said Wednesday that public agencies aren’t required to accept requests through their computers. But he always encourages them to develop policies for e-mail requests, helping ensure they get to where they need to be and don’t languish in in-boxes.

“It’s dangerous not to,” he said.

Dan Chadwick, executive director of the Idaho Association of Counties, said there doesn’t seem to be one consistent way counties handle e-mails. But a sampling of several county clerk offices in the Magic Valley revealed that Jerome County’s neighbors more or less accept such requests – most adding that they still prefer paper submissions and one saying he asks e-mailers to fill out a physical form.

State agencies contacted Wednesday also had systems in place. The departments of Agriculture, Correction, Education and Health and Welfare all accept e-mail requests in their varying policies, and many have places on their Web sites to submit such requests.

County attorneys consulted about the issue said the challenge is to preserve open access to information while solving some of the issues e-mails present. Cassia County Prosecutor Al Barrus said he would lean towards replying with a form and said it can be harder to verify an e-mail. Lincoln County Prosecutor E. Scott Paul said he’d err on the side of accepting e-mail requests unless they were sent en masse and maliciously.

“I think the default is, you have to consider it a legit request,” Paul said.

Seib said Jerome County would love to accommodate its residents via e-mail in this day and age. But he said officials feel doing that would require restricting some people from e-mailing.

“You’ve got to treat everyone the same,” he said.

From the Twin Falls Times-News

From the Twin Falls Times-News

‘Scammers’ comment was opinion, not fact

By Nate Poppino
Times-News writer

A slander suit over comments on a proposed nuclear power plant in Elmore County seems to be over, with both sides declaring victory.

Alternate Energy Holdings Inc., based in Eagle, sued the Snake River Alliance for defamation in August, basing its case on an Aug. 11 Boise news broadcast in which SRA Executive Director Andrea Shipley called the company “scammers.”

On Jan. 16, just a few days before both parties were set to appear in court, 4th District Senior District Judge G.D. Carey granted a motion made by the watchdog group to dismiss the case – in which the group argued that Shipley stated her opinion, not a fact, and was protected by the First Amendment. He also told AEHI to cover its opponent’s court costs, though those are so minimal that the group won’t pursue them, said David W. Knotts, the SRA’s attorney.

On Monday, Shipley celebrated the decision as proving the frivolousness of the company’s lawsuit. But AEHI CEO Don Gillispie said the dismissal was prearranged through negotiations with the SRA, and that Shipley calling her statement an opinion amounted to a retraction of that statement.

“We think we achieved what we wanted with the lawsuit,” Gillispie said.

Knotts said Shipley’s statement was always an opinion. Her organization was fully prepared to defend itself should the case have proceeded, she said, and she in no way has retracted her statement.

“We would have proved that we were speaking truth to power, and sometimes truth hurts,” she said.

Shipley has been one of the most vocal critics of AEHI’s proposed Idaho Energy Complex, a 1,600-megawatt plant now aimed for a site near Mountain Home that the company says could be built by 2016. Officials have asked for nearly 1,400 acres of farmland to be rezoned for the plant.

The suit seemed to catch the SRA off-guard at first, and the normally talkative group said little on the matter, noting in late September that it had secured legal counsel.

In a press release issued Monday, Shipley continued to attack AEHI’s project and business methods, arguing that she thinks the company still relies on misleading public statements and doesn’t have what it needs for the project.

AEHI had sought for the group to retract the August statement and keep from making similar ones in the future. The company also sought payment for alleged damages from the statement, an unclear sum partly based on the number of potential investors who saw the story and decided not to invest.

Asked what the decision means for AEHI’s response to any future comments by the watchdog group, company spokesman Martin Johncox left the door open for possible future actions.

“That’s largely up to (the SRA),” he said. “They’re known for over-the-top rhetoric. If they have trouble controlling their mouths, they could find themselves in this same kind of position again.”

From the Twin Falls Times-News