ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, January 18, 1997 TAG: 9701200082
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-9 EDITION: METRO
SOMEONE should disabuse Virginia legislators of the notion that news reporters just love to sit through long, sometimes tedious meetings of county boards of supervisors or the state's Code Commission. Guess what: The Virginia Freedom of Information Act doesn't exist to accommodate reporters.
The FOI law, enacted in 1968, is on the books because the public employs, and is paying for, the government promulgated by such boards and commissions. The public has a right to know what it's getting for its money.
Alas, the General Assembly mocks that right when, year after year, it fails to strengthen the FOI law - a law that, in too many cases, fails to prevent official bodies from keeping public information and activities under cover.
Closed doors are justified under special cases, such as the early stages of discussing personnel problems or property transactions. But by riddling the law with "exemptions" while refusing to close loopholes or mandate compliance with the law's intent, the legislature has eroded governmental accountability that the act is supposed to help ensure.
Officials across the commonwealth routinely ignore the public's right to know. If you live in Rocky Mount, for example, you've been routinely excluded for years from observing the town council's decision-making.
Recently, House Majority Leader Richard Cranwell of Vinton challenged journalists to cite instances when public officials have flouted the law. OK, here's one he may have forgotten:
In late 1990, the Senate Finance Committee retreated to a Chesterfield County hunting lodge without public notice. There, the committee's staff presented a detailed briefing of the state's revenue situation, and senators discussed proposals for dealing with the budget, including possible tax increases. (Legislators collected travel expenses and were paid for attending.)
When the get-together was challenged under the FOI law, a Richmond Circuit judge said it was "patently obvious'' the meeting ``was conceived, planned and conducted for the purpose of performing the business'' of the public. Yet, because the session had not been gaveled to order, the roll had not been called and no minutes were kept, he ruled it was not an FOI violation.
More recently, the state Supreme Court upheld a 1995 decision by high-school officials in Fairfax County to deny a student newspaper access to student-government election results.
No surprise. The law is so full of loopholes that even flagrant flouting may not be, technically, a violation.
A major review of the FOI law, as proposed by Petersburg Del. Jay DeBoer, is needed. The study should determine how to reduce circumvention of the law's intent. It should also explore revisions required by the evolution of electronic information services.
FOI reform should make public information more easily accessible to its owners. Lawmakers, who commission studies of everything from cabooses to kudzu, should approve the review - or explain their disdain for the citizens' right to know.
LENGTH: Medium: 58 lines KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1997by CNB