Palm Beach Post

A new year, a new fight for public's right to know

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Floridians shouldn't have to worry whether lawmakers will defend the state constitution's requirement that public records and meetings be kept open to the public. Yet Florida's open-government tradition is most threatened during legislative sessions. There are slightly more than 1,000 exemptions to the state's exemplary government-in-the-sunshine rules, and legislators proposed dozens more even before the 2006 session started last week.

Today, as we have since 2002, newspapers in Florida observe Sunshine Sunday. It is a collective effort to remind readers that Florida has long been the national leader in this area and must remain so. This year, Senate Bill 2366 and its House companion, HB 1563, illustrate how the unintended consequences of technology and the challenge of protecting privacy have widened the fight for the public's access to the public's records.

The legislation, which has support from the Florida Association of Court Clerks and Comptrollers, would require, for example, that people who file court documents identify data that lawmakers have ruled should be exempted. Social Security numbers and certain financial data are obvious. But it is at best unrealistic to put the onus on citizens, rather than the clerks who are the custodians of the records and gateway to the system, to keep such data from being misused.

It is not the clerks' fault that the Legislature last year set an unrealistic January 2007 deadline for redacting all such data from records made public. It also is not their fault that state policy has moved from making records available online to — when information became available on the Internet that should have been redacted — the current moratorium that frustrates the clerks.

But there's also the clerks' poor timing. The Supreme Court is winding down two years of effort to establish guidelines for electronic-age access to court and other public records. Rather than await that guidance, the clerks seem to be dumping responsibility on the public through a Legislature-assisted end run around whatever the courts might do. There are disagreements on the degree to which redaction software is accurate and affordable, but the clerks should seek that technology and the staff they need, and an extension of the deadline.

Along with another record number of proposed exemptions, the public also can expect another record number of shell bills. Too often, with little or no discussion, such a blank-slate "act relating to" education or transportation becomes end-of-session law. Legislators also have grown too fond of passing bills out of committees without debating them, even when their staff analysis points out problems. "It's like you're being rude to vote against a bad bill," said Barbara Petersen, president of the Florida First Amendment Foundation.

Heading the list of "subterfuge" aimed at keeping the public in the dark, says Curt Kiser, a former state senator who lobbies for the Florida Press Association, are the so-called "strike-through" amendments, 11th-hour changes that produce virtually new bills with no opportunity for the public to respond. It's how, Mr. Kiser says, "the Scripps bill was loaded with public records exemptions.

In Gov. Bush's State of the State message last week, he didn't stress the need for open government. Ms. Petersen's organization is hearing more and more complaints from citizens about Tallahassee's assault on open government. Lawmakers should hear them too.

Reproduced courtesy of the Palm Beach Post.
Back to top | Return to fsne.org