Don’t Let Government Hide

Power corrupts and corrupt officials become skulkers. So do incompetents. To help citizens flush out governmental bad behavior, California has a public records act, an open meetings law and other statutes that are supposed to guarantee access to information at all levels. Even so, public officials repeatedly stonewall efforts to find out what’s going on in government, in part because there is no serious penalty for such malfeasance. Meanwhile, the courts have failed in their role as a check on government abuse by allowing exemptions to these laws and narrowing their scope.

The recent case of former state Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush sounded an ear-piercing alarm that reform is overdue. Reporters and even a state senator filed freedom of information requests to find out how the office was handling certain claims stemming from the Northridge earthquake. Insurance Department officials rebuffed them time and again, willy-nilly marking the relevant documents “confidential.” The scandal did not erupt in public until a year and a half ago, when a department insider leaked information to the Los Angeles Times. Public outcry forced Quackenbush to resign.

Such sneakiness is why California needs a constitutional guarantee of access to governmental information, something that a constitutional amendment proposed by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco) would provide. SCA 7, which voters must approve, is sponsored by the California Newspaper Publishers Assn. and the California First Amendment Coalition.

“The people,” it declares, “have a right to attend, observe and be heard in the meetings of elected and appointed public bodies, and to inspect and copy records made or received in connection with the official business of any public body, agency, officer or employee, or anyone acting on their behalf.” The amendment would not affect existing open meetings and records laws but would give them backbone and allow the Legislature to toughen existing law, while preserving the public’s right to privacy. Public bodies would still be able to hold closed meetings in special circumstances, such as to discuss personnel matters or legal affairs.

Burton’s amendment is beginning its long legislative journey before the Senate Governmental Organization Committee. To become effective, it will need approval by a two-thirds vote in both houses of the Legislature. Cities and counties have expressed concern about SCA 7 and will not support it without amendments, but the Legislature should not let this strong measure be weakened by politicians and bureaucrats looking for ways to keep what they do hidden from public scrutiny.

Lawmakers: Please speed this amendment along, so that voters can decide in the Nov. 5 general election whether they want government people to work in secret or in full public view.