The League Joins with other Groups to Voice Concerns about Transparency
You may have read the League's Facebook notifications or stories in local media about how the League and four other good government groups who are part of ACCESS/RI sent a letter to Governor Raimondo. noting what they saw as a "disturbingly inadequate pattern" regarding requests for governments. Following receipt of the letter the League and the other members of the coalition-- RI ACLU, the RI Press Association, the New England First Amendment Coalition--met with members of the governor's staff.
You can read more about the issue as reported on RIPR (http://ripr.org/post/raimondo-staff-meet-open-government-groups-transparency-concerns).
Here is the text of the letter:
October 6, 2015
BY FAX AND MAIL
The Hon. Gina
Raimondo
Governor
State House Providence, RI 02903
Dear Governor
Raimondo:
In the course of the past month, our organizations have
witnessed a series of troubling responses from your Administration to Access to
Public Records (APRA) requests filed by journalists, public interest organizations, and individuals on extremely important matters of
public concern. We find
deeply alarming this seeming
pattern of disinterest among state
executive agencies in promoting the public’s right to know.
As a result, we are calling upon your
office to issue clear and strong guidance to the executive departments under
your command about the need to promote transparency in responding to APRA
requests. In that regard, we would urge that you consider, among other things,
the issuance of an executive order emphasizing the need for expeditious
responses to APRA requests and calling upon executive agencies to adopt a
strong presumption in favor of disclosure in addressing requests for public
information.
We briefly summarize below three
publicized incidents of questionable APRA responses that have come to our
attention in the past month. From our perspective, none of them occupies a
“shade of gray” in interpreting APRA.
Rather, precisely because they are so clear-cut, they warrant decisive action
on your part in order to address the lackadaisical interest in a strong APRA
that the responses embody.
1. On September 8th, Kathy Gregg from
the Providence Journal reported on an
APRA request she had filed with the Department of Transportation for records
related to your office’s much-discussed proposal to establish truck tolls on
Rhode Island highways. Her story documents a number of shortcomings by DOT:
incomplete responses to her request for records; failing to properly request an
extension of time to fulfill the records request; taking the maximum possible
amount of time – a full 30 business days – to respond to the request without
good cause for doing so; and denying records
without either specifying what
documents had been withheld or
affirming that they contained no reasonably segregable information, as the law
requires.
2. Your decision to hire former Rep.
Donald Lally to an executive office position
has also led to disconcerting responses to APRA requests for information
about it. For instance, the South County Independent newspaper sought copies of “any correspondence and emails related
to his
hiring
and employment.” Your legal counsel responded that no records at all were publicly available, claiming that the
APRA exemptions for documents protected by “attorney-client privilege” and
records that constitute “preliminary draft” or “working papers” left nothing to
disseminate. This blanket denial of records is untenable on its face.
Even assuming certain documents might
fall into these two exemption
categories – e.g., legal research you asked to be conducted on whether the
“revolving door” law applied – a decision
to hire Rep. Lally and a decision to transfer his hiring were
made. There is nothing preliminary (and certainly nothing attorney-client
related) about that. Further, even if some aspects of those documents relating
to the hiring and transfer were exempt, APRA requires the release of all
“reasonably segregable” information, yet this was clearly ignored as well.
Interestingly, Ms. Andreozzi did not
cite APRA’s so-called personnel exemption in denying access to the records,
perhaps since that exemption would have required a balancing of private and
public interests in deciding whether records
should
be
released.
In
any
event,
whatever records might legitimately be exempt, a claim that all documents
related to this hiring are confidential simply cannot withstand scrutiny under
any fair reading of APRA.
3. Finally, recent news reports
describe how the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS) refused
to release to WPRI-TV and the Ocean State Current a copy of an application the
agency filed with the federal government, seeking additional funding for the
state’s Unified Health Infrastructure Project. Instead, EOHHS counsel responded
that the document (along with related records) was exempt as a “preliminary
draft,” claiming that the “proposal” was “still in development as part of the
budget development process.” But the application itself that was filed with the federal
government is clearly
not “in development” or a
“working paper.” It is a final document in any and every meaningful sense of
the word. Under EOHHS’s interpretation of the “preliminary draft” exemption,
one could argue that your annual budget proposal submitted to the Legislature
could be withheld from disclosure until it had been approved by the General
Assembly.
Before
closing, we think it is also worth mentioning an incident described
just yesterday in the Providence
Journal, indicating how your administration denied a request
to release the time sheet records of Department of
BHDDH director Maria Montanaro. Unlike the three other incidents mentioned in
this letter in which the APRA violations are clear, we acknowledge that these
particular records may or may not be
subject to required disclosure under the law.
But there is no question
that your office,
like former Governor
Chafee’s, has the authority to release them if it chose to. When viewed in the
context of the other APRA disputes we have summarized, it is distressing, to
say the least, that your office has back-pedaled from a conclusion made by the
previous Governor that these records were worthy of disclosure.
This pattern of disturbingly inadequate
APRA responses, all made within a short period
of time by executive agencies
on truly critical
matters of public
import, is cause
for great concern. On numerous occasions, you have expressed
the strong need to promote
transparency
and
accountability in government, but these recent incidents call that pledge into
question. We therefore urge you to demonstrate your commitment to transparency by issuing an executive
order that emphasizes your Administration’s commitment to open government. At a minimum, we believe it should be calling
on executive branch agencies to respond to APRA requests promptly and to err on the side of disclosure rather than secrecy in considering requests for records, and providing for the
adoption of additional guidelines on training and responsiveness that will
better promote public accountability.
We would be happy to discuss in more
detail with you possible affirmative efforts that your Administration can
implement to promote APRA compliance. Thank you in advance for your attention
to this request, and we look forward to hearing back from you.
Respectfully,
Linda
Lotridge Levin, President
ACCESS/RI
c/o
282 Doyle Avenue – Providence, RI 02906
Steven
Brown, Executive Director
American
Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island
128
Dorrance Street, Suite 220 – Providence, RI 02903
Paul
Spetrini, President
Rhode
Island Press Association
c/o
Newport Daily News – 101 Malbone Road – Newport, RI 02840
Justin
Silverman, Executive Director
New
England First Amendment Coalition
111
Milk Street – Westborough, MA 01581
Jane
W.Koster, President
League
of Women Voters of Rhode Island
172
Taunton Avenue, Suite 8 – East Providence, RI 02914
