The Massachusetts Legislature is on the verge of making history with a sweeping overhaul of the state’s weakest-in-the-nation public-records law.
On Thursday, a joint House-Senate committee moved forward with a bill that would grant news outlets and citizens easier access to government documents while penalizing government entities that violate the law.
But over the weekend, the Massachusetts Municipal Association launched an anti-transparency campaign in order to protect the status quo. It sent skittish lawmakers into a dither.
A vote on the reform measure is now on hold.
Profiles in courage this is NOT.
Since 9/11, state and municipal government and related agencies have elevated their contempt for release of public records. It’s gotten to the point that nearly every public-records request is a negotiation, adding unnecessary delays to even the most innocuous document.
Why does government act this way? Because it can. There was never any teeth in the Massachusetts law to punish violators, so many public officials simply ignored democracy.
According to a survey conducted by Muckrock, a Boston news group that helps citizens obtain government documents, Massachusetts ranks 49th among the 50 states in the time it took state agencies to answer public-records requests.
The proposed law would change all that. Requester(s) denied public information would be able to sue for relief in court. If found to be wrongfully denied the records, the requester would receive lawyers’ fees from the municipal or state agency violating the law.
The MMA opposes this key element of the legislation. If approved, it would make the MMA powerless to cite fraudulent excuses, i.e., exemptions, to disclosing records and open the floodgates to deliver competency training for public officials.
But the whining doesn’t stop there. The proposed legislation would place a cap on the ridiculous fees agencies can now charge for records – amounts that often intimidate requesters from following through on their search.
We applaud the serious work done by state Rep. Peter V. Kocot to finally correct an imbalance that dates back to 1973 when the public-records law was enacted. Since then, the list of exemptions has grown longer, adding obstruction after obstruction to public access.
“The most important part of this bills deals with the fact that existing law allows some officials to thumb their nose the law. This bill changes that,” said Kocot.
Kocot has researched the issue, talked to all parties, and produced a reasonable bill. Don’t let the MMA diminish it with an 11th-hour ambush.
Call your state legislators today at the Statehouse and demand what is rightfully yours: A public-records law that puts Massachusetts citizens first – not next to last.
