OUR OPINION: An update on public records law reforms

It’s been over a month since The Patriot Ledger and all of GateHouse Media New England stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the editorial boards of The Boston Globe and Boston Herald in calling on state leaders to strengthen Massachusetts’ public records law.

There has been some traction since the media’s March 14 coordinated effort. The Legislature has referred four bills filed by Rep. Peter Kocot, Sen. Jason Lewis and Sen. Jamie Eldridge that would partially address issues with the law to the State Administration and Regulatory Oversight Committee. We hope it helps that Kocot is chair of that committee. Together, those bills would:

Update public records to conform to 21st-century standards and be available in electronic form;

Require agencies that lose public records challenges in court to pay all attorney fees to challengers – as is the law in 46 other states;

Require each agency to appoint a staff person as the administrator of public records to handle all requests;

Do away with outrageous copying and administrative public records charges, such as when the MBTA sought to charge us $646 after our March request for data on Red Line trips delayed or canceled over the last three years.

While passage of each bill would advance the public records law – and we support all four measures – even cumulatively, they don’t do nearly enough. What’s not been addressed is the public records that still aren’t made public.

For instance, the Legislature still recuses itself from the law. That means that while your tax dollars fund your representatives to work on your behalf, you’re denied access to any documents members and their staff generate unless they choose to share them.

Just this week, the State House News Service reported on budget shenanigans in the House of Representatives where members were quite literally making backroom deals in a lounge, hidden from the public and press, instead of publicly debating the merits of how to spend public dollars on the House floor.

Then there’s the issue of Secretary of State William Galvin’s recent rulings that have had the effect of giving Massachusetts police the discretion to keep arrests secret, and keep mug shots from public view. Additionally, the Massachusetts Department of Correction may withhold the names of everyone it keeps behind bars. As we stated in our March 14 editorial, that level of discretion should not exist.

Galvin’s misguided rulings created a regulatory obstacle course no one interested in governmental transparency can win.

In his response to the Ledger, Globe and Herald’s coordinated effort,Galvin said he would draft a ballot question to address the law’s shortcomings. His spokesman Brian McNiff said he didn’t know if Galvin had yet drafted the ballot measure, but he did say he would check and return our call. He has not yet responded.

The only statewide public officials who’ve said they’re committed to comprehensively reforming the public records law are Senate President Stanley Rosenberg and Attorney General Maura Healey. We call on Speaker of the House Robert DeLeo and Gov. Charlie Baker to commit themselves to a transparent government as well. More important, voters must stand up and demand the same.

We urge all to work together to reform the Massachusetts public records law – and not in some backroom.

Here's one opinion. What's yours? Click here to write a letter to the editor or leave a comment on the story. Read more columns, editorials and letters