Opinion: Thumbing noses at Right to Know
OPINION
[Washington] Observer-Reporter
Pennsylvania may have a new Right to Know Law, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that many bureaucrats and elected officials have no intention of following it.
Two examples have surfaced locally.
North Franklin Township was sued in federal court by its former police chief, Mark Kavakich, who claimed he was denied due-process rights to a hearing after being disciplined in 2005 for reasons never made public. A settlement was reached out of court, and Kavakich received money from the township's insurance carrier. How much? That's what we and township taxpayers would like to know. But the board of supervisors and its solicitor won't say. It's a secret.
After the Observer-Reporter appealed to the state's Office of Open Records, North Franklin was ordered to release the details of the settlement, but solicitor Gary Sweat says he still will not do so without a court order, claiming that the settlement's confidentiality clause prohibits it and opens the township to another suit.
But Melissa Melewsky, an attorney for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, said "Commonwealth Court has made it abundantly clear that confidentiality clauses are not enforceable in settlement agreements with public agencies."
The township's appeal to County Court bought it another 30 days of secrecy. We have to wonder: How much could that settlement be, and how high will the township's insurance premiums rise as a result? We may never know.
And then there is the case of Duke Lake. It was once the centerpiece of Ryerson Station State Park in western Greene County until it was drained because of damage to the dam. The state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources hired consultants to determine the cause of the damage. Based on the consultants' reports, the state Department of Environmental Protection filed a $58 million lawsuit against Consol Energy Inc., claiming mining at its Bailey Mine was responsible.
Even though the consultants' reports were paid for with our tax dollars, as are the salaries of the people who work at the DCNR and DEP, the agencies are using more taxpayer money to hire lawyers to keep the consultants' reports secret and out of the hands of those taxpayers.
The DEP and DCNR have now twice denied access to the reports. The Center for Coalfield Justice, Rep. Bill DeWeese and the Observer-Reporter are appealing this latest denial. The state agencies' contention is that they are exempt from disclosing the reports because they are part of internal "predecisional deliberations" of the agencies and are related to a "noncriminal investigation."
This is hogwash.
Consol denies that its mining activity caused damage to the dam, but the DEP has learned enough from the reports to not only think otherwise but also to go to court to prove it. What could be so revealing or damaging in those reports? We have to wonder if there is something else in there that might possibly be embarrassing to the state agencies. Who knows?
Meanwhile, your tax dollars, so badly needed for things like bridge repair and protecting the quality of water and the environment, are being spent on lawyers who fight to keep information that you own away from you.
Will this ever change? Who knows?
[Washington] Observer-Reporter
Pennsylvania may have a new Right to Know Law, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that many bureaucrats and elected officials have no intention of following it.
Two examples have surfaced locally.
North Franklin Township was sued in federal court by its former police chief, Mark Kavakich, who claimed he was denied due-process rights to a hearing after being disciplined in 2005 for reasons never made public. A settlement was reached out of court, and Kavakich received money from the township's insurance carrier. How much? That's what we and township taxpayers would like to know. But the board of supervisors and its solicitor won't say. It's a secret.
After the Observer-Reporter appealed to the state's Office of Open Records, North Franklin was ordered to release the details of the settlement, but solicitor Gary Sweat says he still will not do so without a court order, claiming that the settlement's confidentiality clause prohibits it and opens the township to another suit.
But Melissa Melewsky, an attorney for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, said "Commonwealth Court has made it abundantly clear that confidentiality clauses are not enforceable in settlement agreements with public agencies."
The township's appeal to County Court bought it another 30 days of secrecy. We have to wonder: How much could that settlement be, and how high will the township's insurance premiums rise as a result? We may never know.
And then there is the case of Duke Lake. It was once the centerpiece of Ryerson Station State Park in western Greene County until it was drained because of damage to the dam. The state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources hired consultants to determine the cause of the damage. Based on the consultants' reports, the state Department of Environmental Protection filed a $58 million lawsuit against Consol Energy Inc., claiming mining at its Bailey Mine was responsible.
Even though the consultants' reports were paid for with our tax dollars, as are the salaries of the people who work at the DCNR and DEP, the agencies are using more taxpayer money to hire lawyers to keep the consultants' reports secret and out of the hands of those taxpayers.
The DEP and DCNR have now twice denied access to the reports. The Center for Coalfield Justice, Rep. Bill DeWeese and the Observer-Reporter are appealing this latest denial. The state agencies' contention is that they are exempt from disclosing the reports because they are part of internal "predecisional deliberations" of the agencies and are related to a "noncriminal investigation."
This is hogwash.
Consol denies that its mining activity caused damage to the dam, but the DEP has learned enough from the reports to not only think otherwise but also to go to court to prove it. What could be so revealing or damaging in those reports? We have to wonder if there is something else in there that might possibly be embarrassing to the state agencies. Who knows?
Meanwhile, your tax dollars, so badly needed for things like bridge repair and protecting the quality of water and the environment, are being spent on lawyers who fight to keep information that you own away from you.
Will this ever change? Who knows?
