Legislature's focus on open-records bill
Jan. 26, 2008
By ROBERT SWIFT
Harrisburg Bureau Chief / Times-Shamrock Newspapers
HARRISBURG — State lawmakers are gearing up to put open-records legislation — a major unresolved issue — behind them next week.
Observers say there's a realistic chance the Legislature will approve a measure bringing Pennsylvania's 1957 open records statute into the 21st century by week's end. The bill declares that state, county and municipal government records are considered public unless stated otherwise and puts the burden of proof on a government to show why a record should not be made public.
"There's a realistic potential it can get to the governor's desk," said Deborah Musselman, lobbyist for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, which supports the legislation.
The House and Senate are nearing the endgame in their yearlong maneuvering over the issue. Key lawmakers want a resolution before Harrisburg's attention turns to the state budget. That starts shortly with Gov. Ed Rendell's Feb. 5 budget address. Symbolically, open-records action would be well received at PNA's annual government affairs conference Wednesday and Thursday. Legislative leaders participate in conference panel discussions.
"Open records will be our main priority next week," said Eric Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware. "Hope to get it all the way done and send it to the governor."
The House and Senate passed separate bills in the fall. The Senate will add a compromise amendment and send it to the House.
House action is less certain. The House is scheduled to take up the contentious school property tax relief debate and has added a session on Thursday.
House leaders are discussing a compromise, but it's too early to say whether a vote will happen, said Tom Andrews, spokesman for House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese, D-Greene.
House Speaker Dennis O'Brien, R-Philadelphia, said open-records will get done, but he wouldn't predict when that will happen.
The shape of a compromise involves resolving differences in bill versions over which documents are considered public. The House version takes a more expansive view than the Senate's.
The two chambers need to agree on how 911 call records and transcripts are treated. In a recent letter to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Mr. Pileggi raised concerns about a House provision that would allow agencies to make citizens pay for a legal review to determine if a record is public.
"It is not hard to envision 'legal review' costs that quickly add up to thousands of dollars if an agency doesn't want to release a particular record," he wrote.
© 2008 Times-Tribune — Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.