Opinion: House passes damaging open meetings bill
OPINION
From the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association
The past few weeks have seen an increase in activity at the Capitol that causes concern to PNA.
We were discouraged on March 10, when the full House, reviewing a bill intended to strengthen sanctions dished out (theoretically) for violating the Sunshine Act, voted to insert a ‘safety and security’ exemption for going into executive session, for school boards. The legislation, House Bill 1324, is sponsored by State Government Committee Chair Rep. Babette Josephs. That committee, at PNA’s recommendation, did strike similar language when the bill was moved into Appropriations last spring.
Local government organizations oppose measures to add any significant checks and balance to the act. Given the interest in ‘security’ generally, and the fact that more exemptions would mean more excuses for excluding the public, we think it’s imperative that executive sessions should be recorded for subsequent review by a judge, if any challenges should arise.
Without a real world check on abuse, what’s the point of increasing the fine for “willful violations” of the law? Anyone would be hard pressed to demonstrate that any such fine is warranted.
The House passed House Bill 1324 on March 16, and it has been referred to the Senate State Government Committee. PNA cannot support this bill, the increased fine notwithstanding, and will carry that message in the Senate as well.
Click here to review the legislation, and click here for a summary of much-needed improvements for the Open Meetings Law.
From the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association
The past few weeks have seen an increase in activity at the Capitol that causes concern to PNA.
We were discouraged on March 10, when the full House, reviewing a bill intended to strengthen sanctions dished out (theoretically) for violating the Sunshine Act, voted to insert a ‘safety and security’ exemption for going into executive session, for school boards. The legislation, House Bill 1324, is sponsored by State Government Committee Chair Rep. Babette Josephs. That committee, at PNA’s recommendation, did strike similar language when the bill was moved into Appropriations last spring.
Local government organizations oppose measures to add any significant checks and balance to the act. Given the interest in ‘security’ generally, and the fact that more exemptions would mean more excuses for excluding the public, we think it’s imperative that executive sessions should be recorded for subsequent review by a judge, if any challenges should arise.
Without a real world check on abuse, what’s the point of increasing the fine for “willful violations” of the law? Anyone would be hard pressed to demonstrate that any such fine is warranted.
The House passed House Bill 1324 on March 16, and it has been referred to the Senate State Government Committee. PNA cannot support this bill, the increased fine notwithstanding, and will carry that message in the Senate as well.
Click here to review the legislation, and click here for a summary of much-needed improvements for the Open Meetings Law.