newsobserver.com projects - House votes in favor of records bill - Comments

Re: House votes in favor of records bill

cicero01 — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:37:11 -0400

The NC House has created "Big Brother" --Yes, an entity that will always let us know what we need to know.

NC HOUSE CREATES "NEW OPEN GOVERNMENT UNIT" WHO IF CHALLENGED LEGAL FEES SHALL NEVER BE AWARDED TO THE PLAINTIFF.

---- What a "chilling effect" on North Carolina's public policy of JUDICIAL REVIEW.

---- Bill elevates AG advisory opinions to equal status with law.

---- Discourages judicial review and creates a "pay to play game" in challenged cases.

Please know that Attorney General decisions [opinions] and crafted letters on transparency are merely advisory. Preexisting judicial orders and appellate decisions are however rule of law--and can be invoked as such. This bill elevates the AG advisory opinions to equal status with law.

Please know that judicial review is public policy. Yet, this bill discourages judicial review--for governments need never reimburse in most cases legal expenses even if judicial review is sought and won.

So, what was the N.C. Press Association thinking?

Re: House votes in favor of records bill

Isaac136 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:42:22 -0400

The reason the bill is necessary in the first place is that so many officials do not act with integrity. If Easley's administration hasn't been a stellar example of that fact then what would it take to demonstrate that more rather then fewer tools are needed to combat entrenched corruption?

The AG's office sees its role as supporting a state agency preference regardless of the legality or integrity of its position. There's not a soul in state government with any experience near the top of the food chain who isn't well aware of that, and there's not a soul who wants his or her job to remain secure who is going to step forward and say so.

Entrenched corruption in state government is the natural result of any one party's holding power for an extended length of time. If the Democrats aren't going to follow Rep. Deborah Ross' lead in cleaning it up, they're handing the GOP some mighty good arguments for unseating them.

House votes in favor of records bill

bniolet — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:31:14 -0400

The House gave preliminary approval Thursday to a bill that would mandate government agencies who lose public records lawsuits have to pay up.

The bill creates a new division of the Attorney General's office that would advise some 1,500 governmental units on public records issues. The unit could also mediate disputes before they end up in court.

The bill also states that if a governmental agency, city, town, county, school system or other public entity loses a lawsuit over public records, a judge must require the agency to pay the plaintiff's attorney fees.

State law already allows judges to impose fees, but it is rarely used in public records cases.

"The public records are the people's records," said Rep. Deborah Ross, a Raleigh Democrat and co-sponsor of the bill. "They're not our records. They're not the politicians' records."

The bill was unlike nearly ever other contentious bill that has been discussed on the House floor this year in that the usual partisan lines were gone. On Thursday, what determined whether a House member was in favor or against the bill seemed to be whether he or she was once a locally-elected official.

Rep. Lucy Allen, a Louisburg Democrat and former mayor of that city, offered an amendment that would allow a government or agency to avoid paying legal fees if it relied on a written opinion from its staff or contract attorneys to deny releasing the records.

More after the jump.