Ridge proposes revisions to state open records policies

Early last month, and before he said he would leave office, Gov. Tom Ridge unveiled legislation intended to upgrade Pennsylvania's open records law. But critics say his plan would keep the law weak compared with those of other states.

Pennsylvania's Right to Know law was written in 1957. Documents that are routinely released in other states, including internal audits, memoranda and proposals from losing bidders on contracts, are kept secret here.

Moreover, local governments often violate it. A consortium of Pennsylvania newspapers reported last year that, when they sent out mass requests for records that are public, local governments often ignored or refused the requests.

Ridge's bill, which he announced during his September radio address, does include some improvements.

Unlike the current law, it would require governments to disclose information on computer if it is kept that way, and it would require governments to make "a good-faith effort" to respond to a request for records within 10 days.

It also would allow requestors to collect attorneys' fees if they proved in court that a government withheld records without reasonable cause.

"Our law doesn't even contemplate computers," he said. "There are no deadlines to respond to requests and no penalties when government flaunts its obligations. Simply put, the law is in need of some significant change," Ridge said.

However, in the most crucial provisions, Ridge's bill does not offer change.

It keeps in place the state's definition of a public record as one that deals with the spending of money or the "fixing of rights." The definition pre-dates the 'federal Freedom of Information Act.

Under the current law, and in Ridge's bill, the government would only have to release those records that are defined as "Any account, voucher or contract dealing with the receipt or disbursement of funds by an agency or its acquisition, use or disposal of services or of supplies, materials, equipment or other property; and any minute, order or decision by an agency fixing the personal or property rights, privileges, immunities, duties or obligations of any person or group of persons.

By contrast, most states and the federal government say that all government records are public unless they fall under a specific exemption for privacy, police investigations or other special circumstances. In states such as Florida and Texas, the phone records, e-mail and appointment calendars of the governor, mayor and other officials are public records open to anyone.

Ridge also would keep the burden on the requester to prove that the records are public, while many states require the government to prove why a record is not public if it wants to withhold it.

"Pennsylvania's law is so bad," said Rebecca Daugherty, an attorney and open records expert for the Arlington, Va.based Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press. "It doesn't need patching up. It needs an overhaul,"

Tim Reeves, who had been Ridge's spokesman, said the governor crafted his proposal with an eye toward getting it through a legislature that has little stomach for more openness in government - even though the publicrecords law doesn't apply to them.

When Ridge called for open-records reform in his February budget address to the General Assembly, he was booed.

For years, Reeves said, open-records advocates have put forward model legislation, only to see it die without a vote.

"Our calculation was, if you change it all, then nothing gets done," he said.

In announcing his plan, Ridge said, "When our Founding Fathers gathered in Philadelphia, they knew their noble experiment in self-government would fail if government was not subject to vigorous public scrutiny.

"To truly be free, people need to know bow their government affects their rights and spends their money," Ridge said.

Ridge's proposal includes new language prohibiting government officials from interrogating Pennsylvanians about why they want the records they want.