Here is the Mitchell Daily Republic’s position on the effort of the Open Government Task Force proposal:
task force is working on a plan to help settle disputes that arise about access to public records in South Dakota.
Here’s the basic idea behind the plan: Have the Office of Hearing Examiners take over responsibility for settling disputes. Anyone who has been turned down in an attempt to see a record in the state can appeal to the OHE, which would determine if the initial denial was right or wrong.
The OHE decision, too, could be appealed in the state court system.
It’s a proposal that has merit, considering the many shades of gray that exist in this state when it comes to open records.
At present, decisions to grant access to records rests at the level of the request. For instance, if a person walks into the local school and asks to see a certain record, the decision likely rests with the business manager or superintendent. Beyond that, some feel there aren’t many places to appeal that decision without the help of a lawyer.
Under the proposal being worked on by the task force, the person who was denied will have options. Even to the media — which is experienced in such situations — this will be an asset. If the proposal becomes law, future disagreements about public record access may have an amicable solution.
But questions remain.
First, we worry that if the proposal does pass, it could create unnecessary delays on accessing records. It’s possible that officers at the local level — county auditors, school business managers, city finance officers, etc. — may feel that it will be easier for a higher power to decide whether or not a basic record is open.
So instead of being granted access to, say, the school budget — a simple request that should be granted upon asking — a school representative may deny that instant access, leaving the final decision to someone else. That could create a delay of almost two weeks for a simple, rightful request.
We also worry about possible filing fees for taking a dispute to the OHE. We feel these fees must be kept at a minimum, or else they imply that only those with ability to pay may see records that indeed are open to the public.
And finally, we wonder if this proposal will be ready for the 2008 session. When the task force met last week in Mitchell, several members questioned whether they can reach consensus prior to the January start of the Legislature.
We hope they can.
The task force’s plan isn’t perfect, nor will it answer all of the state’s questions regarding open records. But it’s a start, and the task force members should be commended for shouldering such a difficult and comprehensive task.
