Author: Liz Wagenseller

Speaking to the County Commissioners Association

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

This morning in Hershey, I spoke to members of the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania about the Right-to-Know Law and the Sunshine Act as part of the organization’s Newly Elected Officials Workshop and Fall Conference.

It was a great event, and I enjoyed talking to so many county commissioners. As a reporter at the Lebanon Daily News in the mid-1990s, I often covered meetings of the Lebanon County commissioners. I have great respect for the work done at the county level in Pennsylvania.

Here’s the presentation I used as part of this morning’s speech:

County Commissioners Association – 23 Nov 2015 (PDF)
County Commissioners Association – 23 Nov 2015 (PPTX)

Fewer than 10% of OOR Decisions Get Appealed

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

A conversation on Twitter earlier today caused me to investigate (more accurately, caused me to ask someone in the office to investigate) how many Final Determinations issued by the Office of Open Records have been appealed to court.

OOR decisions involving state agencies can be appealed to Commonwealth Court. According to our figures, that’s happened 604 times since the law went into effect on Jan. 1, 2009.

OOR decisions involving local agencies can be appealed to the county Court of Common Pleas. Our figures indicate that’s happened 519 times.

As of today, the OOR has decided more than 13,000 appeals.

Thus, approximately 8.6 percent (1,123 out of 13,000) of the OOR’s decisions have been appealed to court.

Note: The numbers above are accurate to the best of our knowledge. Under the Right-to-Know Law, the OOR should be notified of any court appeal, but there have been instances where that hasn’t happened.

Pennsylvania Ranks 4th in Public Access to Info

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

Earlier this week, the Center for Public Integrity published the results of its 2015 State Integrity Investigation. Each state was ranked in a variety of categories ranging from Political Financing and Electoral Oversight to Procurement and Internal Auditing.

As Executive Director of the Office of Open Records, the category that most interested me was Public Access to Information.

And for Public Access to Information, Pennsylvania ranked 4th in the country.

That’s good news, and I’m proud of that ranking. When you examine the study in detail, it’s evident there are areas which can be improved — but the fact that Pennsylvania is ranked 4th for Public Access to Information is worth celebrating.

With a total of 68 points, Pennsylvania was only ranked behind Iowa (73), Utah (70), and Hawaii (70). (By letter grade, Iowa, Utah, and Hawaii were each given a C- for Public Access to Information; Pennsylvania was given a D+.)

Under the general category of Public Access for Information, states were evaluated on 13 issues. Here’s how Pennsylvania was scored:

  • In law, citizens have a right of access to government information through a defined mechanism. YES
  • In law, citizens have a right of access to private sector information through a defined mechanism. YES
  • In law, there is an entity/ies to monitor the application of access to information laws. MODERATE
  • In law, citizens have a right of appeal if access to government information is denied. YES
  • In law, there is an open data law, requiring the government to publish data online in an open format. NO
  • In practice, branches of government, state agencies and government officials do not claim to be exempt from access to information laws. 100
  • In practice, private sector information related to government information is not claimed to be exempt from access to information laws. 100
  • In practice, the calendars of both the governor and legislators are available to the public. 50
  • In practice, citizens receive responses to access to information requests within a reasonable time period and at no cost. 50
  • In practice, access to information requests are fully answered and/or detailed reasons for denying information are provided. 100
  • In practice, citizens can resolve appeals to access to information requests within a reasonable time period and at no cost. 100
  • In practice, the entity/ies to monitor the application of access to information laws independently initiates investigations and imposes penalties on offenders. 25
  • In practice, government responses to FOI requests are made available in open data format. 0

As you can see, of the 13 issues analyzed, Pennsylvania scored “yes” or “100” on a majority — seven — of them. That’s great, but of course it also means there’s some room for improvement in the other six.

The only two categories where Pennsylvania scored “no” or “0” were both related to open data. OpenDataPhilly is doing good work in this area, as is the Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center. At the state level, both Hawaii and Utah got good marks for their open data efforts.

The Center for Public Integrity’s page for Pennsylvania goes into a good level of detail explaining each of the grades. If you’re interested in this kind of thing, it’s well worth spending some time reading through their work.

October 2015 – Another Record Month

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

The Office of Open Records received a record number of appeals in October, marking the third time this year a new record has been set. The top five busiest months ever, and six of the top seven, are from this year.

Here’s a look at the top 10 busiest months in the history of the OOR:

  1. Oct. 2015 — 353 appeals received
  2. Aug. 2015 — 344
  3. Sept. 2015 — 328
  4. June 2015 — 313
  5. July 2015 — 261
  6. Sept. 2013 — 244
  7. April 2015 — 241
  8. Oct. 2013 — 240
  9. Aug. 2013 — 235
  10. Aug. 2012 — 231

Through the end of October, the OOR has received 2,468 appeals in 2015. That’s just 10 appeals short of the record set in 2013, making it a certainty that 2015 will be the busiest year ever for the OOR.

Supreme Court: OOR is Unique, Independent

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania today issued a ruling which holds that the Office of Open Records is “a unique and sui generis independent body” and that its executive director is not an at-will employee.

I believe the Office of Open Records must be independent to work as it was intended, and I’m thrilled the Supreme Court agreed. I’m excited to continue working as the head of this office. It’s an incredible team.

Here are the majority opinion, authored by Justice Baer and joined by Chief Justice Saylor and Justice Eakin, and a dissenting opinion, authored by Justice Todd:

Majority Opinion
Dissenting Opinion

OOR Annual Training – Presentation Materials

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

The Office of Open Records held its annual training session in Harrisburg this week, covering the Right-to-Know Law and the Sunshine Act.

PCN very graciously recorded the presentation and has made streaming video of the OOR’s training session available for free:
PCN Video Part 1
PCN Video Part 2

Here’s the presentation I used for my opening comments:
Annual Training 2015 Opening Comments (PDF)
Annual Training 2015 Opening Comments (PPTX)

And here’s the presentation George Spiess, our Director of Training and Outreach, used for his session:
Annual Training 2015 George Spiess Session (PDF)
Annual Training 2015 George Spiess Session (PPTX)

Thanks again to the Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission and to the State Museum of Pennsylvania for hosting us, and to Senator Dominic Pileggi for saying a few words at the start of the session.

Open Records Panel at PAGR Event

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

Earlier today, I took part in a panel discussion at an event known as Lobbypalooza, hosted by the Pennsylvania Association for Government Relations.

The panel (topic: Open Records) also included Melissa Melewsky, Media Law Counsel for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, and Scott Coburn, General Counsel for the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors.

The presentation we used focused mainly on Senate Bill 411, legislation which would amend the Right-to-Know Law and which is making its way through the General Assembly. I wrote more about SB 411 here, and here’s the presentation we used at today’s PAGR event:

Pennsylvania Association for Government Relations – 22 Oct 2015 (PDF)
Pennsylvania Association for Government Relations – 22 Oct 2015 (PPTX)

Senate Bill 411 Approved by Senate

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

Senate Bill 411 (sponsored by Senator Dominic Pileggi), which would amend Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law (RTKL), was approved unanimously by the state Senate yesterday.

Among the changes SB 411 would make:

  • Dramatically increase the amount of financial and statistical information available from the four state-related universities (Temple, Penn State, Pitt, and Lincoln) by requiring these universities to establish freely accessible online databases. (This provision is based on Senate Bill 412, sponsored by Senator John Blake.)
  • Apply the RTKL to campus police departments with arrest powers the same as it applies to municipal police departments.
  • Establish that the noncriminal investigative exception does not apply to final safety inspection reports.
  • Simplify the request process by allowing requests to be sent to the AORO or to the agency’s administrative office.
  • Simplify the process of filing an appeal with the OOR.
  • Allow agencies to use a different fee schedule for commercial requests and allow those fees to be appealed to the OOR to ensure they’re reasonable.
  • Establish 11 categories of records available to inmates, ensuring they can access information related to their case and incarceration but limiting the burden inmate requests have placed on agencies and the OOR.
  • Define the term “time response log” to clarify what information related to emergency dispatches is available for public inspection.
  • Clarify that records presented to a quorum for deliberation at a public meeting which are not otherwise exempt are public records, regardless of whether a vote occurs at the meeting.
  • Clarify that economic development authorities and industrial development authorities are covered by the RTKL.
  • Clarify that volunteer fire companies and volunteer ambulance companies are not covered by the RTKL except to the extent that they have a contract with a local agency.
  • Prevent parties to litigation from using the RTKL to circumvent the discovery process, when the litigation involves a pending civil action to which the agency is a party.
  • Establish additional protections on personal financial information while continuing to make aggregated data available for public inspection.
  • Attempt to address the issues surrounding home addresses of agency employees, also the subject of ongoing litigation now before the state Supreme Court.
  • Require agencies to register their Agency Open Records Officers (AOROs) with the Office of Open Records (OOR), which makes a statewide database of AOROs available on its website.
  • Allow the OOR to extend the timeline for issuing a final determination when cases are particularly complex or require in camera review of documents.
  • Additional procedural improvements in the OOR appeals process.

As I told Kate Giammarise of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, SB 411 will improve the Right-to-Know Law for both requesters and agencies. There are some legitimate concerns about a few provisions, but I believe those concerns can be addressed as the bill progresses.

The bill now moves to the House of Representatives for consideration.

Opening Comments – OOR Annual Training

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

Today, the Office of Open Records is hosting its annual training session in Harrisburg, covering the Right-to-Know Law and the Sunshine Act.

Here’s the presentation I’m using for my opening comments:
Annual Training 2015 Opening Comments (PDF)
Annual Training 2015 Opening Comments (PPTX)

I’ll post the presentation used by George Spiess, our Director of Training and Outreach, soon. Also, complete video from the event will be available courtesy of PCN.

Last Call: OOR Annual Training Tomorrow (10/21)

/ Liz Wagenseller / Leave a comment

The Office of Open Records’ 2015 Annual Training in Harrisburg is scheduled to take place tomorrow (Wednesday, Oct. 21, 2015) — and it’s not too late for you to join us.

This session will cover both the Right-to-Know Law (also known as the Open Records Law) and the Sunshine Act (also known as the Open Meetings Law), including a discussion of significant recent OOR rulings and court decisions impacting the laws. Attendees will be able to ask questions.

If you’re a lawyer, you can also get 1.5 CLEs.

Registration is free, and the event is pending approval for 1.5 CLE credits.

Register online at http://oor-training-2015.eventbrite.com/