I’ve been enjoying reading Civil Beat’s “The Sunshine Blog” produced by the editorial board, which is billed as “Short takes, outtakes, observations and other stuff you should know about public information, government accountability and ethical leadership in Hawaii.”
To be honest, I disagree with just as much of what’s said there as I agree with.
Earlier this week, a Sunshine Blog post reported data on a study by the Civil Beat Law Center on the failure of the Office of Information Practices to produce timely decisions on appeals filed with OIP after an agency has turned down a request for access to a government record.
It’s now taking OIP director Cheryl Park and her staff more than three years to decide whether documents should be made available after an agency has denied a request.
“When lawsuits are faster, OIP is no longer serving the role that the Legislature intended for OIP to be an ‘expeditious’ place to resolve disputes about public records and open meetings,” the law center says on its website.
I doubt that the Law Center’s report drew much attention on its own, and these are data that the public needs to understand. The whole point of giving OIP the power to review agency decisions was to provide a timely alternative to going to court, where things can drag on interminably. But the Civil Beat Law Center’s cases over access to public records seem to take less time to resolve than OIP’s 2022 average of 795 days. This is the kind of thing where the Sunshine Law Blog shines.
The next section of the same post touts Civil Beat’s bill tracker, a useful tool for keeping track of legislative reform bills proposed by the “Foley Commisison” as the session progresses. So far, so good.
But then, briefly at least, it seems to me that the post goes off the rails.
But many of the other Foley commission bills (named for retired Judge Dan Foley, who chaired the commission) are advancing, at least in the House. The same goes for dozens of other Sunshine bills introduced by lawmakers, state agencies and others. The subject matter of the legislation includes lobbying reform, enhanced campaign finance reporting, establishing a class C felony offense of official misconduct and public financing of elections.
Whether the reform effort continues to make progress remains to be seen. So far, the Senate hasn’t shown much interest.
So, according to this post, many of the reform bills are moving “at least in the House,” although “the Senate hasn’t shown much interest.”
But wait. Did I miss something?
A quick look at CB’s own bill tracker shows all the 31 proposals recommended by the Commission to Improve Standards of Conduct, were introduced as House bills, without Senate companion bills.
So we’re talking Legislature 101–bills introduced in the House have to be considered and passed by the House before they are referred over to the Senate. That’s basic. None of the commission bills have been passed by the House yet, so none are pending in the Senate. No wonder “the Senate hasn’t shown much interest.” At least as far as the commission’s reform bills go, there’s apparently nothing for the Senate to be interested in yet, since none have yet passed the House.
First Decking, the deadline for decking bills for 3rd reading votes in the house where they originated, isn’t until Friday, and First Crossover, the deadline for passing House bills and to the Senate, and Senate bills to the house, is March 9.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Good catch!
I need some 101-training here. Is there a way to put a name/face to specifiic Leglislator(s) that are against the Foley Commission’s recommendations?
You would need to go to the CB tracker and click on the bill number to go to JHA committee vote, amendments and committee reports. I can tell you though JHA and the House have overwhelmingly approved the Foley Commission proposals, or their counterparts from the Ethics and Campaign Commissions and law enforcement coalition, by bill, rule or administrative manual (except for term limits).
Much Mahalo!
Ian,
Glad you are watching.
Many of the “Foley Commission” bills have exact counterparts in bills from the Ethics and Campaign Spending Commissions and law enforcement coalition introduced in the House and Senate. Some Foley Commission companion bills are moving in the Senate. All Foley Commission bills or their counterparts except term limits are moving in the House or adopted in its rules and administrative manual. All the bills are tracked by CB but not as Foley Commission bills, nor does the CB tracker note the companion bills from these other agencies when listing Foley Commission bills. I have pointed out to CB it would be helpful if it did so.
House Resolution No. 9 that created the Foley Commission directed the Commission to submit its report and recommendations to the House (but not the Senate) which had all the Commission bills introduced. Because our report was not submitted to the Senate, our bills were not introduce in that body, but the counterparts to our bills from the Ethics and Campaign Spendinding Commissions and law enforcement coalition were introduced as requested by those agencies. We all worked together in writing thesis bills.
Aloha, Dan
I appreciate Civil Beats efforts to keep the public informed.
Not to defend the self serving (in most cases) politicians, but there are always a lot of redundant bills in any given session so people need to understand that before coming to (drastic) conclusions.
Hi, Ian — thanks for your input. As Judge Foley noted above, there are indeed Senate companions to many — but not all — of the Foley comm bills. President Kouchi is on record as saying he was going to let the House take the first crack at them.
Ian, thanks for your input on the Sunshine Blog. I second Judge Foley’s comment above on how the Foley comm bills in the our tracker do indeed link to the Senate companions, although not all the House bills have one. I agree with Dan as well that CB should try to explain how agency bills duplicate many of the Foley proposals. And while we have credited the House for moving on the Foley bills, it is an important point to make that the Senate has moved on many of the other sunshine bills separate from the Foley package. It’s all a work in progress.
Aside from the specific issue of sunshine, I am more concerned here with your overall point: that reporting can be lazy or uninformed and still state opinions which most readers may assume are well-founded. I have been uncomfortable in the past with contradictions and poorly sourced “conclusions” in pieces which have been given space in CB. Thank you, Ian, for being one I can read with total confidence that you know what the hell you are talking about.