The benefits of electronic records go far beyond the improved searching and sharing of information with the public. They also help prepare governments for present and future records management.
Continue readingCity Finances Were A Story Before Detroit’s Bankruptcy
The news is indeed big and deserving of attention: As of last week, Detroit is now the largest U.S. municipality to file for bankruptcy.
The news, however, is perhaps not as shocking as some would portray it. While national publications have only recently jumped on the story, Detroit's local media have long been keeping the public informed about the city's finances and the series of events that eventually led to filing for bankruptcy.
Accessing public records -- including details about the city's financial data, contracts, and many other datasets -- has enabled the media to shine a light over the years on the city's fiscal challenges. Outlets like Detroit Free Press, The Detroit News, Fox 2 News, and many others were on this story long before the news of bankruptcy woke up the media giants: capturing critical moments like when the city realized it was close to running out of cash in 2011 and press conferences by Detroit leaders in 2012 that described how allowing state intervention could help prevent bankruptcy. Continued coverage from the local media kept residents informed about what was happening, what events and politics had led Detroit to this situation, and what could come next. The potential of bankruptcy was no surprise to those who followed the process of state intervention in the city's finances.
With a population of more than 700,000 people, Detroit is now the largest U.S. city to file for bankruptcy, but it is by no means the first large city to do so. Cities like Stockton (population: 296,000), Vallejo (population: 117,000), and San Bernardino (population: 213,000) have been there, too, and the stories out of those cities can help show what to watch for in Detroit. (And, if San Bernardino is any example, other cities can show some of the particular challenges to financial information disclosure that may appear during bankruptcy proceedings.)
No two places provide an exact apples to apples comparison, however. Each city has its own history, process, and paper trail -- and each needs an experienced scout to know how to traverse the political landscape and to help the public do the same. That's why it's so important to have access to public records (the key to understanding our political past and present) and to have watchdogs who use them to review the political process and show those in power that they will be held accountable for their actions.
Continue readingTo Combat Dark Money, States Must Focus on Disclosure
A recent story in the Huffington Post outlined state-level efforts to combat the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, even as reform... View Article
Continue readingLocal Government Procurement: How Does Your City Stack Up?
The Sunlight Foundation, Code for America, and Omidyar Network are joining forces to investigate municipal procurement trends, best practices, and... View Article
Continue readingReducing Paper, Increasing Transparency: Public Records in Ohio
While "public records management" might conjure images of dusty filing cabinets and stacks of yellowing paper, many state and local governments are taking steps to modernize public information in a way that makes it more easily accessible and engaging.
Continue readingOpen Budget, Open Process: A Short History of Participatory Budgeting in the US
A simple twist on the traditional budgeting process has us paying attention to payoffs for transparency. Participatory budgeting (PB) is a political process that lets members of a community vote on how certain budget funds should be allocated. By including the public in decision-making, PB has the potential to be an agent of accountability, helping to demystify city budgets, to turn voters into active contributors and informed monitors of government progress, and to help support efforts for proactive budget disclosure. As it stands today, PB helps communities explore many of these opportunities, and it serves as an important gateway to engagement with local government for a wide variety of residents, especially traditionally-underrepresented groups. It’s a transformative process -- one that may cost governments almost nothing, since it just reallocates existing funds -- and it's a process we’re eager to see explored in more detail as more and more communities hold a magnifying glass to budgetary data.
Continue readingThe Legislation Will Not Be Televised
This map distinguishes five levels of legislative web and broadcasting comprehension on a sliding scale from “Best” (including all recommended elements: video formatting of floor proceedings and committee hearings, archived, and broadcasted via a variety of mediums) to “Worst” (missing several of these recommended elements). For more info (or to watch!) see the NCSL's original roundup here.
Open legislative data is integral to a functioning legible participatory democracy. The legislative data canopy covers everything from information about who represents you to the nuts and bolts of the legislative process to final letter of the law, with each element carrying its own series of challenges and considerations when it comes to public access. Timely and archived legislative process data (i.e. bills, amendments, committee meetings, votes, and contextual information, such as: research reports, legislative journals and lobbying information) are crucial to supporting citizen participation and informed voting. Video documentation of the legislative process represents the barebones of open and accountable legislative process data -- passive recordings of events as they happen for prosperity and public inclusion -- and yet this information is still not comprehensively available in most U.S. states.
Continue readingAloha Hawaii Open Data Legislation!
Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie is signing the nation’s third statewide open data policy into law today (at 11 a.m. HST/5 p.m. EST). The bill, Hawaii House Bill 632, was originally drafted in November 2012, but the open data movement in Hawaii and push for legislation has been chugging along for years now. Chief Information Officer Sonny Bhagowalia and Burt Lum, the executive director of Hawaii Open Data, crafted Hawaii’s Open Data Bill to support the data release that has been going on over the last year (via the city’s Socrata-hosted open data portal, currently boasting over 150 datasets) and in concurrence with a larger program that updates the state’s IT infrastructure.
Continue readingCalifornia Crying Wolf About Cost of Public Records?
Though all appears to be quiet on the public records front in California after a proposed rollback tucked into a budget deal brought an outpouring of criticism and several political dances, the events of last week still haunt the Golden State’s citizens. And rightly so. There are still many unanswered questions about why language weakening public records laws for California cities (by allowing them to “opt out” of records act compliance) was included as part of the budget process.
The budget bill itself cites that requiring local governments to follow those provisions (versus just giving them the option) has financial implications for the state. In 2011, the Commission on State Mandates decided that the state would reimburse local governments for certain public records costs. This decision came from a voter-approved initiative that required the state to repay local governments for state-mandated measures. Perhaps this is why the legislature thought that destabilizing local-records access could be a cost-saving measure, one that simply saved the state money by ensuring that fewer records-related reimbursements have to be paid.
Is the current law really costing the state money though?
Continue readingWho Should Pay for Public Records?
Whose responsibility is it to pay for access to public records?
The story out of California this week about its public records process, and how the state reimburses local governments for complying with the state's public records act, raises some difficult questions about how states and municipalities interface on certain transparency-related issues. How does a state determine when it owes its local governments for being open to the public? And just how is such a cost calculated? There are many aspects of the public records process that could be given a financial value: staff time, servers, software, paper, ink … and although California seems poised to change its policy of reimbursing local governments for costs related to public records, many questions remain. However the costs of public records are counted, the dollars and cents don’t address whether a state should be financing its local agencies' participation in transparency laws.
The latest news out of a rollercoaster week in California is that the legislature and Governor have responded to the outcry about the proposed slashing of public records requirements for local governments and seem to be in agreement that they will instead maintain the requirements and related funding.
Continue reading
59063
