Copyright 2005, Vacaville Reporter

Opening up government
Prop. 59 is changing way officials do our business

(Vacaville Reporter 3/8/05) -- Government best serves us all when it is open, when there are no walls, no barriers that keep any of us from seeing what elected officials are doing on our behalf.

All levels of California government "should be as transparent as possible to the public it asks for funding, power and trust," rightly went an argument for Proposition 59, which gave Californians a constitutional right of access to meetings of government bodies and writings of government officials.

That change in the state Constitution was passed in November by more than 83 percent of state voters, proving just how important we all feel about having access to those who do the public's business. Open government is good government, not just for media outlets - newspapers, TV, radio, online services - that are trusted to be the watchdog of government, but for all of us.

Even so, it was heartening - and a bit surprising - when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger reversed a long-time policy of gubernatorial secrecy, a secrecy that was blessed by the 1991 state Supreme Court decision that protected the chief executive's so-called "deliberative process." Responding to a request by the California First Amendment Coalition, a nonprofit organization dedicated to promote and defend the people's right to know, the governor just more than two months ago made public his calendar of appointments and meetings. The very reason for seeking access to that information was to see that "deliberative process" at work, to see who and what influenced government policy and whether decisions were made for any reason other than their merits.

Since then, media agencies requested and received the appointment calendars of every elected official holding statewide office.

While Proposition 59 does not deal with the 1991 state Supreme Court decision or deliberative process, it has created a new political expectation, regardless of any future court challenges to the legislative constitutional amendment.

"The new norm is analogous to the ritual release by candidates for national and statewide office of their federal income tax returns," writes Peter Scheer, of the California First Amendment Coalition. "This practice, once the rare exception, is now the rule of contemporary politics - a legally-voluntary but politically-required act of compelled self-disclosure to voters.

"One cannot imagine a serious candidate for president or governor declining, on ground of confidentiality, to disclose his tax returns," Mr. Scheer continues. "That would be political suicide. Similarly, California's next governor will not have a choice about disclosing his or her appointments calendar. The next governor will have to release it ... or face the voters' wrath for refusing to do so."

Unfortunately, there is still a need to be ever diligent. Gov. Schwarzenegger did not enthusiastically support Proposition 59. And his office, claiming deliberative process privilege, recently denied a request for the calendars of his top aides for a time when the governor was deciding which bills on his desk he planned to sign or veto.

These actions send mixed signals to other officials who will face similar requests from the media. Already some lower level and local officials in recent weeks have arrogantly declined to disclose their calendars, claiming deliberative process protection, thus implying they think they are more important than the governor or the 11 statewide constitutional officials.

California voters will not tolerate such claims for special privilege. Not from those doing our business.