Transparency comes into view in this year’s session

Democrats and Republicans call for a ‘Sunshine Movement’

‘‘I don’t know if I can judge if it’s going to be the most successful year for transparency, but it’s a lot that Maryland can do that both sides agree on,” said Ryan O’Donnell, executive director of Maryland Common Cause. ‘‘It’s the start of something.”

This week lawmakers joined together to promote legislation aimed at putting state expenditures on a Web site for public inspection. The bill’s chief sponsors are conservative Republican Sen. Alexander X. Mooney (R-Dist. 3) of Urbana and liberal Democrat Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Dist. 20) of Takoma Park.

The Maryland Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2008 would require the state’s Department of Budget and Management to develop a Web site that displays information on state payouts of more than $25,000, including information on recipients of state grants and loans. The bill, modeled after 2006 federal legislation, was passed in the House on Thursday. The bill is still being heard in the Senate.

Several media outlets have reported on the difficulties of obtaining public information. One story recounted how a request for legislator schedules was denied. Another described how citizens must provide home addresses to view financial disclosure forms of state officials.

The coverage has even extended to jail. The Court of Special Appeals heard a case involving a prison inmate in Cumberland who made a document request to a warden who ignored it.

Earlier this session, Comptroller Peter V.R. Franchot (D) caused an uproar when he released the names of state employees earning more than $100,000 to the media, as provided for in the Maryland Public Information Act. Some lawmakers said it was politically motivated.

These and other cases were meant to be handled by the federal Freedom of Information Act passed in 1966, and the Maryland Public Information Act and Maryland Open Meetings Act, both revised in 2004.

Unfortunately, loopholes exist in the laws, advocates say, and lawmakers are working to close them and to convince state groups to accept the changes.

O’Donnell calls the push a ‘‘Sunshine Movement.”

‘‘I think people got pretty cynical over the past few years because of concern over what was happening nationally,” he said. ‘‘American history goes through cycles where you see reform after periods of secrecy. There are lots of little things, like loopholes in the law, that add up to a general cultural of secrecy.”

Before the Transparency Act became popular, Del. Elizabeth Bobo was pushing for open government 20 years ago when she was a Howard County Council member.

Since then, when media groups need someone to champion the cause, they call on her, said Bobo (D-Dist. 12B) of Columbia.

‘‘I think it’s extremely important that the business of government and government records be open to the public,” she said. ‘‘It’s a bedrock to democracy. That might sound dramatic, but I really believe that.”

This year Bobo has picked up a colleague in her open government fight. Like the Democrat⁄Republican pairing of Raskin and Mooney, Republican Richard B. Weldon Jr. has joined Bobo.

Weldon (R-Dist. 3B) of Brunswick — who has decided not to seek re-election after two terms in the legislature — has dedicated the remaining two years of his term to government transparency issues.

Like Bobo, his interest stems from his background in county politics.

‘‘I’ve looked at the problem from the perspective of a staff guy who is responsible for fulfilling people’s public information requests, all the way up to a member of a county board of commissioners where there were five of us where we shared all of our legislative and executive duties and had to make those discreet, careful choices in do we do this in a public setting or do we do this in closed session,” Weldon said. Before serving as a Frederick County commissioner, Weldon was an administrator for Brunswick and Frederick city.

Although he has not sponsored any open records legislation this year, he has signed on to other proposals working their way the legislature.

‘‘There should be almost no reason to transact the public’s business outside the public’s view,” Weldon said.

And with state lawmakers struggling to balance the budget amid a slumping national economy, there is even more of a need for public access, he said.

‘‘When you are doing things like making cuts and increasing taxes, you better show people how you’re doing this.”

This year, Bobo has sponsored legislation that would require public bodies, such as county councils, to cast final votes on issues in open session. The Open Meetings Act has 14 exemptions allowing public bodies to go into closed session for reasons ranging from consulting with legal counsel to discussing investigations on possible criminal conduct. While the bodies are in the closed session, they sometimes take votes, Bobo said. Her bill would still allow for the closed session discussion, but require the votes to be taken in public.

‘‘I think it serves the government well to conduct its business in public ... because it’s the surest way to convince people that what it is doing is correct,” said John J. Murphy, executive director of the Maryland-Delaware-DC Press Association.

The bill has been amended since its introduction in response to concerns by the attorney general’s office, as well as state government groups like the Maryland Municipal League and the Maryland Association of Counties.

It’s not that these groups are opposed to open government, but some type of balance must exist, said David Bliden, MACo executive director.

‘‘Our generic view is that you need to create a balance between access to records and the efficient functioning of government, and they are not always consistent,” he said. ‘‘We find instances where production of records diverts significant amounts of time and expense, and in some instances, it is clearly abusive.”

Regarding Bobo’s open votes bill, Bliden said that before the amendments, it ignored the practicality of public bodies being allowed to go into closed session and conduct business.

‘‘You need to create mechanisms to ensure the flow of ideas in candid conversation among public officials — that’s how decision-making is best reached,” he said.

Already MDDC has proposed taking up several of the public access issues in a summer worksession with the attorney general’s office and the Open Meetings Compliance Board. On the agenda would be items that Murphy says are ‘‘slipping through the cracks,” such as how to handle electronic records and police investigative files.

‘‘You may spend your whole life thinking that you don’t need to get something from the government, then all of a sudden you find yourself in a dispute with the government and need a public record,” Murphy said. ‘‘When you need one, you should have the ability to get it.”