Proposed Delaware FOIA reform does not go far enough with higher education

Thanks to Redwaterlilly there is an easy reference to the proposed FOIA changes.

Here's one section that is NOT marked up for change:

(d) “Public body,” “public record” and “meeting” shall not include activities of the University of Delaware and Delaware State University, except that the Board of Trustees of the University and the Board of Trustees of the University shall be “public bodies,” and University and University documents relating to the expenditure of public funds shall be “public records,” and each meeting of the full Board of Trustees of either institution shall be a “meeting.”

Read that closely.

At UD and DSU--which between them spend tens of millions of State and Federal funds each year--only the Boards of Trustees are considered public bodies and therefore subject to FOIA inquiries.

Here's the accountability problem with that:

Both the Board at UD and the Board at DSU have adopted a specific strategy for avoiding FOIA and operational transparency. They operate through sub-committees. All the serious work and all the documents only go through sub-committees. The sub-committees then interact with the Executive Committee, which approves their decisions for a formal report to the board that is oral and not detailed. Then the Board at a public meeting approves the work of the sub-committee without any written reference to exactly what the sub-committee did.

Therefore the operations of the sub-committee--which are the actual decisions taken by the Board of Trustees--are sheltered from the Freedom of Information Act.

Delaware is only one of two States in the country (I think PA is the other one) that allows this travesty.

It needs to change.

But it probably won't, because the legislature (not the mention the Governor's mansion) is inhabited by alumni who simply will not allow it to happen.

Comments

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici...

Search This Blog