Branstad disregards openness pledge

By The Des Moines Register

----

When Gov. Terry Branstad was sworn into office in January, he listed transparency among the “principles that will guide my days as governor.”

It's time for the governor and his staff to reread this principle. They seem to have forgotten it.

Branstad directed a group of state department heads to tackle the issue of sexual assaults in Iowa nursing homes and other care facilities.

The governor formed the “work group” after The Des Moines Register disclosed that an 83-year-old convicted sex offender was accused of assaulting a fellow resident at Pomeroy Care Center. The assault - the woman was in her 90s - was allegedly witnessed by an 8-year-old girl visiting the nursing home.

A judge had ordered the sex offender to live in the care center. The Iowa Department of Human Services failed to examine and approve a required written plan to protect residents of the facility. No one from the DHS visited the nursing home before recommending that the man be placed there.

The Pomeroy incident raises serious concerns, and Branstad is to be applauded for quickly gathering his agency heads to analyze the state law and policy ramifications of the case.

That is the right thing to do.

But this is where the governor's handling of the matter breaks down. Iowans have a deep interest in the safety of our most vulnerable residents.

Branstad's staff has refused to say when his “work group” of state officials is meeting. His staff has refused to say who is attending those meetings or what they are discussing.

The Branstad administration justifies this secrecy by arguing this is “an informal group of department heads” that is not subject to Iowa's public meetings law.

Regardless of what the law requires, what does good public policy demand? The answer: public access. Iowans have a right to know what our government officials are doing, particularly on an issue as sensitive and as important as this one.

Instead, the Branstad administration seems to believe the public should just wait for the agency heads to issue their recommendations.

Meeting in secret - with no opportunity for input from the public - runs counter to the philosophy of openness that the governor laid out when he took office.

This behind-closed-doors approach also makes Iowans skeptical about what the work group is doing. Branstad aides have, for example, refused to say whether lobbyists and trade association officials for the nursing home profession are participating in the meetings.

It is logical that the profession would be involved, because it is the association's members who are confronted with the issue of sex offenders being placed by judges in these care centers. But is Branstad's work group hearing from patient advocates, from relatives of the elderly woman and young girl, from the families of residents and from direct care workers?

There is no way for the public to know, and that is wrong.

The group could be considering anything from separate facilities for elderly sex offenders to minimum staffing levels in care centers to notification requirements when sex offenders move into a care center.

There is no way for the public to know.

A conversation concerning the safety of the most vulnerable Iowans should include everyone. The public should be allowed to offer their thoughts and suggestions.

The current secrecy of the group directly defies the pledge Branstad made to Iowans run an open and transparent administration.