A ray of hope for sunshine

There's optimism that this might finally be the year state legislators make it easier for Iowans who believe government has violated open records and meetings laws to be heard.

But it's early. And like so many issues under the golden dome, it's complicated.

Some of that optimism comes from a proposal by Gov. Terry Branstad, who promised during his campaign last fall that government transparency would be a priority. He even hired a transparency adviser, former Iowa Newspaper Association chief and Freedom of Information Council member Bill Monroe.

Branstad's proposal creates a panel within the state auditor's office that would hear and evaluate complaints from Iowans about transparency issues. The panel would gather facts, render opinions, pursue mediation or order an administrative enforcement action. Its decisions could be appealed to District Court.

The governor believes the auditor's office would be a good fit because of its already extensive work with local governments on audits and financial matters. That makes sense.

Branstad's plan improves on Senate File 430, which also sets up a public information board to look into citizen complaints. But the Senate bill lacks the sort of enforcement authority contained in Branstad's proposal. A House bill would create a large “advisory board,” with no authority. It would instead serve as an educational resource for public officials who want to learn more about sunshine laws.

The legislative process is unpredictable. Changes are likely. But regardless of how transparency legislation evolves, lawmakers and the governor should not lose sight of the core reason this debate is happening.

Right now it's too difficult, and in many cases too costly, for Iowans to pursue complaints against governmental bodies they believe broke the law. Exercising this fundamental democratic check should be much easier, and creating a transparency board would help make that happen. Giving the board enforcement power makes it more likely that its opinions will be taken seriously.

It's true that such a panel would come with administrative costs. The Senate proposal carries an estimated price tag of $100,000. That's bound to stoke misgivings, along with already strong opposition from lobbying groups representing local governments, such as the Iowa League of Cities.

Iowa currently has many boards watching over barbers, athletic trainers, landscape architects, massage therapists and many other professions and pursuits. They're needed to protect health and safety.

Iowa also needs a panel of watchdogs looking out for our fundamental right to know what our government is up to. And it needs to happen in 2011.

Comments: thegazette.com/category/opinion/editorial or editorial@sourcemedia.net