Bill to punish those who hide public records would put teeth in Florida Sunshine Law | Column

Too many politicians and bureaucrats have learned they can get away with hiding information without facing penalties.

Once upon a time, Florida was viewed as a national model for public records. Citizens could request records and get them lickety-split.

If you learned your city council was considering putting a landfill, shooting range or strip mall near your neighborhood, you could ask the city to give you copies of all the emails lobbyists had sent city officials — and you’d get them.

If you learned your school board planned to close your child’s school, you could request copies of any reports school officials had created to justify the closure.

And if you were a business owner curious why the state awarded a lucrative contract to a competitor who was charging taxpayers higher prices, you could request calendar records to find out if any government officials had secretly met with your competitor’s reps — or even received offers of gifts, trips or dinners from them — before awarding the deal.

That is, of course, how it should be. You deserve to know how every tax dollar is spent and how every policy decision is made.

Unfortunately, in recent years, many politicians and bureaucrats have learned they can get away with hiding information, because the state’s Sunshine Laws lack teeth. The law says government officials must provide records, but doesn’t provide much punishment for those who don’t comply.

So while some public agencies still do solid jobs providing records, especially at the local level, far too many thumb their noses at the public’s right to know.

Fortunately, there’s a bill in the Florida Legislature this year that attempts to fix that. It has broad, bipartisan support in one chamber and deserves the same in the other.

House Bill 437 would force government officials to respond to record requests within three days and crack down on agencies that try to charge citizens excessive fees. It allows public officials time if they receive a complicated request, but says that if officials don’t provide the records within 15 days, they must explain why. Most importantly, it allows for punishment, including misdemeanor charges, for officials who don’t follow the rules.

Basically, it attempts to put the power of accessing public records back into the public’s hands — which is where it should’ve been all along.

“Providing public records isn’t doing someone a favor,” said Bobby Block, the executive director of Florida’s First Amendment Foundation, which is championing the bill. “It’s a constitutional obligation.”

Both Republicans and Democrats in the Florida House agree. Two weeks ago, a House subcommittee voted unanimously to advance the bill after citizen groups on both the left and the right shared stories of being stonewalled. Block also told lawmakers that the average records request in Florida was being accompanied by a ridiculous demand of $1,800.

The House bill is sponsored by Republican Alex Andrade, who experienced the stonewalling firsthand when he led last year’s probe into the Hope Florida scandal where millions of dollars intended for health care ended up funding political campaigns. The governor, his wife and the attorney general were all connected to the story. The public deserved answers. Yet Andrade said state agencies were “just sitting” on the records.

If a freaking Florida lawmaker can’t easily access public records, what chance do you stand?

You’ve read about some of this secret-keeping in our news pages:

The state’s department of education tried to make it difficult for the Orlando Sentinel to read complaints filed by parents who said taxpayer-funded vouchers were failing their children.

The Sentinel and other news organizations have been thwarted in their efforts to get details about billions of dollars in so-called “emergency” spending at “Alligator Alcatraz” and elsewhere, some of which was dished out in no-bid deals to companies with political connections.

And the state’s attorney general refused to release cell-phone records about exorbitantly priced taxpayer-funded flights that whisked Venezuelan migrants off to Martha’s Vineyard.

The Orlando Sentinel has had to repeatedly sue the state to get information that should have been provided immediately.

Meanwhile, records requests from rank-and-file citizens are routinely just ignored or slow-walked.

Just ask Central Floridian Bryce Maschino. After the state dispatched road crews in the middle of the night to erase a rainbow-colored crosswalk near the Pulse nightclub, the Orlando resident who volunteered with the American Red Cross to help victims after the shooting filed a request for emails to and from two state transportation officials that specifically mentioned that intersection.

To its partial credit, the state responded that it had found 115 records responsive to Maschino’s request and that Maschino would need to pay $34.62 to cover the one hour of staff time needed to provide them.

That sounded reasonable. So Maschino promptly paid what had been requested. But that was back in October. Since then, the state has not given him a single record, even though it said it had already identified them months ago.

“He paid the money!” Block said. “But then he never heard back. He never got anything.” Block’s First Amendment Foundation now has an attorney championing Maschino’s case. But it shouldn’t require that.

As Block says: “Accountability without consequences is not accountability at all.”

If you care about this issue, there are a couple of things you can do:

You can support a group like the First Amendment Foundation (www.floridafaf.org) that helps citizens access records.

You can also contact your state legislator and let them know you care about the issue and want this bill to pass. But to be candid, it’s not House members who need the pressure. They’ve already signaled support. Meanwhile, the companion bill in the Senate (SB 770) hasn’t moved at all, meaning it may live or die based on one man, Senate President Ben Albritton, who essentially controls that chamber. (Senators’ contact info can be found at www.flsenate.gov/Senators)

This should be a no-brainer for anyone who believes in transparency and the rule of law. As Tampa Bay Republican Rep. Susan Valdes said of the bill: “It’s sad that we even need to put it forward.”

It would be even sadder — a public affront, actually — if this common-sense bill doesn’t pass.

Commentary: Support lawmakers reforming Florida’s broken public records law

By: Bobby Block 

First Amendment Foundation

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

First Amendment Foundation Statement on United States v. Burke

The First Amendment Foundation – Florida applauds the federal court’s decision in United States v. Burke to dismiss wiretap charges that were never grounded in law. This ruling is a significant victory for free expression and press freedom, and it will help restore confidence that journalists, researchers, and members of the public are not breaking federal law simply by accessing or reviewing streaming information. 

For more than 40 years, our Foundation has defended the principle that government cannot use vague or untested theories to punish lawful newsgathering. The court’s rejection of the government’s approach here affirms that openness and access to information are cornerstones of both the First Amendment and a healthy democracy.

Key takeaways from the ruling:

• Government overreach rejected. The court found that the government’s wiretap theory was not supported in law, sending a clear message that prosecutors cannot stretch statutes to intimidate or silence those engaged in lawful information gathering.
• Streaming access is not a crime. The decision reassures journalists, watchdogs, and the public that reviewing streaming content does not violate federal law; a critical point in an era when so much information is shared online.
• First Amendment values are protected. The dismissal upholds the principle that the press and public must be free to access, analyze, and report on information without fear of baseless criminal prosecution.

The First Amendment Foundation was proud to support Tim Burke in this case because the stakes extended far beyond one journalist. The government’s expansive theory, if accepted, could have chilled investigative reporting and undermined public confidence in the safety of newsgathering itself.

Today’s decision is a victory not only for Tim Burke, but for every citizen who believes in transparency, accountability, and the right to know.

Click here to review the court order.

Bobby Block

Executive Director

First Amendment Foundation – Florida

Charlie Kirk’s assassination: A threat to free expression | Opinion