OPINION — Editorial

Requiem for freedom of information

At last count, our esteemed legislators in less than solemn assembly have added at least 10 more exemptions to this state's once model Freedom of Information Act, which tends to emerge from every session of the Ledge with still more holes in it. This time it came out of the fray not only tattered and torn but almost beyond recognition.

To quote Tom Larimer, a temperate fellow who's executive director of the Arkansas Press Association, some changes in the FOIA "were not bad ideas. Unfortunately, the bills went way too far by closing 'records and other information.' " That phrase, he noted, could cover "just about anything" any agency of the state wanted covered up. "I don't think there is any doubt," he added, "the 'security' bills passed in this session will have the most impact on the FOIA going forward." Impact indeed. Like the impact a freight train might have on a car stranded on its tracks. They may be dubbed "security" bills but they're likely to leave We the People more insecure as ever when it comes to knowing just what our public servants are serving up.

Seven of these misconceived changes have already been signed into law by our governor, The Hon. Asa Hutchinson. Some of the exemptions may be warranted, but in their cumulative effect they're a standing invitation to abuse.

For examples, the public will not be allowed to see or hear any recordings of a police officer's death; certain information about community correction centers or about records involving details about security at the Governor's Mansion; a lot of investigative files on juveniles; information about security in or around public schools from kindergartens to universities; information about the state Capitol's security records--you name it, and the information may not be available to you, Mr. and Mrs. Arkansas.

Just about the only thing that kept this session of the Ledge from being a total catastrophe for this state's Freedom of Information Act instead of an unmitigated disaster seems to have been its sponsor's decision not to press ahead with a proposal that would have kept secret any bill that had been considered by any attorney for any governmental agency. Thank goodness for the smallest favor.

Editorial on 04/17/2017

Upcoming Events