Accountability and openness in government under attack in Texas

Foes of open government are trying to turn back the clock on transparency and accountability in a two-prong attack on the Texas Open Meetings Act. They should be thwarted at every turn both in the courts and in the Texas Legislature.

We’ve consistently argued since the act initially was passed in 1967 and enhanced after the Sharpstown scandal of the early 1970s that all meetings of a governmental body should be open to the public – with very limited exceptions.

The act has been an important tool for good government in Texas for the past 42 years. The news media benefit immeasurably from access to public records in their role as watchdogs, but the public benefits more with knowledge of how elected officials are performing their duties.

“Transparency in government is good for everyone. Anything less should not be tolerated,” as one person posted in the Story Comments section of our Web site at www.lubbockonline.com.

Nevertheless, at least three Texas cities and the Texas Municipal League are endorsing a legal challenge in the courts that will render Texas’ Open Meetings laws ineffective, reported Enrique Rangel, A-J Austin Bureau chief.

“TML, which is supported by your tax money in the form of membership fees, is urging more than 1,100 Texas cities to sign on to a federal lawsuit claiming the Texas Open Meetings Act unconstitutionally restricts their right of free speech under the First Amendment,” said Bill Hobby, former Texas lieutenant governor, in an op-ed article we published Sunday.

Elected officials are free to say anything they wish to anyone they wish at any time they wish, as Mr. Hobby points out. However, when they are meeting as a quorum of a governmental body, they must say it in front of the public at an open meeting.

Open government opponents also are turning their sights on the Legislature. Last month, the TML passed a resolution to support changes that would lessen the penalties for violations of the open meetings act. This is wrong-headed thinking.

The penalties are what make elected officials sit up and pay attention to the act’s requirements. Soften the penalties and the act becomes toothless, says Fred Hartman, chairman of the Texas Daily Newspaper Association.

“No doubt, the open meetings act creates burdensome requirements for governmental officials,” says Mr. Hartman. “How much easier it would be to make appointments and award contracts without the public’s prying eyes. Those requirements, however, are ones that good public servants should respect, not fight.”

Lubbock is fortunate in that regard. “This is not an issue for us in Lubbock because our city attorney keeps a hawk eye on us,” said Mayor Tom Martin. “If we are about to get out of bounds, we’re immediately told not to go there.”

TML thinks we need more government secrecy to protect free speech. It doesn’t make sense.

Copyright 2009 The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal