Proposed bill would undermine the public’s right to know
February 23, 2014 04:00 AM | 2053 views | 1 1 comments | 30 30 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Would the public’s interest be served in any way by weakening the state’s “sunshine laws” to shield the records of private contractors working for the state and local governments?

Of course not. In fact, the public’s interest would be undermined. But that’s not stopping a pair of Cobb legislators leading a push to keep the public from learning what it needs to know.

State Reps. Earl Ehrhart (R-Powder Springs) and John Carson (R-northeast Cobb) are co-sponsors of House Bill 976. It would prevent the public from having access to the payroll and personnel records of private contractors (and their subcontractors) who provide services of any kind on public property.

The state’s Open Meetings and Open Records Act is designed to protect the public’s interests as much as possible — not the self-serving interests of elected officials or the private sector. Yet the changes proposed by Ehrhart and Carson would shift the balance heavily against the public’s interest.

Private companies who work for government do so by choice, and they know what the law is when they choose to seek that work. We’re sure many if not most of them would prefer to keep their records private, but that clearly would be inimical to the public’s best interest.

Ehrhart contends that Open Records requests are being used simply to gain access to the payroll records of private businesses, although when pressed by a Marietta Daily Journal reporter he was unable to provide a single example of such an incident.

Ehrhart also gave a hypothetical example of a sheetrock contractor who employs thousands of people, only two of whom work for local government. He claims that means all of the company’s personnel records are now open to the public.

Not so, says Georgia Press Association attorney and First Amendment expert David Hudson of Augusta. He says the only records available by law to the public under Ehrhart’s example would be those of the two workers in question.

“The law is needed even for a sheet rock contractor,” Hudson added. “Is the contractor using undocumented workers? If it is cost plus, is the payroll padded? Are workers employed only because they are related to public officials of the agency? These are just samples of why public oversight is necessary when the funding is coming from public funds.”

Hudson also countered with a hypothetical example of his own.

“A local government hires a private contractor to perform the maintenance work on local government vehicles,” he suggested. “A series of accidents occur and they are blamed on maintenance defects in the vehicles.”

Yet the public would be prohibited from gaining access to the personnel records of the contractor’s employees, if the changes pushed by Ehrhart and Carson are passed.

“In fact, it was a similar type request that uncovered school bus drivers without proper licenses, or with bad driving records, employed by a private contractor hired by the Atlanta School Board some years ago,” Hudson said.

Added director Holly Manheimer of the Georgia First Amendment Foundation: “This would reverse decades of progress that our state has made in recognizing that private contractors must agree to appropriate public scrutiny when they are performing a government function, including providing service on public property.”

Critics have suggested Ehrhart might be pushing the bill on behalf of the Atlanta Braves, who will be building a $672 million stadium in Cobb with $300 million in public dollars. Ehrhart is the one who first brought the Braves and Cobb Commission Chairman Tim Lee together, and some wonder if his bill is part of an effort to help the Braves shield details of the stadium’s construction from the public.

“The best joke I’ve heard all day,” Ehrhart responded to the MDJ, adding such critics “need to readjust their tin foil hats.”

In addition, Braves Executive VP Mike Plant told the MDJ on Thursday his organization has no interest in such a bill.

That’s greatly encouraging. However, Ehrhart’s effort to water down the sunshine laws would leave the door wide open to a repeat here and elsewhere around the state of what happened with the construction of the new Cobb Superior Court Building, when it was discovered the contractors and subcontractors involved were using substantial numbers of workers who were illegal aliens. Your tax dollars were being used to pay people to do jobs that should have been performed by those here legally.

Mocking the public’s right to governmental transparency is bad government — and as Ehrhart should know — bad politics as well.

And if Ehrhart and Carson want to serve the best interests of taxpayers and the public, they will deep-six their bill.
Comments-icon Post a Comment
February 24, 2014
Come one we all know they were put up to this by Gov Deals good buddy Kassem Reed. When we had the snow/ ice event three years ago, Kaseem cut a no bid contract to one of his buddies for gravel for $1,000 per ton. That would equate to about $9,000 a truck load. The same gravel costs around $50 ton. I can go for us getting absolutely screwed in a snow event and paying $200 a ton, 4 x the going rate. We all know that they probably didn't pay that $12 hr truck driver double time. But it may have taken him longer to deliver it. This is the same trucking company, whose axel fell off and killed a boy in the backseat of his mothers car, amputated the mothers., arm and only had $25k of insurance. Non- interstate trucks don't have to have anything but the car limit. Then the mayor was trying to give his donors company the contract for bus transport at the airport. Then oops the unlicensed operator slammed into a truck with faulty brakes and bad tires. How much did he and Gov. Deal pay for gravel during these past two storms.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides