Date: Fri 15-Jan-1999

Publication: Bee

Author: CURT

Quick Words:

edink-FOI-Rosenthal-Lysaght

Full Text:

ED INK: Whom Does Secrecy Serve?

Last week the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials met with state

legislators from the area to discuss needed legislation that will help the

region. We were surprised and disappointed to see Newtown's First Selectman

Herb Rosenthal use the forum to launch a broadside against the state's Freedom

of Information Commission and the open government laws it administers. "I

believe the FOI Commission, as a whole, has run amok," he told his fellow

chief elected officials from area towns.

In particular, it irritates the first selectman that job evaluations of public

officials are public documents under state freedom of information laws. He

referred to the public disclosure last fall of Newtown's Police Commission's

critical evaluation of Police Chief James Lysaght, Jr, and claimed that it had

undermined the chief's authority and credibility as a leader, making the his

job harder. The town suffers when the police chief is hindered from doing his

job properly, according to the first selectman.

Mr Rosenthal, who has served as chairman of the town's Board of Education,

also noted that school board job evaluations of Superintendent of Schools John

Reed had been requested, mostly by people who had a gripe with Dr Reed and who

wanted to embarrass or discredit the school administrator. Dr Reed's

evaluations, however, were always complimentary and only bolstered his

position. In this instance, the disclosure of the evaluation was a help not a

hindrance to an administrator.

More secrecy in government may make the work of public officials easier. The

days always go so much smoother for anyone in charge of a large enterprise

when no one asks pointed questions, when no one challenges authority, and when

critics don't know what is really going on. The whole point of democracy,

however, is not to make the lives of public officials easy. The point is to

make the lives of citizens better, and we don't understand how sweeping a poor

evaluation of a local police chief under the rug serves that end.

The successful effort last fall by the police union to secure the Police

Commission's evaluation of Chief Lysaght is not the cause of the police

chief's problems in running his department -- it is a symptom of those

problems. It was not the disclosed evaluation of the chief's performance that

may have undermined his authority and credibility. It was his performance

itself. The police union was unhappy with his work, and the Police Commission

was unhappy with his work. There was a problem, and the chief's evaluation

revealed exactly how the problems were being addressed. Do we really want to

keep this kind of information from the townspeople, who will pay $2.4 million

for police services this year?

Government belongs to the public, and our laws properly accord, with few

exceptions, unfettered access to information so citizens may determine whether

their government is working properly. Information is power, and in our system

of government the ultimate power always lies with ordinary citizens. Those who

would take information away from citizens are working to diminish their power

and standing in our democracy. Doing the public's business can be messy,

inefficient, and irritating to those who take on the job. It is not an easy

job. But that is the job.