|
|
|
In considering a rollback of legal provisions that guarantee governmental transparency, state legislators are asking us to trust them unconditionally.
So, when it comes to whether municipal employees are achieving stated goals, legislators will say: “Don’t worry about a thing; we’ve got this covered. Trust us.” And on issues of whether unionized personnel actually deserve the benefits they received on the state level, legislators wish to proclaim: “You needn’t concern yourself with this problem; we’ll handle it from here. Trust us.”
The Illinois General Assembly amended the Freedom of Information Act last year. This strengthened some aspects of the law, thus providing more tools for people to see what’s going on behind closed doors. But lawmakers this year passed House Bill 5154, which makes all personnel evaluations exempt from public scrutiny. Gov. Pat Quinn placed an amendatory veto of the bill, exempting evaluations for local and state law enforcement agents but leaving those of others open.
Legislators have said they will attempt to override Quinn’s amendatory veto in the fall session and restore the blanket exemptions. To assert that members of the public have no right to any information pertaining to personnel evaluations is contrary to the principle of open government.
Some unionized state employees, for example, were guaranteed they wouldn’t be laid off for at least two years. The notion that we shouldn’t be able to see how they’re performing their jobs to assess the wisdom of this agreement is outrageous.
With the threat to override this amendatory veto, lawmakers are moving away from the mechanism that makes self-government possible. There are ways to balance privacy concerns with the public’s right to information.
Take a look at last week’s election results. Members of the public aren’t exactly in a trusting mood when it comes to bureaucratic operations. Don’t shut us out of the very process that ensures any accountability in municipal and state functions.
In considering a rollback of legal provisions that guarantee governmental transparency, state legislators are asking us to trust them unconditionally.
So, when it comes to whether municipal employees are achieving stated goals, legislators will say: “Don’t worry about a thing; we’ve got this covered. Trust us.” And on issues of whether unionized personnel actually deserve the benefits they received on the state level, legislators wish to proclaim: “You needn’t concern yourself with this problem; we’ll handle it from here. Trust us.”
The Illinois General Assembly amended the Freedom of Information Act last year. This strengthened some aspects of the law, thus providing more tools for people to see what’s going on behind closed doors. But lawmakers this year passed House Bill 5154, which makes all personnel evaluations exempt from public scrutiny. Gov. Pat Quinn placed an amendatory veto of the bill, exempting evaluations for local and state law enforcement agents but leaving those of others open.
Legislators have said they will attempt to override Quinn’s amendatory veto in the fall session and restore the blanket exemptions. To assert that members of the public have no right to any information pertaining to personnel evaluations is contrary to the principle of open government.
Some unionized state employees, for example, were guaranteed they wouldn’t be laid off for at least two years. The notion that we shouldn’t be able to see how they’re performing their jobs to assess the wisdom of this agreement is outrageous.
With the threat to override this amendatory veto, lawmakers are moving away from the mechanism that makes self-government possible. There are ways to balance privacy concerns with the public’s right to information.
Take a look at last week’s election results. Members of the public aren’t exactly in a trusting mood when it comes to bureaucratic operations. Don’t shut us out of the very process that ensures any accountability in municipal and state functions.
