The powerful daily newspaper affirms the saying that "Might make right" for the uninformed
How do you tell a friend that, in spite of their good intentions, their careful deliberation of every action and their sincere due consideration of outcomes, that they are still wrong as two left feet?
Michael F. Curtin, Vice Chairman and Associate Publisher of The Columbus Dispatch is truly a remarkable individual. For all the power and influence he wields, I have never met a more humble individual. I remember from at one of our "what's going on in the world" breakfast meeting years ago, before the rest of the political world discovered the ring of power of Mike Curtin, in the middle of our conversation I suddenly stopped talking and stared at Mike. I said Mike, you are going to do great things. God has his hand all over you. I saw the glow then and I watched it grow into the powerful beacon of light that it is today.
As the years went by, Mike did what he does best, empower the people around him. Mike grew and the people around him grew. Dispatch reporters and editors in ways never experienced before were given a free hand in that which they did. The paper became stronger because of it and the community was better served. Then, the logical negative consequences of success started to get inserted in the equation of power, progress and public policy - business interest conflicts, political interest conflicts and complicated social and political issues that required a public response but did not mandate that those publicly responding were adequately educated on the issues.
To help my readers better understand the issues at hand and, provide a historical perspective, I am going to site material from an article written by Attorney Karhlton E. Moore "Pro Se at the Supreme Court" for the Columbus Bar Association's Bar briefs publication - Archive 2001-2004:
On December 1, 1999, Columbus resident Cornell McCleary argued a landmark public records case before the Ohio Supreme Court. Although Mr. McCleary was not successful in his attempt to obtain records in the possession of the city of Columbus, the McCleary decision is the best known and the most cited public records case in Ohio.
The issue - Whether the Recreation and Parks Department's database containing personal identifying information regarding children who use the City's recreational facilities is a public record subject to disclosure pursuant to R.C. Chapter 149, Ohio's Public Record Act?
Published by the County Commissioners Association of Ohio in their County Information and Data Service (CIDS) publication:HIGH COURT NARROWS SCOPE OF PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, STOPS DISCLOSURE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION ON PRIVATE CITIZENS CONTAINED IN RECREATION DEPARTMENT DATABASE
Personal information about private citizens that appears in public documents is no longer subject to disclosure under the state's public records law, according to a decision released by the
Ohio Supreme Court on April 12th (2000).
In the case of State ex. rel. McCleary v. Roberts (88 Ohio State 3d 365), the high court significantly narrowed the scope of the state's public records law. The decision was surprising because it unanimously reversed an appeals court decision and because courts, in the past, have consistently come down on the side of mandated disclosure of public records.
The case arose from the effort of Cornell McCleary, a well-known Columbus political activist, to obtain a database from the city's Recreation and Parks Department. The database contained information on children enrolled in the Columbus swimming pools photo identification program, including names, home addresses, emergency contacts and medical histories. McCleary maintained that this information was subject to disclosure because it is maintained in a record kept by a public agency.
The court rejected that argument. It held that the mere fact that the information was contained in the department's database did not require disclosure. Disclosure is required under ORC 149.011 (G) only if the information serves to "document the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations or other activities of the office."
Under the court's reasoning, a blank application form for the department's swimming pool photo identification program would have been subject to disclosure because it pertains to a function, policy or procedure of the public office. However, the personal information supplied by the youths who filled out the application forms did not need to be disclosed because it does nothing to document any activity of the department.
The court stressed that the decision does not extend to public employees and their public employment personnel files. Instead, it applies to what the court described as "files on private citizens created by government."
To really appreciate what I was up against in this matter, in addition to the Dispatches articles of support and editorials for the City's actions, there was Janet E. Jackson, Columbus City Attorney, and Daniel W. Drake, Chief Counsel, for appellant (City of Columbus), Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, Mark R. Weaver, Special Counsel, and Lisa Wu Fate, Assistant Attorney General, urging reversal for amicus curiae Attorney General of Ohio, attorneys Barry M. Byron, Stephen L. Byron and John Gotherman, urging reversal for amicus curiae Ohio Municipal League. Plus, the Ohio General Assemble who, while the Supreme Court delayed making an official decision, passed a specific law prohibiting anyone from getting the type of public records that I was requesting.
In this case, like most issues of great public interest, everybody is talking to everybody. The Dispatch hammered the City's and Betty Montgomery's BS position of "We have to protect the children" over my clearly stated and factual public presentation presentation that the issues are (1) The city of Columbus illegally collecting public information on children and using it at-will against these children and not even their parents could view the information or records maintained by the City regarding their children; (2) Parks and Recreation employees under the direction of Wayne Roberts was illegally giving this information to law enforcement agencies: and (3) If Columbus is allowed to do this, almost every government entity in Ohio will be allowed to do this, a serious erosion of our civil rights.
The Ohio Supreme Court in this case, by a unanimous decision, build a brick wall regarding records of Ohio's governmental actions and citizen's access to records and knowledge of these many actions. Even the mighty Dispatch can't get past the great wall of governmental secrecy built by the Ohio Supreme Court in this particular and specific decision.
I laid this Supreme Court case before you to set the stage for where I am going next. When I ran for public office as a Columbus City Council candidate in 2001, I went before the Dispatch's editorial board. A female Dispatch reporter or editor grilled my ass over this public records case (This was before the Dispatch itself was bitten in the ass by the Court's decision). I tried to the best of my ability to get her to understand the true issues of the case. She could not get past her emotions in the matter, the records that I were trying to get involved kids period. I did not get the Dispatch's endorsement and for a time, the Dispatch was proud of its actions regarding the Supreme Court decision.
There is a saying that goes "Those who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them." Some of todays major public policy issues that the media's 800-pound gorilla has weighted in on that I personally feel that they have not fully realized the potential negative consequences of their editorial and/or news reporting actions:
Crime and community safety issues - The Dispatch has consistently reported and editorialized crime and related problems in our community. However, they selectively report on negligent private multi-family property owners and managers who are politically connected and play a major role in housing known criminals and criminal suspects. The Dispatch also frequently reports how our community needs more police yet flat out refuses to report or educate the community of the fact that in the State of Ohio there exist such a thing as Private Police who are private security personnel and the role the Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission plays in both training and certification of such individuals.
Mayor Coleman's super capital-improvement bond package - When voters approve bond packages they, at the same time, vote to approve a tax increase to cover the bond package. The City and the Dispatch consistently wrongfully inform voters that they are not voting for a tax increase because the City has yet exercised acting on the voted tax increase. Instead, the City has increase service fees, tax collections, user's fee, etc to avoid imposing the tax or flat out tax increase. It is only a matter of time before the City runs out of back door tax increases and have to walk through the front door and raise taxes.
Civil rights and governmental control - Of late, the Dispatch's reporting and editorials supporting a Nation ID, Red Light Cameras, Conceal Carry Weapons Ban, the City's plan to pass an ordinance to require scrap yard dealers to ID customers and a statewide Anti-smoking Ban. At issue, law enforcement agents are use to acting outside of the law to enforce the law. Most agents when attempting to enforce the law are mostly focused on getting the would-be bad guy not civil liberties. The same as the military for the most part. We have civilian control over such entities to keep them in check. The truth is, post 911, military and law enforcement agencies do what the hell they want to do and the civilian authorities over them had better not try and stop them. The only controls that we have today is potential public outrage related to reported abuse of power incidents, after the fact.
Let's take a look at the Red Light Cameras issue. According to both the City and the Dispatch this is a safety issue even though big bucks is being made. At issue, the red light cameras are electronic surveillance devices under government or should I say police control. In place is the ability to video monitor citizens as well as auto tags. The police can and will find a way to take advantage of that capability. It's not a matter of if, its a clear case of when. They do what they do. They just need the Right bad guy to take the system to the next level.
In my mind's eye I'm sitting across the table from my friend Mike Curtin. I'm smiling and he's giving me that look he gives me when I'm right and he thinks he's right. In some cases we both agree to disagree. But we both know that we have impacted each other and given each other food for thought. Nothing else need be said.
Recent Comments