Aug 17, 2023 By Dave Ball 5 min read

Transparency in government is key to accountability. Information maintained by our government is a public asset.

Our county officials love to talk about transparent government, but try to get any information from the county and see how transparent our government is. The information is ours. Why can’t we have easy access to it?

If a resident wants some information about county business, it should be as simple as asking the appropriate official a question. It is not. To find out nearly anything, information in the public domain, one must follow a complicated legal procedure called a Right to Know request. Even simple questions get complicated. Why? It is information that should be available to the public.

The RTK rabbit hole begins with obtaining a special form, filling it out, detailing exactly what information is being requested, and filing it with the county open records officer. After a delay of five days, said officer will respond, generally denying the request and informing you that you have the right to appeal to the State Office of Open Records by filling out more forms and submitting multiple copies to various offices. Within 30 days or so, you will receive a notification from the state office that your appeal has been denied.

You will find that there are very few and very specific things that may be obtained by a Right to Know request. I think we can all understand that certain things may need to be confidential, but certainly not all that is withheld. It seems that our elected officials find multitudinous ways to withhold information for no discernible public purpose.

A great case in point was the recent headline article in the Observer-Reporter regarding the denial of the newspaper’s Right to Know request that Washington County be required to release the names of people searched in a background check database by Prothonotary Laura Hough. This caught my eye because I made exactly the same Right to Know request on May 5 and was denied in a like manner. I made the request only after asking the county commissioners directly for the information and being told I had to file a Right to Know request. That was the proper channel. No other good reason.

During the summer of 2020, Hough requested access to the confidential LexisNexis database allegedly to look up addresses necessary for prothonotary business. The common pleas court has issued a statement saying it never directed Hough to utilize the LexisNexis system and further stated that Hough is required only to use addresses provided by parties or attorneys.

In the fall of 2022, a review of the use of the LexisNexis system determined that she had “clearly,” and without authorization, accessed potentially confidential information of certain individuals, including all three county commissioners, her own solicitor, the former chief of staff, the chairman of the Pennsylvania Republican Party and several other prominent political figures. In all, the review noted some two dozen persons were searched.

To date, the county has refused to make the list of those searched public and has refused to notify the individuals involved. Why? An attorney for the Pennsyvania NewsMedia Association said that the county could release the information if it determined it served the public good. What would serve the public good better than allowing people to know if their private information had been stolen or not?

Commissioner Diana Irey Vaughan has said that if anyone calls her office, they can find out if they are on the list of individuals searched. Maybe the whole county should call the commissioner’s office? An easier solution that gets to the same place would be to publish the list in the paper or post it on the county website.

The larger issue is that it should not be difficult for citizens to obtain information and all information, save very limited special cases.

Recently, I have asked several questions, via Right to Know requests, I think are pretty reasonable:

n Provide the policy under which county row officers are allowed to remove or disable security cameras in their offices. Several offices have cameras that reportedly have been removed or disabled. Request denied as no such document exists. Apparently, there is some authority on the county’s part to put cameras up, but row officers can take them down at their own discretion. Utter nonsense.

n Provide the county policy for obtaining background checks on persons working in county offices as community service. What restrictions apply regarding prior offenses? My request was denied. No policy. The request followed complaints about individuals with serious offenses working in offices that handle sensitive information. The court is aware of the criminal backgrounds of people working in community service jobs. It begs an even larger question as to why not everyone working with sensitive information is required to pass background checks, just as in other government agencies and private industry? There are government standards for this.

n Under what policy or procedure was Hough authorized use of the LexisNexis database, and who signed off on her use? My request denied. Imagine that? It would assign accountability.

We seem to have a long way to go before we can talk about transparent government.

Dave Ball is the former chairman of the Washington County Republican Party.