This blog is designed to give readers a glimpse of our editorial-page operation and how we make our decisions. We’ll let you know who we’re meeting with, what they’re telling us, what events and issues we’re looking at. We’ll also pass on information and observations that may not make our print editions. In addition to the editorial board members who post on this blog, the board includes Publisher David Zeeck, Executive Editor Karen Peterson and Managing Editor Dale Phelps.
Editorial board bloggers
Editorial page editor Patrick O’Callahan oversees the online and printed opinion sections of The News Tribune. He came to The News Tribune in 1987 and has worked at Washington newspapers since 1979. E-mail him at patrick.ocallahan@thenewstribune.com
Editorial writer Cheryl Tucker, in addition to writing commentary, manages the daily production of the editorial and op-ed pages and edits letters to the editor. She began her journalism career in 1974 at a Virginia newspaper and came to The News Tribune in 1978. E-mail her at cheryl.tucker@thenewstribune.com.
Editorial writer Kim Bradford manages the online opinion section of The News Tribune and writes commentary. She joined The News Tribune in 2005 after working 11 years at newspapers in Washington and Maryland. E-mail her at kim.bradford@thenewstribune.com.
Guest bloggers
Editor emeritus David Seago retired from The News Tribune in 2008 after 41 years at The News Tribune. E-mail him at sds99@harbornet.com.
Richard Davis’ column on state politics frequently runs in the print edition of The News Tribune. He was president of the Washington Research Council, a statewide think tank, from 1986 through 2006. Currently, as a principal with The Simeon Partnership, Inc. he coordinates the activities of the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy, a business coalition founded by the Research Council, the Association of Washington Business and the Washington Roundtable.
Karen Irwin of University Place, a mother of four, has been a frequent contributor to The News Tribune's print editions. She has also written for Seattle's Child, Puget Sound Parent, the Tacoma Weekly, the Fayetteville Observer Times and the political blog Right Meets Left. She graduated from California Lutheran University with a degree in English literature and is currently working toward a history degree.
Michael Allen, professor of history at the University of Washington Tacoma, was born and raised in Ellensburg. He served with the U.S. Marines in Vietnam from 1969-70. He has written five books, including the prize-winning "Patriot's History of the United States: From Columbus' Great Discovery to the War on Terror," "Rodeo Cowboys in the North American Imagination" and "Western Rivermen, 1763-1861: Ohio and Mississippi Boatmen and the Myth of the Alligator Horse." Allen lives in Tacoma and Ellensburg and has three children.
- All
- Editorial cartoons (284)
- Editorial outtakes (315)
- Election (109)
- How we work (185)
- Taking notice (1816)
- What's coming (891)
- Who's visiting (122)
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| << < | > >> | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |
- July 2009 (8)
- June 2009 (94)
- May 2009 (80)
- April 2009 (91)
- March 2009 (99)
- February 2009 (90)
- January 2009 (125)
- December 2008 (111)
- November 2008 (89)
- October 2008 (111)
- September 2008 (87)
- August 2008 (75)
- More...
XML Feeds- acqb1424
- traknut
- Peetie
- Tischx4
- MrSinister
- BabyBones
- smoothsayer
- artman77
- Guest Users: 683
What's on the minds of Tacoma News Tribune editorial writers
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009
Posted by David Seago @ 11:52:26 am
Wow. State Sen. Darlene Fairley (D-Lake Forest Park) either really hates open government, or else she thinks the state Sunshine Committee isn't doing enough to promote open government.
It's clear from a bill she's sponsoring, though, that she doesn't think the commission is worth a warm bucket of spit.
I serve on the board of the Washington Coalition for Open Government along with Jason Mercier of the Washington Policy Institute. Mercier, formerly of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, is doing a great job of tracking legislation affecting open government.
Today Mercier's WPI blog called attention to Fairley's SB 5119, which would eliminate the Sunshine Committee. The bill just flat-out calls the committee a waste of time and money.
I don't agree. I doubt the TNT ed board would, either, but I'm sure they'll be taking a look at the bill.
Mercier's post today also calls attention to some other bills that have open-government implications.
Categories: Taking notice
• 3 comments
COMMENTS:
What we need within Washington State is more 'sunshine' shining upon what our Citizens' government presented to us as truth within public presentations, but just absent is the substance of detail just missing and questions just continue to remain open and unanswered supporting what is presented for public view and support requested; for just one current example, I have been requesting information detail related to a specific item listed within Governor Chris Gregoire's PROPOSED 2009-11 AND 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL CAPITAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL, Dec. 18, 2008, [Adobe PDF document] available at http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget09/bills
I am just looking for an item described for benefit for the State Parks and Recreation Commission: The Puget Sound Initiative Projects (30000050), Sec. 3088, Supra. at 95, (adobe at 98), (a total $30.32-million projected cost, and this does not sound like any existing State Parks funding operation or maintenance cost of operation, and State Parks Centennial 2013 Plan Priority One is 'Fix what we have'), but nobody will send me that details that describe this item: Not the State Parks Public Affairs Officer, The Governor's Office, so maybe this is just one simple-rare-example where information is not available for Citizens view or review? But, it does appears this Section 3088 is good-enough to support for capital appropriations funding for $30.3-million? See
http://www.commencementbayopinion.com/?p=637#thesecondquestion
It does make-one-wonder how many other item(s) as described within this same document (Supra.) are not explainable beyond the simple one-line-title and section number? And our Governor wants the Legislators to 'muster the courage' to approve these type of non-descriptive items within her PROPOSED 2009-11 AND 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL CAPITAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL released for public view and news media public news consumption.
So, this is why; it follows, I think we need more 'sunshine-shown' and remedy against those people within our Washington State government that refuse to disclose what become 'Taxpayers' capital-money projects and for-ever-more 'Taxpayers' expenses-money necessary to be spent for many tomorrows each future year!
But, those are just my thoughts about 'open and transparent Citizens government' no stuff hidden ever from the 'Taxpayers'.
I am just looking for an item described for benefit for the State Parks and Recreation Commission: The Puget Sound Initiative Projects (30000050), Sec. 3088, Supra. at 95, (adobe at 98), (a total $30.32-million projected cost, and this does not sound like any existing State Parks funding operation or maintenance cost of operation, and State Parks Centennial 2013 Plan Priority One is 'Fix what we have'), but nobody will send me that details that describe this item: Not the State Parks Public Affairs Officer, The Governor's Office, so maybe this is just one simple-rare-example where information is not available for Citizens view or review? But, it does appears this Section 3088 is good-enough to support for capital appropriations funding for $30.3-million? See
http://www.commencementbayopinion.com/?p=637#thesecondquestion
It does make-one-wonder how many other item(s) as described within this same document (Supra.) are not explainable beyond the simple one-line-title and section number? And our Governor wants the Legislators to 'muster the courage' to approve these type of non-descriptive items within her PROPOSED 2009-11 AND 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL CAPITAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL released for public view and news media public news consumption.
So, this is why; it follows, I think we need more 'sunshine-shown' and remedy against those people within our Washington State government that refuse to disclose what become 'Taxpayers' capital-money projects and for-ever-more 'Taxpayers' expenses-money necessary to be spent for many tomorrows each future year!
But, those are just my thoughts about 'open and transparent Citizens government' no stuff hidden ever from the 'Taxpayers'.
The other such bills are; for example, HB 1017 - 2009-10 'Creating a committee to study the feasibility of creating a board with public records act and open public meetings act responsibilities.' available at
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1017&year=2009 ("AN ACT Relating to studying the feasibility of creating a board with public records act and open public meetings act responsibilities; creating a new section; and providing an expiration date."). Sound to me just-like a another funded study suggested without remedy for public records abuse by rule enforcement? And, this HB-1017 requests the appointment of enough member for this review process that it is doubtful, as I think about this, that any study results under HB-1017 will be adopted, but it will die under its own weight of study.
We not need more studies. Government should follows some existing rules. Let the 'sunshine' into the closed records. And do enforcement remedy for those persons within government that don't open-the-books for Citizens view.
Seems to me, the Washington AG Office should have a 'records retention specilist' position that could provide oversight and make a 'legal-right-to-know' call decision right-now upon any records that any- and all-Washington State Agency(s) denied Citizens public records request right-now. It does not seem that complicated to me, but what is going on here with the Public Records Exemptions Accountability Committee demise and a new study; it follows, apparent to me is a delaying game to the Citizens, 'Taxpayers', and any news reporting media for additional delayed records access without actually doing a records request rejection; since it is under study how public records release process should work and nobody will know until the HB-1017 study has been complete; as a result, to the records requestor: Please just stand-by we are working on this Citizens right to know information right now and will let you know what the committee of the whole decided and the new rules approved for Agency use. Stand by.
Why is such a simple subject (Records Retention Plan) become so difficult for government decision process and the records release process, so it must be the complexity of government and diminished value of services delivery back to 'Taxpayers' that makes this happen; as a result, things just don't write will or document could not be-taken into direct- or indirect-sun-light without catching-on-fire first. And, nobody wants any fires anywhere where they don't already have water and a fire extinguisher ready to suppress the possible flames.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1017&year=2009 ("AN ACT Relating to studying the feasibility of creating a board with public records act and open public meetings act responsibilities; creating a new section; and providing an expiration date."). Sound to me just-like a another funded study suggested without remedy for public records abuse by rule enforcement? And, this HB-1017 requests the appointment of enough member for this review process that it is doubtful, as I think about this, that any study results under HB-1017 will be adopted, but it will die under its own weight of study.
We not need more studies. Government should follows some existing rules. Let the 'sunshine' into the closed records. And do enforcement remedy for those persons within government that don't open-the-books for Citizens view.
Seems to me, the Washington AG Office should have a 'records retention specilist' position that could provide oversight and make a 'legal-right-to-know' call decision right-now upon any records that any- and all-Washington State Agency(s) denied Citizens public records request right-now. It does not seem that complicated to me, but what is going on here with the Public Records Exemptions Accountability Committee demise and a new study; it follows, apparent to me is a delaying game to the Citizens, 'Taxpayers', and any news reporting media for additional delayed records access without actually doing a records request rejection; since it is under study how public records release process should work and nobody will know until the HB-1017 study has been complete; as a result, to the records requestor: Please just stand-by we are working on this Citizens right to know information right now and will let you know what the committee of the whole decided and the new rules approved for Agency use. Stand by.
Why is such a simple subject (Records Retention Plan) become so difficult for government decision process and the records release process, so it must be the complexity of government and diminished value of services delivery back to 'Taxpayers' that makes this happen; as a result, things just don't write will or document could not be-taken into direct- or indirect-sun-light without catching-on-fire first. And, nobody wants any fires anywhere where they don't already have water and a fire extinguisher ready to suppress the possible flames.
Comments are not allowed from anonymous visitors. Please login or register to comment.
