Pennsylvania Sunshine Act fails to ensure open meetings
Rob Cathers
Issue date: 11/19/09 Section: Web Extras
Since the law was first imposed, the penalty for a violation has remained $100. Considering most traffic tickets cost more today, $100 is not enough to encourage government entities to take measures to deter violations. Information discussed in meetings could easily cost taxpayers more. Increased fines would encourage government entities to follow the law.
Smucker is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 101 that supports increased penalties for intentional Sunshine Act violations from $100 to $1,000. The bill also proposes a fine for second or subsequent offences up to $2,000.
The bill passed the Senate and is currently in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives as House Bill 1324. It has been in appropriations since May 12, 2009. To become law, the bill needs to pass in the House and be sent to the governor for approval. Smucker also mentioned in the January 26, 2009 news brief that increased Sunshine violations was proposed last session. He said the bill died of neglect in the House of Representatives.
If the current bill stops making progress in the House, it will likely meet the same fate of the last proposal. Smucker is right in saying current penalties for Sunshine violations are not sufficient. A fine so minuscule as $100, without an increase for a second offence, does not make a violation appear serious.
In Pennsylvania Senate general assembly meeting on June 1, Smucker said current penalties "do not deter decision makers from erring of the side of secrecy." He further explained the Sunshine law does not justify enforcement by officials compared to other crimes.
The lack of enforcement is what allows violations to continue and possibly go unnoticed. This leaves the potential for information to be hidden from the public. Sunshine laws should represent a states dedication to transparency in government bodies. Without adequate enforcement, the current law is an illusion of transparency.
Also during the assembly meeting, Sen. Andrew Dinniman mentioned that he supports the proposed increase but is "concerned about the innocent public official who gets caught in the middle."
Smucker is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 101 that supports increased penalties for intentional Sunshine Act violations from $100 to $1,000. The bill also proposes a fine for second or subsequent offences up to $2,000.
The bill passed the Senate and is currently in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives as House Bill 1324. It has been in appropriations since May 12, 2009. To become law, the bill needs to pass in the House and be sent to the governor for approval. Smucker also mentioned in the January 26, 2009 news brief that increased Sunshine violations was proposed last session. He said the bill died of neglect in the House of Representatives.
If the current bill stops making progress in the House, it will likely meet the same fate of the last proposal. Smucker is right in saying current penalties for Sunshine violations are not sufficient. A fine so minuscule as $100, without an increase for a second offence, does not make a violation appear serious.
In Pennsylvania Senate general assembly meeting on June 1, Smucker said current penalties "do not deter decision makers from erring of the side of secrecy." He further explained the Sunshine law does not justify enforcement by officials compared to other crimes.
The lack of enforcement is what allows violations to continue and possibly go unnoticed. This leaves the potential for information to be hidden from the public. Sunshine laws should represent a states dedication to transparency in government bodies. Without adequate enforcement, the current law is an illusion of transparency.
Also during the assembly meeting, Sen. Andrew Dinniman mentioned that he supports the proposed increase but is "concerned about the innocent public official who gets caught in the middle."
Be the first to comment on this story