Lawmakers call on public to voice support for legislative transparency bill

Some 85 percent of Oklahomans believe the state Legislature should comply with the same open government mandate that applies to other public officials, according to a SoonerPoll survey released Friday.

But those Oklahomans will have to speak up if that transparency is to become reality, three lawmakers said during FOI Oklahoma's Sunshine Week conference on Saturday.

"It's an uphill battle," said House Speaker Kris Steele. "But it's more likely if constituents speak up."

The House could vote as early as Wednesday on HB 1085, which would create a separate transparency statute requiring legislators to give public notice of their meetings and open most of their records to public inspection.

Two Republican representatives, Randy Terrill of Moore and Mike Reynolds of Oklahoma City, have filed 19 amendments to the bill. A subsequent posting to this blog will elaborate on their amendments.

In the meantime, encourage your state representative by email or telephone to vote for HB 1085. (Find your legislator.)

The Legislature's self-imposed exemption from the state's Open Records and Open Meeting laws is "hypocritical," said the bill's author, Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie.

Most Oklahomans would seem to agree, according to SoonerPoll.

Its survey found that 72 percent strongly supported and 13 percent somewhat supported requiring legislators to comply with the Open Meeting and Open Records laws.

That support cut across political lines, with 85 percent of Republicans and 84 percent of Democrats favoring such legislation. Independents showed the most support with 93.1 percent in favor of removing the Legislature's exemption, said SoonerPoll.

"Similarly, 84.5 percent of conservatives, 90.7 percent of liberals and 85.9 percent of moderates said they would support legislation to remove the exemption," said SoonerPoll.

Oklahoma's Legislature is one of only three in the nation to still be explicitly exempted from its state open records law and one of only seven to be explicitly exempted from its open meeting law.

Requiring the Legislature to comply with an open government statute "isn't the end of the world," Murphey said.

The Senate co-author of HB 1085, David Holt, R-Oklahoma City, noted Saturday that open government laws are "perfectly manageable" at the local level.

Holt served as chief of staff for Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett for five years but said he was "stunned" at how state lawmakers conduct the public's business.

“At the Legislature, we may spend minutes or seconds considering some of the same issues of the same level of importance, and unfortunately, our decisions affect the entire state, not just the city,” he said.

HB 1085 might slow the process, "but I'm OK with that," Holt said.

"The sum total of the wisdom of our constituents exceeds the wisdom of the legislators or the city council members, and that's not going to be imparted to us unless they know what's going on. That's the virtue of open meetings and open records acts,” Holt said.

Steele said many legislators don't have experience in local government, so they haven't had to work under the state's open meeting and records laws.

"It sounds kind of scary to them," said Steele.

But HB 1085 "is the next logical step in really opening up transparency and accountability" at the Legislature, Steele said.

"It's just a matter of time before the public demands that the Legislature be subject to the same transparency laws that apply to other levels of government," he said.

But that step won't be taken unless Oklahomans tell their legislators to do it.


Joey Senat, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
OSU School of Media & Strategic Communications


The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the commentators and do not necessarily represent the position of FOI Oklahoma Inc., its staff, or its board of directors. Differing interpretations of open government law and policy are welcome.

Opening legislative caucus meetings likely to stir most opposition to HB 1085, Rep. Murphey says

Requiring state legislative caucuses to discuss the public's business in public will likely create the most opposition to a bill forcing the Legislature to abide by Oklahoma's open government laws, Rep. Jason Murphey said Friday.

"Closed caucus meetings have been an institution forever, and legislators like the ability to talk behind closed doors," the Guthrie Republican told the FOI Oklahoma Blog after filing House Bill 1085 on Friday.

(Read more about the bill.)

In an Edmond Sun column last month, Murphey said opening legislative caucuses is "one of the most important aspects" of his proposal.

"An important principle of open meeting laws is the concept that dictates that a majority of a governing body should never meet behind closed doors to discuss business. This concept helps keep policy makers from taking a public stand different from the position taken in private," Murphey wrote.

On Friday, Murphey seemed optimistic that his bill would pass if he can get it heard in committee and the House floor.

"I do think there is bi-partisan support for the idea. And, make no mistake about it, anytime this bill is given a vote, it will pass overwhelmingly," he said. "This challenge will be getting the hearing in committee and on the floor."

Murphey said he thinks HB 1085 will be assigned to the House Rules Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Gary W. Banz, R-Midwest City.

The bill should find support in that committee because Vice Chair Weldon Watson, R-Tulsa, and three committee members -- David Dank, R-Oklahoma City; Randy McDaniel, R-Oklahoma City; and Seneca Scott, D-Tulsa -- signed FOI Oklahoma's Open Government Pledge.

Other House members who signed the pledge are:

• John Bennett, R-Sallisaw
  
• Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City
  
• Al McAffrey, D-Oklahoma City
  
• Jeannie McDaniel, D-Tulsa
  
• Todd Russ, R-Cordell
  
• Mike Sanders, R-Kingfisher
  
• Emily Virgin, D-Norman
  
• Harold Wright, R-Weatherford
  

Gov. Mary Fallin also signed the pledge and as a candidate last spring said she supports removing the Legislature's exemption from the Open Records and Open Meeting laws.
 
In the Senate, Josh Breechen, R-Coalgate, Roger Ballenger, D-Okmulgee, and minority leader Andrew Rice, D-Oklahoma City, signed the pledge.
 
Along with Murphey, each of these politicians promised to support the public's right to know at every opportunity and to "support legislation to strengthen the letter and the spirit of Oklahoma's Open Meeting and Open Records laws."
 
That's why Murphey should be able to count on their public support for HB 1085.
 

 
Joey Senat, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
OSU School of Media & Strategic Communications

Rep. Murphey files bill requiring Legislature to abide by state Open Meeting, Open Records laws

The Oklahoma Legislature's self-imposed exemption from the state's open government laws would end, under a bill filed Friday by Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie.

House Bill 1085 would add the Legislature to the definition of public body under the Open Records and Open Meeting acts while removing its exemption from the statutes.

Murphey's bill addresses one of the objections raised by legislative leaders last summer: That legislators must be exempt in order to avoid releasing personal or confidential information revealed in constituent e-mails or letters.

Murphey's bill would exempt from the Open Records Act personal communications to a legislator in which a person -- who cannot be another legislator or a registered lobbyist -- exercises rights under the federal or state constitutions.

An exemption for personal communications exercising constitutional rights already exists under the Open Records Act. (OKLA. STAT. tit. 51, § 24A.14)

"Except for the fact that a communication has been received and that it is or is not a complaint, a public official may keep confidential personal communications received by the public official from a person exercising rights secured by" the state and federal constitutions, according to the statute. "The public official's written response to this personal communication may be kept confidential only to the extent necessary to protect the identity of the person exercising the right."

For example, a 1988 attorney general opinion explained, a person filing a complaint with the Board of Governors of Registered Dentists or with the Board of Medical Licensure would be exercising a right under the state and federal constitutions "to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances." (1988 OK AG 79,¶ 17)

Therefore, the identity of the complainant could be kept confidential, the opinion concluded. (See also Bd. of Medical Licensure v. Miglaccio, 1996 OK CIV APP 37, ¶ 9)

The attorney general opinion noted that the statutory language did not require that the complainant's name be kept confidential, only that public officials may do so.

In contrast, Murphey's bill would require the communications to be kept confidential by adding them to a list of records specifically exempted from the Open Records Act. (OKLA. STAT. tit. 51, § 24A.5(1))

But even so, HB 1085 would finally require Oklahoma legislators to follow the state's open government statutes just as other public bodies are required to do.


Joey Senat, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
OSU School of Media & Strategic Communications