ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS
Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - A new version of a bill updating Ohio's open records laws would exempt records kept by Ohio courts and give authority over keeping such records open to the state Supreme Court instead.
Proponents of the bill and court officials say the issue stems from the constitutional separation of Ohio's legislative and judicial branches and is not meant to close off court records that are now open.
"The third branch, the judicial branch, has the authority to determine which records are open and not open," said Chief Justice Thomas Moyer of the Ohio Supreme Court.
However, the measure would be a significant change to current Ohio law governing taxpayers' ability to examine court records pertaining to administration and personnel.
Advocates for open records say the change by itself won't close any records. But they're concerned that lawmakers would lose control of the process for keeping court records open in the future if the bill becomes law.
"The way it's written now, the legislative branch would totally give up any oversight of those records," said Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association. "That's the danger."
The change is included in the latest draft of open records legislation proposed by Rep. Scott Oelslager, a Canton Republican and open records' advocate.
The legislation was introduced following a 2004 survey by the Newspaper Association and The Associated Press that found public employees followed the law only about half the time when asked to provide common records on an unconditional and timely basis as required by law.
The proposal regarding courts and open records was made by Rep. Bill Seitz, a Cincinnati Republican who had held up an earlier version of the bill when Seitz was chairman of the House Civil and Commercial Law Committee.
Seitz, now the sixth-ranked Republican leader, and Oelslager had disagreed over the time a public agency would have to fulfill a records request of more than 100 pages.
Oelslager wanted a 10-day limit; Seitz said in some cases, public officials would need more time.
Oelslager has since replaced Seitz as committee chairman, and the new version includes the 10-day limit with extensions allowed based on the size of a request.
Seitz said courts are governed both by a constitutional requirement to keep their records open and by state law, which he said could create problems.
A law prohibiting the release of a public employee's name, for example, might conflict with the appearance of that name in a court document, Seitz said.
Moyer emphasized that the change is not meant to close off any documents, whether case files or a court's administrative records.
"There should not be a concern that seven members of the court in the future would decide to close from public view a substantial category of records that have been traditionally open," Moyer said. "That's not very realistic to think that that would occur."
Oelslager agreed but acknowledged he doesn't think the change will come easily.
"We're going to have a lot of discussion on this one, and we'll see what happens," he said Friday.
The new version of the bill would also permit individuals who sue public agencies for refusing to provide records to seek fines of up to $1,000.
It would also create a state office to handle complaints from people who say they were denied records or kept out of public meetings. That provision is modeled after a similar office in Indiana.
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Felons, sex offenders target of online dating legislation
Northwest Indiana News: nwitimes.com
BY CATHERINE ANDREWS
Medill News Service
SWM, 32. Enjoys travel, cooking and 19th century literature. Nonsmoker. Convicted of a felony in 1998.
Not exactly what a typical online dating profile looks like these days. But if legislation before the Illinois Senate about background checks for dating sites passes, it would be the law.
The draft, House Bill 5299, which was approved by the House on Wednesday and is now in the Senate, would require paid dating sites with over 1,000 users to disclose whether other members are subjected to background checks for sex offenses and felony convictions. If such a check is conducted, the sites would have to disclose information about any member with either a felony or sex offense conviction.
"People in my district came up to me and were saying, 'do you realize those internet dating services don't provide any kind of safety check?' " said Rep. John E. Bradley, D-117, who introduced the legislation. "I said that can't be right, but I looked into it and was shocked to find out they don't. So I proposed just a simple background check. Sites should at least tell their users if they do a check or not."
If the bill passes, sites like Match.com or eHarmony.com that fail to disclose whether or not they perform background checks would face a $1,000 fine.
Patrick Elward, a Chicago web developer and user of several online dating sites, said he thinks that the legislative bodies have good intentions. But it was his belief that people should simply use common sense when it comes to online dating, instead of relying on state regulation.
"The best protection one can use when dating is to use your judgment," Elward said. "There are snakes in all walks of life ... Would it be any more successful if offenders had to wear a large orange cap on their heads when perusing the vegetable aisle at the local grocery store?"
But Bradley thinks the bill, which passed the House 74-36, will be worthwhile and is likely to be approved.
"I know a lot of people really utilize and enjoy these sites and there are a lot of good stories out there," he said. "But let's not wait for there to be a bunch of bad stories, too."
BY CATHERINE ANDREWS
Medill News Service
SWM, 32. Enjoys travel, cooking and 19th century literature. Nonsmoker. Convicted of a felony in 1998.
Not exactly what a typical online dating profile looks like these days. But if legislation before the Illinois Senate about background checks for dating sites passes, it would be the law.
The draft, House Bill 5299, which was approved by the House on Wednesday and is now in the Senate, would require paid dating sites with over 1,000 users to disclose whether other members are subjected to background checks for sex offenses and felony convictions. If such a check is conducted, the sites would have to disclose information about any member with either a felony or sex offense conviction.
"People in my district came up to me and were saying, 'do you realize those internet dating services don't provide any kind of safety check?' " said Rep. John E. Bradley, D-117, who introduced the legislation. "I said that can't be right, but I looked into it and was shocked to find out they don't. So I proposed just a simple background check. Sites should at least tell their users if they do a check or not."
If the bill passes, sites like Match.com or eHarmony.com that fail to disclose whether or not they perform background checks would face a $1,000 fine.
Patrick Elward, a Chicago web developer and user of several online dating sites, said he thinks that the legislative bodies have good intentions. But it was his belief that people should simply use common sense when it comes to online dating, instead of relying on state regulation.
"The best protection one can use when dating is to use your judgment," Elward said. "There are snakes in all walks of life ... Would it be any more successful if offenders had to wear a large orange cap on their heads when perusing the vegetable aisle at the local grocery store?"
But Bradley thinks the bill, which passed the House 74-36, will be worthwhile and is likely to be approved.
"I know a lot of people really utilize and enjoy these sites and there are a lot of good stories out there," he said. "But let's not wait for there to be a bunch of bad stories, too."
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Check finds no offenders at TC schools
But officials cautious about releasing data
By CHRISTINE FINGER
Record-Eagle staff writer
TRAVERSE CITY - A statewide background check didn't turn up any convicted sex offenders working for Traverse City Area Public Schools, but district officials are cautious about disclosing the full results.
The state reports, sent last week to school districts, are part of new laws that went into effect Jan. 1 and aim to keep sex offenders out of schools. Michigan State Police ran background checks on about 200,000 current school employees statewide.
Christine Davis, TCAPS human resources director, said results received Monday showed none of the district's 2,000 employees had convictions for sex offenses, for which state law would require immediate termination.
But TCAPS, like other districts around the state, discovered inaccurate information on the initial list.
"I'm confident that when we get the list to a point where it is accurate, it will be a much more usable document," she said.
Davis said she found numerous misdemeanor criminal convictions inaccurately assigned to district employees. She is contacting the affected employees, running another criminal record check through state police and relaying that information to the state department of education so officials there can correct the list.
The new state laws, dubbed the Student Safety Initiative, require criminal background checks on all school employees, including teachers, administrators, janitors, cafeteria workers and paraprofessionals.
The legislation dictates that districts fire any employee convicted of a sex offense and requires employees with other felony and some misdemeanor convictions to get written permission from their superintendents and school boards to continue their jobs.
Davis said TCAPS in 1994 began running criminal background checks on all incoming teachers, administrators and other non-certified staff, as well as volunteers working in the district.
The Michigan Education Association cited inaccuracies in persuading a judge last week to issue a temporary order preventing the state from releasing results to the public. But the state released the results to local districts.
Davis predicted TCAPS will publicly report the results once accuracy is ensured.
"I think it will be very good news," she said.
Tim Bolles, manager of the Michigan State Police identification and criminal history section, said cross-checking the Department of Education's school employee list and the state police criminal database yielded some "false positives" because of misused Social Security numbers or common name matches.
The data-to-data searches will be replaced by more accurate fingerprint matching when all employees are required to be fingerprinted starting in 2008, he said.
Alison Burns, a parent at Central Grade School, said the results are important to ensure students' safety, but TCAPS doesn't necessarily need to publish the list.
"I would expect the district and law enforcement to take appropriate action," Burns said.
http://www.record-eagle.com/2006/feb/08school.htm
By CHRISTINE FINGER
Record-Eagle staff writer
TRAVERSE CITY - A statewide background check didn't turn up any convicted sex offenders working for Traverse City Area Public Schools, but district officials are cautious about disclosing the full results.
The state reports, sent last week to school districts, are part of new laws that went into effect Jan. 1 and aim to keep sex offenders out of schools. Michigan State Police ran background checks on about 200,000 current school employees statewide.
Christine Davis, TCAPS human resources director, said results received Monday showed none of the district's 2,000 employees had convictions for sex offenses, for which state law would require immediate termination.
But TCAPS, like other districts around the state, discovered inaccurate information on the initial list.
"I'm confident that when we get the list to a point where it is accurate, it will be a much more usable document," she said.
Davis said she found numerous misdemeanor criminal convictions inaccurately assigned to district employees. She is contacting the affected employees, running another criminal record check through state police and relaying that information to the state department of education so officials there can correct the list.
The new state laws, dubbed the Student Safety Initiative, require criminal background checks on all school employees, including teachers, administrators, janitors, cafeteria workers and paraprofessionals.
The legislation dictates that districts fire any employee convicted of a sex offense and requires employees with other felony and some misdemeanor convictions to get written permission from their superintendents and school boards to continue their jobs.
Davis said TCAPS in 1994 began running criminal background checks on all incoming teachers, administrators and other non-certified staff, as well as volunteers working in the district.
The Michigan Education Association cited inaccuracies in persuading a judge last week to issue a temporary order preventing the state from releasing results to the public. But the state released the results to local districts.
Davis predicted TCAPS will publicly report the results once accuracy is ensured.
"I think it will be very good news," she said.
Tim Bolles, manager of the Michigan State Police identification and criminal history section, said cross-checking the Department of Education's school employee list and the state police criminal database yielded some "false positives" because of misused Social Security numbers or common name matches.
The data-to-data searches will be replaced by more accurate fingerprint matching when all employees are required to be fingerprinted starting in 2008, he said.
Alison Burns, a parent at Central Grade School, said the results are important to ensure students' safety, but TCAPS doesn't necessarily need to publish the list.
"I would expect the district and law enforcement to take appropriate action," Burns said.
http://www.record-eagle.com/2006/feb/08school.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
