Category: Local Government

Categories
Democracy Gov2.0 Governing Government Communication Journalism Local Government News Media public communications management Public Engagement Public Information Transparency

Educating the Public: A Brave New World

This is a reprint of a guest column I was invited to submit to Barrett & Greene Inc. published on 11/29/2023 (Adapted for the TDK blog, readers have the option between the “appetizer” version and the “main course” version.)

As an appetizer…

In a democracy, the news media’s vital role in disseminating government information faces challenges with the rise of social media. As technology transforms communication, government officials argue its advantages for efficiency, while journalists warn of unchecked government influence. Public trust in both government and news media compounds the issue. Acknowledging low trust levels, governments aim to engage residents through social media, with 55% of American adults using it for news. Caution is urged, advocating for greater coordination between public organizations and the media to ensure historic checks and balances endure. Recommendations for government managers include treating news media as constituent VIPs, using dedicated technology platforms for communication and information exchanges, and building media partnerships for informed public discourse to navigate challenges and uphold democratic principles.

As the main course…

Disseminating information about government and public affairs is a basic responsibility of the news media in a democratic society. The Founders believed it was important for a formal institution, independent of government, to have the responsibility to oversee, vet, and inform the public about government affairs and guarantee it constitutional protection.

However, with rapid advancements in digital communication, the landscape is changing. Social media supplements and at times circumvents the role of the traditional press as a means for state and local governments to get their messages across to a broad audience. This trend introduces new challenges and opportunities to inform, educate, and engage residents that impact government deliberations and policymaking. 

Many public officials argue that using these enabling technologies improves efficiency in delivering information to larger, more diverse populations they serve. The journalism community warns that when the government circumvents the news media, residents become vulnerable to government influence with unvetted information that may lack accuracy or contain slanted content. There are elements of truth to both perspectives.

Compounding the complexity of the issue are the historically low levels of public trust in both the government and the news media. In the context of a functioning democracy, acknowledging this reality becomes crucial in understanding the dynamics between the message and the messenger, and the public’s response. 

For the most part, the goal of governments is to inform and educate the residents they serve, and it’s not a surprise that they are increasingly inclined to meet the public on common ground. “The percentage of American adults who use social media for news, sometimes or often, is now at 55%,” according to Amy Mitchell, the Pew Research Center’s director of journalism. That’s up from the presidential election of 2016 when 42% of adults received at least some news from social media.

Enabling technologies present opportunities to expand the dissemination of public information, but caution must be taken. Government managers can play a pivotal role in enhancing the quality of public information and education. Here are three recommendations that advocate for cultural shifts within public organizations –which are never easy:

1. Treat the news media as a VIP member of your constituency.  Proactively utilize technology to work with the traditional news media in disseminating information to the public about your agency’s programs and policies.

Consider your department as one of many digital entry and dissemination points to the media and the public. Go from an information gatekeeper to an information gateway using technology to stream relevant content to a wider audience.

Work with your communication manager to build relationships with journalists through regular media briefings and position yourself as a point of contact for media inquiries that address your span of control within the administration.

2. Use a dedicated technology platform beyond social networks. A scalable, enterprise technology public engagement platform is essential to sharing information on a large scale. Each agency should have its designated portal providing easy access to information for the public and the media. 

Public engagement platforms benefit your agency and the news media in two ways. First, it is a proactive repository for information about your programs and policies the public and the media can easily access. Second, it serves as a collection point for public input and feedback. The information and exchanges amplify your message to a larger audience and can identify topics of interest the news media may want to follow up on. Your communications director and IT department are key internal partners.

3. Build news media partnerships for informed public discourse. Governments use public forums to inform residents about public policies and projects. The media’s role has been that of an observer. 

Partner with the news media to cosponsor public forums, both conventional and online, and share responsibility for managing public information and feedback. Each institution serves a different role and purpose as a public information provider. However, working together provides inclusive background and analyses which help build public support and trust and minimize misinformation. 

Be creative with the partnership in navigating community awareness around other critical public issues, such as misinformation education and digital media literacy campaigns.

The digital age has ushered in new challenges and opportunities for the primary institutional providers of public affairs information –the press and the public sector. While technological changes empower governments to play an increased role in information dissemination, trust must be preserved – a goal that is becoming ever more difficult.  

To restore public trust, both the government and the news media must build meaningful relationships with the residents they serve and with each other. Improving their roles as public information providers becomes the first and most crucial step in navigating the complexities of governing in the digital age while upholding the principles of democracy.

Categories
Democracy Journalism Local Government News Media PIO Public Engagement Public Information

Reimagining the PIO-Journalist Relationship to Build Trust and Inform Society

As an appetizer…

I attended my first 3CMA Annual Conference in Orlando. My presentation tackled the crucial task of rebuilding trust in government, the media, and democracy. I emphasized the roles of government communicators and journalists in informing and educating the public about public affairs and stressed the need for greater cooperation between them. The historic friction between these groups has eroded, mirroring societal polarization. Technological shifts and declining public trust in both institutions have strained their effectiveness and public trust. To rebuild, both must engage their communities and each other. Increasing transparency and modernized, expanded engagement are key, and leveraging technology to bridge the gap. Collaboration is essential for a more informed, educated, and engaged public.

As the main course…

I attended the 3CMA Annual Conference in Orlando last month, marking my first attendance. My familiarity with this great organization of government communicators and marketers dates back to my days as a Public Information Officer (PIO) with the City of Louisville.

Continue reading “Reimagining the PIO-Journalist Relationship to Build Trust and Inform Society”
Categories
Branding Local Government Public Engagement

The Power of Branding: The Public Engagement Asset

When it comes to branding, jurisdictions should consider public engagement as part of their strategy. 

Read as an appetizer…

Public organizations and their jurisdictions should integrate public engagement into their branding strategy, mirroring how businesses manage their brand image. A positive community brand attracts businesses, conventions, and tourists and relies on residents’ trust in their local government. Trust is foundational for public institutions and crucial for political participation and social cohesion. Yet current data shows growing public mistrust of government. To help (re)build trust, increasing transparency and community cooperation is essential. Public engagement, facilitated by technology platforms, enhances transparency, fosters involvement, and boosts trust, positively impacting a government’s brand and image. Creative communication strategies and the right technology enable an open, progressive local government to build and maintain a strong brand.

Read as the main course…

Note: This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com) 

ReaJust as companies work to improve the image of their brand, many local governments do the same.  Creating and maintaining a favorable community image has always been a key component of any economic development strategy. Typically falling on local chambers of commerce and convention and visitors bureaus, promoting a positive community brand helps attract businesses, conventions, and tourists.

Continue reading “The Power of Branding: The Public Engagement Asset”
Categories
Civic Engagement Local Government State Government

IIJA: Engagement’s Impact on Funding

 

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

As the National Association of Regional Partnerships, or NARC, wraps up its annual National Conference of Regions meeting in Washington, D.C., two important federal funding initiatives have regions thinking about new opportunities and challenges for their connected jurisdictions.

The American Rescue Plan Act, or ARPA, and the (“Bi-partisan”) Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, will distribute $1.9 trillion and $1.2 trillion, respectively, to state and local governments

National Investment: Local Impacts

ARPA funds are tied to the economic hardships suffered due to the COVID-19 pandemic and can be used for supporting public health expenditures; addressing negative economic impacts of the pandemic; replacing lost public-sector revenue; and providing premium pay for essential workers.

IIJA funds provide a huge multi-year investment into the improvement and innovation of the nation’s infrastructure. Everything from transportation to broadband internet expansion and water pipe replacement is the target of this federal funding program. Roads and bridges are the biggest beneficiaries.

Social, environmental, and infrastructure challenges facing local jurisdictions typically do not stop at a legal boundary. Hence, the need for these jurisdictions to have established formal agreements in place to tackle these challenges and opportunities as a collective.

It’s very common for these agreements to cross state boundaries. For this reason, regional planning, which includes multiple jurisdictions working together to benefit the whole, will be front and center in these programs.  Front and center in that process are MPO’s (Metropolitan Planning Organizations) and COG’s (Councils of Governments) as groups focused on regional initiatives and investments.

As the federal government plans a historical disbursement of funds for state and local infrastructure improvements, local governments are preparing to make their pitch for needed funding for their communities. Many of these initiatives will involve multiple jurisdictions and regional planning partnerships will be critical to pursuing federal funding.

Competition, Planning, & Public Engagement

Competition for IIJA funds will be stiff. “This is why it’s crucial that so many state and local government leaders are doing preparatory work now to position their organizations for the coming influx of federal money,” according to Ellory Monks, co-founder of The Atlas, an online community for local government leaders to crowdsource ideas and advice.

Engagement is highlighted as a key to securing funding

The focus for local jurisdictions in their planning puts public participation as a top priority. Governments will conduct historical civic listening sessions to collect input from residents about their preferences for infrastructure improvements. How well these jurisdictions capture the collective voices of their residents will be tied to the success and the level of funding requested and received.

IIJA includes descriptive requirements for public engagement

No other federal funding program has been as insistent of jurisdictions and descriptive in their requirements surrounding resident engagement to ensure representation, inclusion, and equity in their public participation efforts.

For example, the IIJA offers provisions promoting digital equity along with a $2.75 billion allocation to the category. Among requirements for jurisdictions to qualify for these funds, they must provide detailed plans that:

    • Identify barriers to digital equity faced by covered populations in the state;
    • Provide an assessment of how the objectives will impact the state’s civic and social engagement; and
    • Provide a description of how states plan to collaborate with key community stakeholders and residents

For jurisdictions to meet the important community engagement requirements, the act allows and encourages the use of technology to encourage public participation in the planning process. This encourages public institutions to utilize their civic infrastructure to improve their physical infrastructure.

The Competitive Edge: An Engagement Platform built for equity

Today, many jurisdictions are recognizing the opportunity presented by the pandemic to re-imagine the way they connect and engage with their residents.

PublicInput’s unified public engagement platform helped many jurisdictions provide equitable access to the public process when traditional means of engagement were no longer possible.  By providing options for residents to provide input online, by phone, email, and even text messaging, organizations reported significant increases in participation.

Increasing the volume of participation is one thing, but measuring improvements in equity has been an even more noteworthy benefit of new approaches. Agencies using PublicInput’s Equity Mapping tool have combined census data layers from the EPA’s EJSCREEN with their resident database to visualize engagement from neighborhoods most impacted by the pandemic.

Equity Mapping layers showing participation in low-income and linguistically isolated communities in Austin, TX

Geospatial layers like these can be even more valuable when combined with a resident database that can generate resident segments by census block, EPA EJSCREEN percentile, or another relevant filter such as Qualified Census Tracts (QCT’s). An example below shows how Guilford County, NC did exactly that using PublicInput’s segmentation and reporting tools.  By creating a segment of respondents who live or work in Qualified Census Tracts, they were able to zero in on the input from areas that qualify for ARPA spending. 

Guilford County leveraged PublicInput’s segmentation tools to report on ARPA engagement specifically from residents in Qualified Census Tracts

QCT’s have historically been a key focus for Community Development Block Grants, but more recently have become relevant in deploying ARPA funding. Federal guidelines offer even greater flexibility for expenditures in Qualified Census Tracts, as these areas are often home to communities, households, and businesses disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. With the right technology, agencies can now improve how they engage these communities, and use data to clearly identify key themes and needs.

Whether you’re deploying ARPA funds or pursuing IIJA funding for critical projects, being able to demonstrate equitable community engagement will likely become the tipping point for local governments securing competitive federal dollars for their community.

Categories
Civic Engagement Local Government Public Engagement

Public Engagement and the CIO

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

CIOs and IT see a greater role in public engagement

Modern-day government is adding democracy to their list of CIO priorities. In the 2020 State CIO Survey conducted by the National Association of State CIOs (NASCIO), “Digital services and emerging technologies” took over as the #1 priority replacing cyber security which had held that spot for four years. While CIO/IT engagement with citizens has addressed many public policy areas, those exchanges were never as critical as in their new role that began in March 2020.

When COVID-19 struck, public officials retreated from conventional public engagement practices for the health and safety of themselves and for the members of their communities. Despite this, the imperative for local governments to remain open and continue dialog with residents and facilitate their participation in deliberations remained –particularly in times of crises

Many local governments were unprepared technologically and procedurally for a seamless transition from conventional, in-person meetings to virtual ones. As a result, the circumstances propelled by the pandemic set the stage for an incredible transformation in the IT government space.

CIOs and their teams became the central government employees in public meetings. They were the architects and managers to build and at times run the platforms for public bodies and the public to virtually connect and collaborate.

The expanding CIO role is being recognized by government leaders who are realizing their value beyond traditional technologists and as key players and enablers in the future of government-citizen collaboration.

“We have also seen concrete evidence that technology is expected by the general public and important for communicating and engaging at scale.”  CIO quote from NASCIO survey

Leveraging Technology

Most CIOs and IT staff were challenged early on in the pandemic to cobble together multiple technologies to replicate and comply with traditional in-person meetings and requirements.

Today, many have found end-to-end solutions offering the best fit to bring more diversity, equity, inclusion, and meaning to public engagement and decision-making processes.

Expanding the role and influence of CIOs and IT to ensure the government has a secure and manageable platform that improves both the quantity and quality of collaboration with residents offers both an opportunity and a challenge.

In this year’s NASCIO survey, “with responses being collected a full year after the pandemic began, one answer overwhelmingly stood out as the biggest driver for state governments’ need to digitize: ‘better online experience for citizens.’”

A survey from Emerging Local Government Leaders (ELGL) echoed this at the community level. Asked which areas of government where software and technology adoption were made during the pandemic would become permanent, 83% of respondents identified “community engagement.”

What does this new role of “democracy enabler” mean for CIOs and for their departments?

This larger role illustrates the importance of technology solutions to public engagement in governing today. The responsibility to contribute to successful engagement is spread across a broader spectrum of government employees, each contributing their talent to the process.

Public engagement is more than collecting input and feedback from residents. It is a central theme for public institutions to build and rebuild trust among constituents and the opportunity to collect more informed input from subject matter experts in their communities that lead to better decision-making for the whole.

Expect to see an ongoing role for IT as local governments continue to utilize virtual methods along with conventional forms of public engagement to provide residents and public officials with a blended, or hybrid environment that takes advantage of the benefits offered using both formats.

Categories
Local Government Public Engagement

Public Engagement Effectiveness

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

Enterprise Public Engagement

Applying enterprise approaches to public engagement helps government increase input and feedback for better decision-making, inclusion, and efficiency.

The IBM Center for The Business of Government connects research to practice in helping to improve government and to assist public sector executives and managers in addressing real-world problems with practical ideas and original thinking to improve government.  The“Seven Drivers Transforming Government” is the culmination of research with current and former government leaders that identifies seven drivers for transforming government in the years to come.

PublicInput is applying a selection of those drivers to interpreting the future of one of the government’s most important success components: public engagement.

Effectiveness

IBM Center for The Business of Government

Applying enterprise approaches to achieve better outcomes, operational efficiency and a leaner government.

Approaches to Engagement

When asked for examples of public engagement, many people may suggest a town hall or council meeting where members of the public are allotted a brief opportunity to provide public comments to their elected officials. Others may point to government initiatives around transportation or environmental projects where governments seek input or feedback from impacted residents.

Few people, if any, suggest an example of public engagement as a 24/7/365 service between the government and their constituents. On the surface, daily engagement sounds like a pretty massive undertaking. Engagement practitioners often wonder, can something like this be accomplished and what benefits can be realized for a government and a community engaged in on-demand collaboration around important policy issues.

The answer is a government with the ongoing goal of being more effective, both in terms of its operations and results.

Effectiveness

Effectivity has been demonstrated through the use of technology across government agencies –known as the adoption of enterprise solutions– to deliver mission-support services seamlessly across program and organizational boundaries.

The Future of Performance

IBM Center for The Business of Government

. . . the future of government performance relies not simply on greater efficiency, but also on increasing capacity to work effectively

How does this apply to public engagement? 

We saw firsthand at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic the critical challenge for state and local agencies to effectively use technology to continue their deliberations with public officials and the community. To continue public meetings in many jurisdictions, it took emergency executive orders, supporting legislation, and a corps of talented and hard-working CIOs and IT departments across the nation. Not only was the government less efficient in carrying out the basic function of public engagement, it was also noted among many jurisdictions and governing bodies as an ineffective way to inform constituents and to solicit input on public issues.

As the pandemic continued, most governing bodies adopted some form of information and/or communication technologies to continue meetings and public engagement, even without the efficiency or effectiveness required or desired. Today, a new era of public engagement and representative democracy is emerging through the use of dedicated public engagement technology platforms.

From these platforms, governments are realizing the benefits of blending virtual and conventional approaches to public engagement that increase and diversify participation. Data collected through the use of new public engagement models to organize and centralize public governance are creating more effective processes that can be realized across multiple departments.

Positive, Significant, & Lasting Change

 

IBM Center for The Business of Government

To achieve positive, significant, and lasting change, government leaders must focus on sound implementation. The focus on implementation involves the meaningful integration of operations across agencies via an enterprise approach.

24/7/365 Engagement

Governments need to consider what an enterprise approach to public engagement could look like with a 24/7/365 public engagement process. It will take a rethinking of how we use technology and how we define public engagement.

It will require the government and the public to change the narrative when it comes to public engagement. Instead of being selective where public participation or comments are sought, the government should be engaging the public on issues in every department every day. This cannot be accomplished without the use of technology solutions. Fortunately, we have the technology capable of enterprise deployment.

Governments must also consider how they can be more effective through more engagement. There is a vast ocean of knowledge among the residents in a community. Many who possess skills and expertise about challenges the government faces every day surrounding public policies would offer their input or feedback if given the right mechanism to contribute to it.

At PublicInput, we agree with those thought leaders who advocate governments should constantly be thinking about how they can tap into the community’s energy and enthusiasm and leverage that with public work being performed by the government on their behalf.

Enterprise Government

 

IBM Center for The Business of Government

. . . enterprise government focuses on mission support and emphasizes streamlining and integration of administrative services, as well as processes and functions that share common elements.

Public engagement can be a shared service —government-wide or department-wide– as a system that can be standardized, produced, and delivered, aligning enterprise approaches with problem-solving. That is, public engagement should look and operate the same across all government sectors and agencies offering governments a centralized, organized, managed, and reported system made more efficient through an enterprise solution.

Government Transformation

IBM Center for the Business of Government

Enterprise approaches that leverage modern management and technology systems and practices can enable progress across the public sector. The evolution of enterprise government can give fresh momentum to improving effectiveness and driving transformation in government. 

Adding “engagement” to public administration along with the basic framework of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness is a principal way of practicing the work of governance with more inclusion and equity creating more informed decision-making.

Categories
Democracy Local Government Public Engagement State Government

Virtual Meetings & State Legislatures

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

More state legislatures are enabling virtual public meetings as an option for deliberations and public engagement.

Historically, government officials have been required to meet in person to deliberate about the public’s business. This has been particularly true for meetings that included constituents and their elected representatives. Some states even have laws requiring officials to attend meetings in person.

Face-to-face meetings between elected officials and the public are important.

This is because elected officials can’t ignore people that are right in front of them talking about a problem or a policy. It also helps them put a “face” to a certain issue or law. The public’s physical presence at a meeting can be very impactful when making decisions and could affect the outcome.

Times and technology have changed and public attendance at council meetings or committee meetings usually represents those who have a strong opinion for or against the issue that is being debated and may not represent the voice of the whole community.

The Pursuit of Alternative Means

In March 2020 as the COVID-19 virus became a pandemic, state and local governments were forced to shutter their buildings and halt their in-person proceedings. Alternative means had to be pursued to conduct the public’s business and for the continuation of governance.

For years, the public has had options to view or listen to their governing bodies’ proceedings electronically, whether online, televised, or by radio and officials were physically present in those proceedings. Now, the elected and the electorate would need to segregate from each other and conduct their meetings virtually. Yet, some states had laws that required meetings of public bodies to have the officials present which prevented them from attending virtually.

With the growing pandemic, states had to act fast to enable the government to continue to operate and in a way that would not violate their open government laws surrounding access, participation, and transparency of public meetings.

Executive orders became the norm in most states to enable their governments to continue operations, including holding virtual proceedings. Those emergency orders, however, had deadlines so it was up to state legislatures in those states that restricted virtual attendance to create formal alternatives for convening public meetings.

Fast forward to the summer of 2021

With a year and a half of a continuing (and resurging) pandemic, along with 18 months of positive data about the effectiveness of virtual public meetings (VPM), decisions by state and local governments to meet virtually have taken hold across the nation on whether or not there were legal restrictions preventing them. Today, VPMs as an alternative or complement to in-person meetings are launching a new era of public engagement for governments and for residents.

Recall that not all states have laws requiring in-person attendance by officials that prevent VPMs and therefore do not require legislative action to approve their use. Wyoming is a good example of a state that switched to VPMs over the last year and a half, including hybrid models, to ensure continuity of services and decision-making along with public outreach.

For those states that either required officials’ in-person attendance or wanted to revise legislation to ensure VPMs were included in their public meeting requirements, 17 states had bills filed over the last year that included language pertaining to VPMs, according to BillTrack50, a free research and tracking service of state and federal legislation and legislators from LegiNation, Inc.,

So far, four of the 17 states have signed and enacted legislation to support VPMs (California, Georgia, Nebraska and Utah), while seven are still in committees or have been approved by one chamber and crossed-over to the other. These states include Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina and Washington. Bills addressing VPMs in six states died in committee or failed on the floor: Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada and Texas.

A New Way to Govern

With or without needed changes to laws to enable VPMs across state and local jurisdictions, many public officials and residents are realizing the benefits along with the challenges of adjusting to VPMs and hybrid models that blend VPMs with in-person meetings.  Residents are enjoying the ease and convenience to learn about and engage their public officials without the challenges to their schedules including traveling to a meeting for whatever reason they may have.

Public officials are seeing the ranks of public participation swell and increased diversity among attendees. Key challenges facing public bodies such as inclusion to hear from more voices in the community are being facilitated using VPMs. The public’s personal preferences surrounding communicating and sharing information with public officials are being met and with greater ease. That helps build more trust between public officials and residents.

Whether out of necessity or in response to a disaster, state and local governments and their constituents are finding VPMs provide a new and welcoming way for governing and advancing democracy in their jurisdictions.

 

Categories
Local Government Public Information Public Meetings

Re-Examining Public Meetings

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

Local jurisdictions rethink public meetings amid spikes in COVID-19 cases

Headlines from the pandemic outbreak in 2020?  No, these are announcements local governments have made in recent weeks as new cases of COVID-19 infections are exceeding totals recorded in 2020.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are reporting new outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 infections, including COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infection, associated with large public gatherings. Local governments are faced with a critical challenge regarding in-person public meetings in the midst of a resurgence in the pandemic as many jurisdictions returned to in-person deliberations

A Re-examination of Priorities

After vaccines became available and inoculations of U.S. residents increased with lower cases of COVID-19 infections being reported, local governments planned a return to in-person meetings. However, after more than a year of virtual public engagement — which came with its own set of challenges, but also returned major benefits — the data makes a strong case for continuing virtual proceedings.

Whether for ongoing health concerns or for the benefits to government decision-making, the evidence is clear: given the opportunity to participate virtually, the public will attend and in larger numbers than in person.

It’s understandable that elected officials have expressed a desire to return to in-person meetings for the face-to-face experience. However, successful virtual engagement has made an impressive impact as a way for governments to engage a larger and more diverse segment of their population.

Governments should not consider in-person or virtual meetings as an either/or decision. Instead, utilizing both methods in a hybrid model is a highly effective way to meet or exceed public information and communication objectives.

A New Era of Unified Public Engagement

Virtual public meetings are part of a new era of public engagement. Many state legislatures have recognized the benefits and have passed new laws allowing policies for continuing virtual public meetings to complement or supplant in-person meetings.

A recent survey from The Atlas, Engaging Local Government Leaders (ELGL), CivicPulse, CivicPlus, and Route Fifty reports 53% of responding jurisdictions that used virtual public meetings last year will continue to use them. Greater use of information technology by local governments over the last year has also increased expectations among residents for greater communication and information sharing with their governing bodies.

Click the image to view the “New Normal” survey report.

While the rise in COVID-19 cases should cause widespread alarm and a reexamination of public health policies in every state, governments are not facing the same great wall as they were in March 2020 when public communication and information processes came to a standstill. Proven options are available with virtual deliberations.

In Florida, the Treasure Coast newspaper editorial board has called on their county government to reinstate Zoom meetings permanently due to the increase in COVID-19 outbreaks and based on the fact virtual meetings facilitate greater public participation in government. The paper’s editorial stated:

Local governments around the state should not be looking to deep-six Zoom or any other video conferencing program they’ve used during the pandemic. They ought to be looking for ways to permanently integrate the services into the governing process. Zoom video conferences and Zoom commenting should be standard additions to the way local governments do business. Editorial Board – Treasure Cost Newspapers

Categories
Democracy Journalism Local Government

From Bad Bills Come Bad Laws: A Proactive Prescription for Restoring Trust in Government and Democracy

When the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation announced in March a $300 million investment to improve the quality of local news, it made an important first step to restoring trust in a key component of our society.

The funding decision was spurred by a recent report from the Knight Commission on Trust, Media and Democracy, which explored the disconnect between the public, the press, and our public institutions, notably the government.

Its conclusion: We are in a watershed moment and must make reforms in our media and civic infrastructure.

The report advances a series of recommendations aimed at the news media, civic educators, and the public. And while the report urges “every government official to be open and transparent,” what is missing is a list of reforms required in our federal, state, and local governments to help restore trust.

Instructing government to be transparent is not enough. Restoring trust in democracy through our public institutions must include reforms in all branches to ensure openness, access and accountability.

Knight addresses one area of needed reforms by granting $10 million to the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press to increase litigation efforts to defend access to public information. This is an important and welcome investment to ensure our First Amendment rights.

Even so, building trust in government requires a strong offense as well as a strong defense. The National Freedom of Information Coalition and its state coalitions support a multi-faceted approach beyond reactionary litigation to usher in needed reforms.

Most litigation challenges bad laws that lead to bad policies. But before they were bad laws, they were bad bills. A proactive, holistic approach to needed legislative and policy reforms can prevent these bad laws and poor public policies from being created in the first place.

It’s a daunting task to enact reforms that promote trust in our public institutions in an era where more and more governments, particularly state legislatures, attempt to undermine existing open government precedent, making it harder for journalists and the public to monitor and report violations that diminish access and accountability.

But there are areas that have shown results to increase transparency and accountability of our public institutions and should be instilled in all public institutions across the nation:

· Legislative tracking. Bad bills can be identified and fought early. Yet this is not an easy task. Many state legislatures can bury amendments that dismantle existing open government laws or increase exemptions to existing laws in the text of unrelated bills — hiding them from the public until it’s too late.

· Compliance enforcement. State and local governments across the nation inconsistently comply with their open government laws. Sometimes it’s a lack of training and education. Other times it’s intentional. Enforcement of existing open government laws is critical to discourage violations. Yet violators are rarely charged and when they are, punishment is usually a slap on the wrist.

· Formal appeals processes. Some states don’t have an appeals process when a record is denied, leaving the petitioner no option but to sue, which creates a financial burden not only on the requestor but also on the taxpayer. Independent state open records ombudspersons are a way some states combat this issue. Fee shifting, where the losing government agency pays the legal fees of the prevailing petitioner is another.

· Technology solutions. Open data and online request portals readily provide public access to public records, establish or advance professional standards, and help create best practices within executive branch agencies.

Without public oversight, without creating more professionalism in administering state open government laws and policies, and without an internal culture to punish violators, there will always be inevitable situations where a bad bill is passed, or when a public agency continues to deny access in violation of their state open government laws. And the only option is to sue.

Still, through enacting reforms in all branches of state and local governments, and proactively monitoring and educating the public (and officials of their responsibilities), we can help restore trust in our democracy by restoring trust in our public institutions.

Daniel Bevarly is executive director of the National Freedom of Information Coalition, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that promotes press freedom and legislative and administrative reforms that ensure open, transparent, and accessible state and local governments. Reach him at dbevarly@nfoic.org.