Mark Mahoney and The 2009 Pulitzer Prize

The first story I chose to analyze is "Upholding our right to know: OUR VIEW: Every citizen has the right to information from public officials" because it tells interesting issues citizens have to deal with.

People do care about their government operating in secret as they share their stories about the secrecy that has occurred.

Their stories are shocking and discouraging. People tell their stories about how for years they've been trying to get basic information from the government, only to be ignored. They talk about the acts of retribution being brought against them for daring to exercise their rights. Furthermore, talk about being dismissed by state agencies and put down at meetings of their own local governments for simply asking for information.

But that shouldn't be the case.

Every citizen has a right to public records. That right doesn't belong exclusively to the people with the most clout or the people who can make government officials look bad with scathing commentary. Yet many members of the public feel that if they speak up, they'll be punished in some way.

In feeling powerless, they either give up or continue to suffer in silence.

I agree.

For example, as a citizen, no matter what I say I feel political figures have a different agenda in mind. Same goes for public records. Access to your government is a basic right. Most people are scared to ask for that right. It's just like saying, "Hey mom, can I do my own laundry?" If you already have the right, why should you have to ask? However, I believe there are some things that shouldn't be released to the public because the reaction of the citizens is uncontrollable and unexpected.

---

The second story I chose to analyze is the "Committee sidesteps Open Meetings Law: OUR VIEW: When the public's business is being conducted, the public has a right to be there" because of the loophole in the state Open Meetings Law.

These meetings should be held in the open.

In "walking forums," public officials get around the Open Meetings Law by splitting up their committees into small groups in order to conduct business. Since none of these little groups constitute a quorum of the full committee or board, these meetings can legally be held without notifying the public and without opening the meetings to the citizens.

Supervisor Hall decided to apply the concept of walking forums within the county budget workshops and any other meeting in which the budget is discussed.

For example including health, human resources, government operations, public works, and public safety.

Meetings are deliberately scheduled and supervisors specifically assigned to assure that no quorum is reached, and therefore that the discussions can legally be held in secret.

This article was very well written. With all this in mind, citizens should be outraged that county representatives would attempt to build the new budget in secret without the public to see. Country representatives always find new loopholes around laws. It makes me question, what are they hiding from the public?

What do they not want the public to hear about?

This is an interesting series of posts to read about local issues anyone can find relatable. If you would like to read more here is a link.

If you would like to see more, follow me on Twitter @AmandaH23942284.