Pa.’s redistricting process is officially over

A weekly newsletter by

March 17, 2022 | spotlightpa.org

The good, the bad, and the ugly of Pa.’s open records law

Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law is central to much of Spotlight PA’s work. But that doesn’t mean that the statute is perfect, or that our reporters don’t run into issues when trying to obtain information they believe the public should have access to. Below, three of Spotlight PA’s investigative reporters explain barriers they’ve encountered while using the law. 

Angela Couloumbis, Spotlight PA: When the General Assembly wrote Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law, it carved out a sizable exemption for itself. Unlike the executive branch, the legislature does not have to give up emails or other correspondence that can be critical to the reporting process. What they are on the hook for are financial records — but as I learned with my colleagues at The Caucus, even those records aren’t guaranteed.

We embarked on a project in 2019 to document how the legislature spends money, seeking every expenditure other than salaries and benefits. The state House and Senate eventually turned over thousands of pages of expense records, but they were littered with redactions that obscured the reason for the expense.

We appealed, and both chambers backtracked and provided most of the documents without redactions. But the state Senate stood by its argument that “legislative privilege” allowed it to withhold some details about how lawmakers spend public money. 

Jamie Martines, Spotlight PA: In September 2021, I requested records related to the state’s COVID-19 school testing program with Boston-based Ginkgo Bioworks. I wanted to know details like which schools were participating in the program and how many people were getting tested weekly. I knew from contract documents between the Department of Health and Ginkgo, as well as from interviews I had conducted, that the records I was looking for should be available. 

DOH denied my request based on the Disease Prevention and Control Law, a defense the Wolf administration used to avoid releasing records throughout the pandemic. In my appeal, I outlined similar situations during the pandemic in which DOH had the data and used the DPCL to avoid releasing it but eventually made it available anyway.

My appeal was granted in February 2022 — five months after I initially requested the information. By that time, DOH had already made most of what I was looking for available on its website. 

However, the appeal process was still useful, because the ruling from the Office of Open Records in my favor outlined that the information was not confidential under the DPCL. This could be useful if similar situations come up in the future. 

Adapted from previous reporting by Ed Mahon, Spotlight PA: In 2018, the Wolf administration endorsed cannabis as a treatment for addiction — a controversial decision. As part of his reporting on the issue, Ed Mahon asked the Department of Health how many of the state’s roughly 550,000 registered patients were approved to use marijuana for this reason. 

The agency refused to hand over that information and later denied a request made under the state’s Right-to-Know Law. The rejections were surprising, as the state has made such information publicly available in the past.

Mahon appealed the decision to the Office of Open Records, which ruled in his favor, finding DOH had failed to prove the information was confidential under state law. The agency appealed that decision to Commonwealth Court, and Spotlight PA is now fighting the case with help from the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press.

TRAVEL MONEY:

» AP: Stampede of candidates file for Pennsylvania primary

» CAPITAL-STAR: Crypto-miners taking advantage of state tax break

» INQUIRER: No charges in shooting death of Jamaican immigrant

» LNP: Ex-Lancaster Drug Task Force chief 'abused his position'

» VICE: How militarized police in Pa., beyond are aiding Ukraine