Arlene Braun isn't your stereotypical open government advocate. She's neither a journalist nor a media lawyer. She's not a conspiracy theorist or an angry citizen demanding government accountability.

Rather, as President of the Missoula League of Women Voters, she simply believes that knowledge is strength.

"The League's purpose is to get people to participate in thei government. They need to be able to vote and they need information," Braun said. "People need accurate information to be able to vote intelligently and participate in what government is doing."

On March 8, Braun and other League members from across the state gathered at the state Capitol in Helena to celebrate International Women's Day. In between meetings with legislators, they handed out postcards promoting what has become an annual event among open government advocates -- "Sunshine Week."

This year, Sunshine Week runs from March 11-17 and includes founding father James Madison's March 16 birthday. For many years, news media organizations and other open government advocates have chosen Madison's birthday as a time to take stock of what generally is known as our "Freedom of Information." In March of 2002, Florida newspapers launched "Sunshine Sunday" in response to various assaults on that state's open government laws.

That initial effort caught on with national organizations and now is a week-long observance. Among other things, it's a time to remind Americans about the laws that allow us to keep watch on government at all levels; to attend meetings, offer comments and criticisms, watch the legal system at work, inspect documents and records and, in the words of the First Amendment, "petition the government for a redress of grievances."

What will 2007 bring? Here are some things to watch:

Thirteen months ago the Montana Supreme Court, in Fleenor v. Darby School District, ruled that people must be directly impacted by a government decision in order to challenge its validity. That decision sets a higher threshold for citizens (or news organizations) who seek to overturn government decisions they believe were made in violation of open government laws.

At present, the court has before it a case that could impact Fleenor. In that case, Helena attorney Mike Meloy represented the Cut Bank Pioneer Press, which sought information about how the local school board dealt with an incident involving students and BB guns. "The court doesn't have to deal with Fleenor," Meloy said. "But if they want to clean it up, they'll do it."

At the legislature, a bill to fix Fleenor died in the Senate. SB 109 by Sen. Rick Laible (R-Victor) would have allowed anyone to challenge a decision made by a public body, as long as the person resided in the area served by the body. The Montana Newspaper Association opposed the residency requirement, since it would have precluded newspapers (among others) from challenging open meetings violations or illegal decisions in an adjacent city or county.

Still alive is SB 177, which would relax the time limit for citizens to challenge government decisions. The bill, by Sen. Carolyn Squires (D-Missoula), would start a 30-day clock from the time that the petitioner (or the public) learns of the decision, instead of from the moment the decision is made. That bill has been sent to the House, along with SB 242 by Sen. Jim Elliott (D-Trout Creek). Elliott's bill would open corporate income tax records to public inspection, allowing legislators and others to see how much income tax major corporations pay in Montana.

On the House side, representatives have approved HB 132 by Rep. Jon Sesso (D-Butte) to insure that state reports will be available to the public, even if they are not issued in paper form.

Starting next year courts across Montana will have a uniform set of rules for public access to court records. The rules were developed by a committee appointed by the Supreme Court. (Full disclosure-I was a committee member, representing the news media.) The rules should leave no doubt about the public's right to inspect the vast majority of court records while spelling out clearly what kind of private or personal information should remain out of public view.

In addition, the rules anticipate courts' ability to place their records on the Internet. When that happens, the rules will treat paper, electronic and virtual records equally. In other words, if new records are available at the courthouse, they also will be available on the Internet.

On the federal level, the OPEN Government Act, hailed as the most significant and positive revision to the Freedom of Information Act in a decade, is progressing nicely through Congress. In addition, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) believes this could be the year that his long-frustrated efforts to open federal courts to photographers and video cameras will bear fruit.

Challenges remain, however, as some members of Congress work to expand the blanket of executive secrecy that has been a hallmark of the Bush administration. Major news media organizations and other open government advocates will continue to oppose those efforts.

Closer to home, citizens need to recognize their legal and Constitutional ability to participate in government decision-making and actively monitor, question and, if need be, challenge government action.

For Arlene Braun and the League, it's an issue that resonates from coast to coast.

"It doesn't matter what state you're in," Braun said. "It's very important that information is available and people don't get hassled trying to get it. And that meetings are open so people can understand how a decision has been arrived at."

Amen.

Letters to the Editor

He doesn't represent me...

Dear Editor,

David S. Hurtt recently submitted a letter to the Editor which read as follows: "I am proud to be a member of the Gang of Ten. Much more rewarding than being a member of the Group of Two Losers. Judge Larson vindicated our position."

I have been frustrated with the "Gang of Ten" but I found this letter very revealing. First, Mr. Hurtt apparently doesn't realize that the "Gang of Ten" has not "won" yet. Judge Larson ruled in favor of the voters and upheld our choice to change county government. The only part of the Judge's ruling that Mr. Hurtt could believe makes him a "winner" is the Judge will decide at trial whether or not Commissioners Thompson and Chilcott will have to run for office to keep their seats. So, if Mr. Hurtt believes he "won", was he really trying to protect Commissioners Thompson and Chilcott? Was that the purpose of the lawsuit? I'm being sarcastic, of course, because we all knew the "Gang of Ten" was simply trying to protect their friends, not the voters. Their transparent charade was obvious from the start. Yep, you're a "winner."

Second, the "Gang of Ten" has already cost the taxpayers a substantial amount of money and the costs haven't stopped. Since the "Gang of Ten" has delayed that decision, Ravalli County residents may have to pay the cost of another special election ($40,000+) once the Judge makes a final decision. The "Gang of Ten" who claims to be looking out for the voters has stopped the voters from deciding what we want. The Ravalli County Local Government Review Study Commission got it exactly right - let the voters decide what we mean by our choices. We voters can clearly say whether or not we want to keep Commissioners Thompson and Chilcott by voting. We don't need someone to ask a judge to interpret what we meant. We can show it with our votes. Clearly, Mr. Hurtt and the rest of the "Gang" were afraid we wouldn't keep their friends in office and are trying to protect them, not us.

Third, just who are the "Two Losers"? The "Gang of Ten" filed suit against the Ravalli County Local Government Review Study Commission, Ravalli County Commission, Ravalli County Clerk and Recorder, Howard Anderson, Vicky Bohlig and Alec Sutherland. There are "Six Losers" if I count correctly. Does Mr. Hurtt's advanced age make it difficult for him to count or has he singled out some Defendants to call losers? Does anyone else take offense to this characterization and lack of clarity? Does anyone else recognize that Mr. Hurtt, and co-Plaintiff Gary Zebrowski, have filed suit against the Ravalli County Commission but intend to seek office to become members of that very same Commission? So is Mr. Hurtt saying that he's a "winner" but wants to be a "loser"? Will he and Mr. Zebrowski drop out of the lawsuit if they win a seat on the Commission? Isn't there a conflict of interest here?

Fourth, how is it that the "Gang of Ten" so readily admits they were uninformed voters last November? I may not be an average voter, but I try to educate myself about the issues, especially those as important as this, before I vote. I knew changing the number of districts would mean that the district each commissioner was elected to represent would no longer exist. I knew we didn't have the choice of electing commissioners for four years before. I knew if we chose four-year terms (like we tried to before) that one of the sitting commissioners would already have served a four-year term. I knew it was only fair to let the voters decide who should represent them after we knew all the nuances of the new county government - whether it would be four-year terms or six-year terms, five districts or three, concurrent or non-concurrent terms, partisan or non-partisan elections.

The attitude displayed by Mr. Hurtt is very disturbing. It's not appropriate to brag about being a "winner" and call your opponents "losers". It is foolish to take pride in being a member of the "Gang of Ten", the self-proclaimed representatives of all voters in the County who want to waste our money asking a Judge to tell all of us what we meant when we voted when we could clearly show what we meant through another vote. But the "Gang of Ten" has taken that away from us. I don't want someone to represent me who wastes our County money protecting his friends. But, thankfully, we get to vote to decide all these things, as it should be. Be assured, Mr. Hurtt, I won't be voting for you. You're not a "winner" in my book, except in the sarcastic sense.

Marilyn Owns Medicine
Stevensville

Rokosch explains platform

Dear Editor,

I'm a candidate for county commissioner from District 1. In a nutshell, I represent active leadership for accountable government and responsible growth. I may be a fresh face to many of you, but I feel it's time for some fresh faces and a fresh start in our county government. I hope you agree.

Why am I running for the commission? Mainly because of the many good people that encouraged me to do so. I believe in public service and in putting the public back in public service. A cornerstone of my personal world view is that we are all here on this earth to make a contribution. I believe in taking responsibility for the way things are and to try and make a difference. I believe in working with others to try and leave things better than we find them. "Thinking globally and acting locally" is much more than a cliche with me - it's how I live my life. Many of you that know me have told me my professional background as a biologist and my work with water resources and natural resource management, along with my personal background in community involvement and local leadership, will make me a great asset to the county commission. You convinced me the commission is where I can make the greatest contribution. I am running for the commission because I feel the responsibility to do so.

Active leadership for accountable government and responsible growth. What is accountable government? I believe the foundation of accountable government is citizen involvement and public participation. And it takes work, hard work, by elected representatives to achieve that participation on a daily basis. Elected officials need to look, listen, learn, and lead - and I will. I will look for your input. I will listen to your needs and concerns. I will learn from your ideas and experience. And I will lead with your support. That's my pledge to you - I will look, listen, learn, and lead.

Active leadership for accountable government and responsible growth. -What is responsible growth? I think most of us know what it is not - the status quo. The saying "Failing to plan is a plan to fail" has never rung more true than it is ringing today in Ravalli County. And the sounds of that bell ringing are resonating - they can no longer be ignored. I've been one of those people, along with many of you, that's been pulling on the rope - ringing that bell. And I will continue pulling on that rope - ringing that bell, no matter what the outcome of this election.

Responsible growth is the issue of issues that is challenging the health, safety, stability, prosperity, and future of Ravalli County. I believe growth can be balanced, healthy, smart, and fair. However, I cannot characterize the growth we have been experiencing, and that is being thrust upon us, as balanced, healthy, smart, and least of all - fair. I am your best choice to bring balance to the challenges of growth. We can balance sustainable growth with sustainable quality of life. We can balance prosperous private enterprise with the protection of public resources. We can balance economic diversity with environmental and social diversity. We can balance fair profits and tax relief. We can balance private rights with public responsibility.

That balance can only be achieved with active citizen involvement in an effort towards consensus. That consensus can only be achieved through honest communication, a willingness to cooperate and seek the common ground, and some level of compromise.

In closing, we live in a special place, and we find ourselves living at a special time requiring a special stewardship - we are at a crossroads. A principle I emphasize, and try to emulate to my three children, is that we are examples, whether we like it or not. The choice we have is "What kind of example will we be?" My friends and neighbors, in the next few years, we will establish our legacy here in Ravalli County, western Montana, and the Rocky Mountains. The choice we have is "What kind of legacy will it be?" I'm hoping it will be one that makes our grandchildren's, grandchildren's, grandchildren proud.

Jim Rokosch (D)
Candidate for County Commissioner

Now I am mad

Dear Editor,

Now I am mad! Earl Pollard, Chris Linkenhoker and their ilk are constantly demonizing Realtors and large land owners as the root of all evil here in the Bitterroot Valley.

What is interesting in Earl's last tirade is his comment "So much for free enterprise." What the heck is he saying? Free enterprise is when there is a demand for a product by the public and the product is supplied to that public via a variety of sources versus one conglomerate or government entity. Eighty real estate businesses up and down the valley indicate just that. However here are some interesting facts about local real estate.

Only a handful of Realtors make what most would consider a good living. You will find Realtors working second and third jobs tending bar, teaching, ranching or farming, driving truck, working in grocery stores and so on.

Realtors do not make individuals sell their land.

Realtors do not make any individuals purchase land.

Fact, very few realtors are developers.

A Realtor is a problem solver assisting individuals in purchasing or selling one of life's biggest financial and emotional commitments.

Realtors provide jobs, pay taxes, and serve their community in many volunteer capacities, support many local charities and school functions. They are coaches to our children's sports and extra curricular activities. Realtors give back to their community and can be found at any event happening in the valley helping in a variety of ways.

I am proud that my husband is a Realtor and a darn fine and honest one who cares deeply about each and every person he represents in the course of business. He has talked folks out of coming to the valley when their needs and expectations won't be met here. He has helped many local young families purchase their first home and assisted many of our seniors move towards a more financially secure retirement when it was time to move off of the family farm or ranch. Greedy and "weasel-worded" is a sad comment coming from a man who is one of those wanting everything in the valley to go just the way he thinks is fit!

One last but important point. In the past, development in the valley was from small local construction companies, two or three man operations, who purchased five or ten acres from a rancher needing some cash flow so he could keep the bulk of his operation running. The contractor would build a few homes over a few years and sell them. The day came when some well meaning newcomers decided that this business had to stop! We needed laws, rules and controls so these evildoers could be controlled. They got their wish. It is way too expensive for most local small businesses to consider a minor subdivision so now only the large, out of state developer with tons of money can afford to develop here. Even for them a small project won't pencil out so the only option is large sprawling projects. With one per two they can't even do cluster developments even though that has been pushed as the ideal way to develop rural areas for many years.

It seems to me, Earl, that you and every other person who thinks government regulation is the answer to everything is now getting just what you wanted. Big government, big taxes, and big messes up and down the valley. If you want to blame someone take a look in the mirror. Good job!

Suzy Foss
Hamilton

Support for community college

Dear Editor,

There is a perception out there that we actually have a choice between a Community College and a College of Technology. Our competitive capitalist system requires that people who don�t fit into the rapidly changing market get retrained, it is only fair that we provide access. What people may not know is that the College of Technology (COT) is dependent on the legislature appropriating $14 million dollar to the COT in Missoula, which in turn is supposed to provide $4 million for a branch down here. The problem is that the money is not in the Governor�s budget and no one seems to be pushing the issue. I have not heard our local legislative delegation making it a priority. The University of Montana doesn�t seem to be going to the mat for the Bitterroot COT either and a cynical person could view all the sound and fury they produced a couple of months ago as an attempt to ward off competition from a Community College. The Community College option is a true grassroots proposal, coming from the people �on the ground� doing the work to provide job training and adult literacy, and people who want continuing education and enrichment for our seniors. It is therefore clear that the Community College isn�t just the right choice; it is truly the only choice.

John Schneeberger
Hamilton

Question Lone Rock's bond issue

Dear Editor,

You are invited... to give even more money to Lone Rock School.

Should you accept their invitation? That would depend on what you've received from them in the past and what you can expect from them in the future. Would you support any organization that does not respect or even recognize the majority of its investors? An organization that wants more of your money, and none of your input? One with a CEO that promises positive change and receptivity to its Investors but actually removes any hope of progress? Lone Rock School will need more space for future students. But should we build without a firm foundation? Should we build without tried and true proven methods and without new and updated building materials? And without sage advise and guidance from those long known for their experience and knowledge in such matters? Of course not. That would be very unwise. We need to know that all of our concerns and requests are valued, honored and considered, and that there is at least a reasonable and acceptable return on our investment. Should you accept Lone Rock's invitation? Unless you can be guaranteed that your views, opinions, advice and rights will always be acknowledged and respected by Lone Rock's Administration and Board, perhaps you should send your regrets.

Cathy Kulonis, President
Constitutionally Correct Lone Rock School/Public Schools
Stevensville

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2006 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney