Joe Nelson, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 09/22/2008 10:09:07 PM PDT
San Bernardino County has a new protocol when dealing with public records requests from the media seeking information on its employees: give the two unions representing the employees a heads-up before releasing the information.
In December 2007, The Sun and Daily Bulletin published the names, positions and salaries of every county employee on its Web site, triggering an outcry from County Administrative Officer Mark Uffer and the two unions that represent county employees, the San Bernardino Public Employees Association and the San Bernardino County Safety Employees Benefit Association.
In response, the newspapers removed the employees' names from the online database, but left posted positions and salaries.
Since then, the SBPEA has fought against information being released on county employees to newspapers, calling such publications "anti-public employee" and rallying for subscribers to cancel.
When the Los Angeles Times requested information on employees at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center earlier this year, the union, on its Web site's home page, described the newspaper as an anti-public employee tabloid and urged its readers to cancel their subscriptions.
The union has since removed that claim from its site.
A recent request by The Sun and Daily Bulletin for the names and salary information of all county employees who are also receiving retirement benefits from the county has been delayed by more than a month.
The request, made Aug. 5, was in response to a recent news report on how some states are cracking down on the controversial practice that lets government workers collect pension benefits while continuing to work for a salary, a practice referred to as "double dipping."
While county spokesman David Wert chalks the delay up to his own personal mistake, he said in an e-mail Friday: "We are also affording the unions who represent county employees a heads-up on this and time to voice any views they may have on the release of this information."
Peter Scheer, executive director of the San Rafael-based California First Amendment Coalition, called the new county practice "troublesome" and a "ploy to give the unions an opportunity to sue, seeking an injunction against the county from releasing the information.
"Hopefully, the unions will not make the huge mistake of accepting that invitation, because this issue has been settled by the California Supreme Court, and if they challenge it, they will lose," Scheer said.
In an e-mail, Wert said the new protocol is a courtesy the county extends to the unions so that they may have an opportunity to notify their members that information about them may be published.
After the names were published in the newspaper's online database, the unions said the county should have notified them beforehand that the information had been requested by the newspaper, Wert said.
Some experts don't see it as courtesy.
"Employees are upset about it, understandably, but a public record is a public record," said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles. "It just sounds like they're stonewalling and trying to delay as much as possible."
Uffer was not in the office Monday and unavailable for comment.
Wert said the county is within its rights.
"All public records act requests are in and of themselves public information," Wert said. "I am not aware of anything in the Public Records Act that makes a news media request confidential."
As far as such protocol further delaying a media request for information, Wert said, "The county hopes that it doesn't result in a delay, and stalling is not the county's goal. But I think we can all agree that had we known prior to December what we know now, we could have avoided a lot of the controversy that accompanied the publishing of the list."
Bob Blough, general manager for the SBPEA, did not return a phone call seeking comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment