I’m pleased to see Chancellor David Gearhart at the University of
Arkansas in Fayetteville take the initiative in streamlining the process whereby journalists and the public always have easiest access to any public records they request.
Gearhart says he’s exploring ways the university can erase burdens in all requests for public information and ensure “transparency in all we do.” How can anyone who cares about freedom of public information disagree or take issue with that?
Of course, you already may know I’m one of thousands who believe Gearhart has done a superb job of leading the state’s flagship campus. And, yes, I’m generally supportive of the state’s major university and the historic progress it’s made since he took over in 2008. I haven’t seen any reason not to be impressed, frankly, except for that unfortunate major budgeting shortfall in the school’s Advancement Division and the brouhaha surrounding it.
The chancellor says he believes transparency in a public university isa vital aspect of ensuring trust with the public it serves. Toward that end, he says, a task force on the freest possible flow of public information has been established.
Headed by Laura Jacobs, the associate vice chancellor of university relations, the panel has invited over 200 Arkansas media types to a “conversation” session Friday. Jacobs says she prefers media members who attend to do the talking in expressing their needs and any hurdles they have faced. “We will be doing the listening,” she said.
Although Gearhart won’t be part of this 11-member task force, he said he seeks input from the media on how the university can most efficiently respond to their requests and those of the public.
This effort is part of a broader, well-publicized push from the university’s Board of Trustees on a renewed and re-examined public records policy. Only weeks into her new position, Jacobs said this is an ideal time to review the procedures with fresh eyes and streamline the efforts of the university to respond to such requests.
A former editor colleague and friend, Dennis Byrd, who’s a board member of the Arkansas Press Association and, as with myself, a veteran of FOI battles over the decades, told reporter Bill Bowden that the state’s law is plenty straightforward in explaining how such requests are to be handled. He’s correct. It isn’t difficult for most adults to understand.
But I find it commendable nonetheless that the university system is making an effort to streamline and improve its internal system to better accommodate those searching for information from a relatively complex system.
Improving communication and compliance is never a bad thing in any business or public office. I believe it would be a fine thing should every department in Arkansas municipal and county governments, along with public school boards, pledge to follow the university’s lead.
Lots of hog calls
I seem to write far more than others in our state about the state’s decision to permit a hog factory in the Buffalo National River watershed. So I thought I’d pause a moment to explain just why that is.
Over 43 years in this business in some of the major media markets across our nation, I came to recognize a major national news event when I smelled one. And believe me, the matter of our state wrongheadedly permitting a hog factory in the watershed of our state’s only national river stinks to high heaven.
While others in my craft choose to focus on other matters they deem important to you, I see many reasons this story easily ranks among the most significant events of the past year. The obvious questions surrounding this permit are enough to fuel a dozen enterprise news stories.
Where did the idea for this wholly inappropriate location even originate? With the factory’s supplier, Cargill Inc.? Who, specifically, within the Department of Environmental Quality (cough) signed off on this permit and why didn’t Teresa Marks, the director of that agency, even know her folks had permitted this waste-producing factory until it had been signed and sealed? Why’s she still in charge? Why didn’t the agency’s local office in Jasper know this was coming? Or the National Park Service? Why weren’t public hearings held and relevant newspaper notices published about the proposed factory?
Why did the factory owners and operators list three leased fields on their permit’s nutrient management plan that the fields’ owners said they denied for such purpose? Did the state know these three unapproved fields were not valid? If so, why didn’t they blow the whistle and stop the idea right there? Why is Director Marks publicly seeming to defend the factory’s permit despite such glaring misinformation her agency’s own permit contains?
Why weren’t water quality and subsurface flow tests required before a permit was even considered? What role, if any, did other outside groups and lobbyists for the pork or agricultural industry play in shepherding the factory’s permit and the federal loan guarantee through? How deep do the politics of this terrible decision run? Who involved in all this has made campaign contributions to whom?
Yes, there’s sufficient smoke in this saga to hickory-roast several full-grown sows, much less 6,500 swine.
-
———◊-
———
Mike Masterson’s column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at [email protected]. Read his blog at mikemastersonsmessenger.com.
Editorial, Pages 13 on 02/25/2014