Disappointing but not surprising is the best way to describe lawmakers' failing -- again -- to make important changes to the state's open records law.
What stalled the bill for a second year in a row was an attempt to make members of the General Assembly subject to the law, just as all other public officials are. The House bill was sent back to the Judiciary Committee, and there it sits.
That's very unfortunate because it would accomplish some good things, including:
Newton's bill would exempt from disclosure memoranda, working papers and correspondence related to a bill not yet introduced to a committee or the General Assembly. It also would exempt written or electronic correspondence sent to a lawmaker by a constituent.
We understand why he did it, but we don't think it's good law. People corresponding with public officials about public matters should not have an expectation of privacy. And how we get to a bill can matter as much as the final product.
Newton has said he introduced his bill to allow a public hearing and avoid potentially unintended consequences. He also had hoped to see the bills get out of the House before the May 1 deadline. He clearly was overoptimistic on that score.
Yes, there is next year, but that's what we heard last year when the effort passed the House but failed to get a vote in Senate. Leaders in the House and Senate must make this a priority, or we're going to see another year pass with little to show for lawmakers' pledge to give us "transparent government."