Releasing the names of water scofflaws
When Greensboro police charge you with violating the law, that record is public information. When Greensboro city cites you for violating its water restriction ordinance, that record is private.
Until last night. Greensboro City Council voted to open its books on water scofflaws. But this government transparency was harder than it should have been. Releasing the names of those who violated the water restrictions passed 5-4, with opposing council member Tom Phillips wondering if public stoning was next. (Who knew he was such a molly-coddling liberal?)
The issue came up when we, Yes! Weekly and NPR independently requested the records of those cited. The city initially took the stance that the information wasn't public because it was part of the person's water bill, which was exempted from public records law some years ago. The requests then came before the council.
I was surprised when we were denied the records last month. I had assumed the city -- struggling with its worse drought in years -- would have wanted to take every step possible to discourage people from wasting water. Letting the scofflaws' names be published -- a form of public shaming, yes -- is one way. The people cited had been warned once about their water usage....and the chance of them avoiding detection several times before being caught twice (warned once, cited on the second offense) was likely.
We haven't decided if we are going to publish the list of names. But as members of the public, we certainly want to decide for ourselves.
Thanks to Mike Barber, Sandy Carmany, Sandra Anderson Groat, Keith Holliday and Yvonne Johnson for their votes for openness.
Update: We got the list. Here is a brief story. The actual list is coming here.
Comments (2)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I'm all in favor of releasing the names of adults who break the law but it concerns me that our current leadership has to fear the threat of lawsuits (That would have been your next option.) before they're willing to do the right thing.
How many other secrets are our "transparent" city leaders hiding?
Posted on November 6, 2007 7:52 AM
I was pretty surprised there was so much push-back from some council members on releasing the information. I thought releasing the names would be automatic.
After the meeting, I jokingly told Councilwoman Goldie Wells that as a resident of District 2, I would remember her comments in the voting booth today.
Wells explained there was too much negativity in the newspaper, and that printing the names of water scofflaws would simply add to it. Besides, she said, most of the offenders are good people who violated the restrictions out of ignorance, not malice.
It was late, and I didn't feel like getting all philosophical with her. Obviously I disagree with her in the strongest possible terms.
As far as Councilman Tom Phillips goes ... he ate one too many chocolate chip cookies in the back room during the break. I'll attribute his vote to a sugar high.
Posted on November 6, 2007 8:02 AM