State open-records law might change

In light of the Penn State scandal, state-related universities might find themselves subject to… In light of the Penn State scandal, state-related universities might find themselves subject to a new law requiring them to open their records.

Currently, the only information state-related institutions such as Pitt and Penn State must make public is in their 990 tax form. This form includes information such as the wages of the schools’ 25 highest-paid employees. This is because these institutions are exempt from Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law. Police and attorneys have found it difficult to obtain documents regarding former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky because the law does not require the university to hand over any documents or emails surrounding the allegations.

But the law requirements could change. To make these partially state-funded universities more transparent, state Sen. John Blake, D-Lackawanna County, has unofficially proposed a change in legislation that would make state-related institutions adhere to the Right-to-Know Law.

Kyle Mullins, a spokesman for Blake, said that the state senator has not announced a specific date on which he will meet with state legislative leaders to officially propose the change.

Mullins went on to discuss the effects the prospective change could have had on Penn State. “Of course the tragedy of Penn State couldn’t have been prevented by more transparency in terms of open records,” he said, but he also said it could have brought “some facts to light sooner.”

When Pennsylvania’s New Right-to-Know Law became effective in 2009, overhauling the old law under which all state records were closed, state-funded institutions were still marked as an exception. Graham Spanier, the former president of Penn State who was fired earlier this month after the Sandusky scandal surfaced, was responsible for proposing the state-related schools’ exemption from the Right-to-Know Law in 2007.

Pitt spokesman John Fedele declined to comment on the impending proposal and what it might mean for Pitt.

Currently, Pitt doesn’t have to reveal any of its records, including information like its research projects and yearly budget cuts.

But even if the law is changed, Erik Arneson, a spokesman for state Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Chester, said he does not think that Pitt would have to reveal potential cuts to yearly budgets.

The Pennsylvania governor’s office does not have to reveal its budget cuts until the budget is finalized because before then it is considered “pre-decisional deliberations.” Arneson said he believes that this is how Pitt would work as well.

Arneson said that since there are not a lot of comparable models to Pennsylvania’s state-related institutions, which are a “hybrid” of public and private schools, it was hard to judge what to do with them when the law was made.

Both Pileggi and Blake noted the difficulty of classifying the four state-related institutions, which also include Temple University and Lincoln University, because the institutions receive their financial support from both taxpayers and private donors, unlike state schools which are subject to all of the conditions of the Right-to-Know Law.

Terry Mutchler, the executive director of Pennsylvania’s Office of Open Records, supports Blake’s proposal. She said she thinks that state-related schools should have to adhere by the same provisions as state schools.

“Anytime you have [taxpayers’] dollars and dimes thrown into the mix, you should have accountability,” she said.

Mullins said the state wants to respect the University’s privacy because of the research Pitt does. He said that information about the research Pitt conducts should not be open to the public, in case a private company were to take ideas and make them their own.

“That’s one of the major factors that we recognize that makes Pitt stand out nationally as an institution,” he said. “We are going to try our best to keep that in mind to respect that mission.”

Arneson said that there can always be an exemption written for research, though details on the potential law are not yet available.

He said that Pileggi would also like to see campus police forces’ activity become more transparent to the public. As of right now, campus police are not required to submit any records or information to the public.

Pileggi is currently looking into Blake’s proposal and is open to “having a discussion” on it.

“The events that have transpired recently have put a whole new light on the … law,” Arneson said.

Mullins said that Blake is looking forward to meeting with legislative leaders in order to discuss the proposal. No time has been established for the meeting.

“We are optimistic that the senate state-government committee will have a public hearing [to discuss reforms],” Arneson said.