<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8216;Vexatious requestor&#8217; bill pulled due to opposition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2009/04/22/vexatious-requestor-bill-pulled-due-to-opposition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2009/04/22/vexatious-requestor-bill-pulled-due-to-opposition/</link>
	<description>Politics in the Bay Area and beyond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:39:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John W</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2009/04/22/vexatious-requestor-bill-pulled-due-to-opposition/comment-page-1/#comment-7882</link>
		<dc:creator>John W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=6159#comment-7882</guid>
		<description>I applaud the effort and major expense BANG has put forth to ensure access to public records by the press and other parties.  However, it seems to me that truly abusive situations that overwhelm the capacity of a government office or agency to comply undermines the very access you&#039;ve worked so hard to secure by giving agencies an excuse to throw up their arms and just say &quot;sue us.&quot;  If the &quot;vexatious requestor&quot; is a real problem, beyond anybody&#039;s definition of reasonableness, can&#039;t you guys work with the AG to come up with something that works rather than just fight it?  Wouldn&#039;t that be in everybody&#039;s best interest?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I applaud the effort and major expense BANG has put forth to ensure access to public records by the press and other parties.  However, it seems to me that truly abusive situations that overwhelm the capacity of a government office or agency to comply undermines the very access you&#8217;ve worked so hard to secure by giving agencies an excuse to throw up their arms and just say &#8220;sue us.&#8221;  If the &#8220;vexatious requestor&#8221; is a real problem, beyond anybody&#8217;s definition of reasonableness, can&#8217;t you guys work with the AG to come up with something that works rather than just fight it?  Wouldn&#8217;t that be in everybody&#8217;s best interest?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Mitchell</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2009/04/22/vexatious-requestor-bill-pulled-due-to-opposition/comment-page-1/#comment-7883</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Mitchell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=6159#comment-7883</guid>
		<description>Hi Josh: Check out my blog post on AB 520 --

http://www.bapolitix.org/2009/04/will-new-bill-end-up-weakening-state.html

In my piece you&#039;ll see comments from Marc Le Forestier, Attorney General Jerry Brown&#039;s legislative affairs director.
Le Forestier said the state does have some gnarly examples of California Public Record Act requester abuse. He also told me that, ultimately, the reason for the legislation was about agency cost and resource containment in these troubled and uncertain economic times.
At its core, the CPRA is critical to illuminating the operations of California government because it forbids a given governmental agency from taking into consideration a requester&#039;s purpose or reason for seeking certain public records.
If AB 520 was to be enacted, however, a superior court judge would be put in that exact position, thus creating a terribly steep &#039;slippery slope&#039; along the way.
As a veteran California journalist I share the view that this is a heavy-handed effort that if passed would do more harm than good and would establish a &quot;chilling effect&quot; on the rights of all folks to better monitor and understand their state government.
Thanks, Josh, for bringing your Tribune and BANG readers up to speed on this legislation.
The Assembly&#039;s Judiciary Committee has scheduled next Wednesday (4/28) to hear AB520. Whether or not the legislation is actually taken up at that time remains an open question. Let&#039;s hope not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Josh: Check out my blog post on AB 520 &#8211;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bapolitix.org/2009/04/will-new-bill-end-up-weakening-state.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bapolitix.org/2009/04/will-new-bill-end-up-weakening-state.html</a></p>
<p>In my piece you&#8217;ll see comments from Marc Le Forestier, Attorney General Jerry Brown&#8217;s legislative affairs director.<br />
Le Forestier said the state does have some gnarly examples of California Public Record Act requester abuse. He also told me that, ultimately, the reason for the legislation was about agency cost and resource containment in these troubled and uncertain economic times.<br />
At its core, the CPRA is critical to illuminating the operations of California government because it forbids a given governmental agency from taking into consideration a requester&#8217;s purpose or reason for seeking certain public records.<br />
If AB 520 was to be enacted, however, a superior court judge would be put in that exact position, thus creating a terribly steep &#8216;slippery slope&#8217; along the way.<br />
As a veteran California journalist I share the view that this is a heavy-handed effort that if passed would do more harm than good and would establish a &#8220;chilling effect&#8221; on the rights of all folks to better monitor and understand their state government.<br />
Thanks, Josh, for bringing your Tribune and BANG readers up to speed on this legislation.<br />
The Assembly&#8217;s Judiciary Committee has scheduled next Wednesday (4/28) to hear AB520. Whether or not the legislation is actually taken up at that time remains an open question. Let&#8217;s hope not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BJD</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2009/04/22/vexatious-requestor-bill-pulled-due-to-opposition/comment-page-1/#comment-7884</link>
		<dc:creator>BJD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:36:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=6159#comment-7884</guid>
		<description>Dear Mr. Richman,

I dare you, I double dog, over the barrel dare you to send a PRA to the town of Discovery Bay and CoCo County, requesting all PRA&#039;s from a man named Bill Richardson... but you have to ask for ALL of them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Mr. Richman,</p>
<p>I dare you, I double dog, over the barrel dare you to send a PRA to the town of Discovery Bay and CoCo County, requesting all PRA&#8217;s from a man named Bill Richardson&#8230; but you have to ask for ALL of them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using apc
Database Caching 4/11 queries in 0.004 seconds using apc
Object Caching 209/214 objects using apc

Served from: www.ibabuzz.com @ 2012-02-10 07:38:44 -->
