Candidates Offer Views on Government Transparency, Right-To-Know to Montana Newspaper Association

The Montana Newspaper Association surveyed candidates for the state legislature, Public Service Commission and statewide offices about their positions on government accountability, transparency and the right to know.

Of 281 candidates receiving survey, 111 responded, or about 40%. Among respondents—including Republicans, Democrats, and independents, from Butte to Wibaux—there is a consensus that the right to know is imperative for our state’s democracy. 

While the low return rate is disappointing, we appreciate those who responded during this busy campaign season. A vibrant democracy relies on open discussion about the ideals of transparency and participation embodied in the Montana Constitution. Here’s a summary of responses:

Question 1: If elected, would you support legislation to add government accountability mechanisms to the right to know, such as time limits for responses or guaranteed attorney fees for successful plaintiffs litigating right to know matters? Are there other policies you would support on this issue?

• 0.9% No, I don’t support these proposals

• 19.8% Yes, I support time limits for all government responses

• 1.8% Yes, I support attorney fees for successful plaintiffs

• 1.8% I don’t know

• 13.5% I might support proposals

Overwhelmingly, 84% of respondents support at least one of these proposals. Jane Weber,HD19 candidate in Great Falls, stated: “The Montana Constitution ensures the public’s right to observe deliberations and decisions of its public bodies or state government officials/agencies.” Link Neimark, SD5 candidate in the Kalispell area: “Transparency is critical to an honest and efficient government.” 

Candidates hesitant to support these proposals noted concerns about language, timeliness and constraints they could put on the government. 

Question 2: Does Montana’s government effectively meet its obligation to public in fulfilling public information requests?

• 7.2% Yes

• 18.0% I don’t know

• 44.1% No

• 30.6% Maybe

Candidates were divided: 49% answered “maybe” or “I don’t know,” 44% answered “no” and 7% “yes.” Those answering “no” cited long waits, saying state agencies “drag their feet” (Bob Carter, HD98 in Missoula), egregious costs, the difficulty of getting “through the red tape” (Rina Fontana Moore, HD20, Great Falls), and ‘roadblocks … that make it difficult to obtain certain information” (Jamie Isaly, HD58 in Livingston area).

Those responding with uncertainty or “no” compared Montana to rest of nation or were satisfied that right to know was in the state Constitution. Trenin Bayless, candidate for HD74, Butte: “Montana isn’t perfect, and improvement would be great... but as far as I can tell we have done pretty well thus far.” Other candidates cited inconsistency: “Some organizations, boards, and officials do a terrific job! Others have extraordinary lack of transparency” (Wes Feist, HD83, East Helena).

Question 3: Should state government reduce transparency measures (such as disclosure requirements or document preservation requirements) to reduce red tape and regulation?

• 8.1% Yes

• 8.1% I don’t know

• 68.5% No

• 15.3% Maybe

Nearly 70% don’t want transparency reduced. Governor and lieutenant governor candidates Ryan Busse and Raph Graybill: “While … important to eliminate unnecessary red tape … it cannot come at the cost of public information the public deserves to know.” Others agreed:

“Reducing transparency measures, even in the name of cutting red tape, risks eroding public trust and accountability” (John J. Looney Sr., HD 82, Helena area).

Those responding “no” or with uncertainty cited need to look at requirement specifics. Alanah Griffith, HD60 candidate in West Yellowstone area: “Reducing red tape always sounds like a good idea for speed, but you always give up certain protections when you do.” She supports reducing red tape only if it doesn’t sacrifice safeguards “necessary for protection of the information.” 

Question 4: Should the state introduce a uniform policy for responding to information requests (including, for example, uniform response deadlines or uniform fee schedules) that applies to all state agencies?

• 67.6% Yes

• 6.3 I don’t know

• 5.4% No

• 20.7% Maybe

Two-thirds agreed a uniform policy is necessary, saying this would create a more educated citizenry. “Knowing what to expect when embarking on a freedom of information request streamlines the process …,” said Anne Ross, HD48 candidate near Billings. Erin Farris-Olsen, Clerk of the Montana Supreme Court candidate said: “Accurate and timely information can make or break a person’s ability to work, live, or parent.”

Those disagreeing or uncertain said such a policy may only work in theory. Jason Gunderson, HD58 candidate, Livingston area: “The issue with any one-size-fits-all policy, is it rarely fits all and creates more problems.” Jill Sark, HD79 candidate in West Helena: A uniform policy is unreasonable but “state agencies should have ‘response to information requests’ policies available to public and should adhere to the policies.”

Question 5: What role do you think Montanans’ right to know plays in our democracy? 

Montana’s right to know is “critical,” “vital,” and “essential” to our democracy and to the prosperity of our state governance, said candidates. Tracy A. Sharp, candidate for HD12 south of the Flathead: The right to know “is more critical today than at any time in our history.” Many said Montana’s right to know is essential to an engaged and educated citizenry. Still, candidates recognize need for improvement: “There is still much work to do to ensure the public’s right to know,” said Laura Smith, candidate for SD40, Helena.  

We wish candidates good luck and hope elected officials continue to support transparency and accountability, as highlighted in the Montana Constitution.