Stephens Vows to Reintroduce HB Bill 218 Exempting Business Negotiations from Open Records. - Legislation stalled amid media criticisms.
The controversial Georgia House Bill 218 is down but not out, said Rep. Ron Stephens (R-Garden City). Stephens says he will reintroduce the legislation next year.
The bill, which would have exempted negotiations between the state and businesses it is courting from the Georgia Open Records Act, passed the House but bogged down in the Senate, and was ultimately tabled at the end of the session.
The bill enjoyed wide support from the business and economic development sectors, but was targeted for elimination by media outlets and First Amendment groups that alleged it would add another barrier between the government and the public's right to information.
Stephens contended relentless vilification of H.B. 218 by the media made it difficult for senators to explain to constituents the bill's true purpose.
"The press essentially made this into a local issue of secrecy for landfills, dumps, that kind of stuff, and it had nothing to do with that," Stephens said. "It would have just given us an equal footing with other states in that when companies come to Georgia and ask for confidentiality, that we not disrupt their business."
Stephens provided as an example a large Fortune 500 company currently based in Indiana that is considering relocating to Georgia. If this company's 5,000 employees in Indiana get wind that it's about to move to Georgia, Stephens said, the company would have union problems.
[From personal experience I can attest that examples such as this are really at the heart of HB 218.]
"You can understand how this would disrupt their business back home," Stephens said. "That in a nutshell is what the essence of the legislation is all about."
Georgia Economic Development Commissioner Craig Lesser said H.B. 218 is necessary to put Georgia on a competitive footing with other Southeastern states.
"There was a misunderstanding about the intention of the bill. There's no conspiracy here. This isn't about secrecy," Lesser said. "This is about companies who may want to come to Georgia and until they come to some conclusions, they want to protect their shareholders. The surrounding states have those protections, and Georgia should as well."
The Georgia First Amendment Foundation led the charge to kill the bill.
"H.B. 218 could dramatically undercut the public's ability to find out almost anything that government officials decide to call 'a program of economic development.' That could include a new factory that creates much needed jobs, or, it could include a waste treatment plant, a dump for out of state garbage, or a private prison," wrote foundation board member Hollie Manheimer in a letter to Senate Research Office Director Eric Robinson. "H.B. 218 would add to the ever growing number of exemptions to the Georgia Open Records and Meetings Act, which are slowly and methodically being undermined by the addition of unnecessary exemptions such as this one."
Manheimer cited among the foundation's objections that "H.B. 218 gives no real definition to "economic development programs" and that "the proponents of H.B. 218 have never been able to cite to any project that Georgia lost as a result of its open government laws."
But Stephens said he can provide several examples. He believes, for instance, that America Online did not come to Georgia because of details of negotiations would be disclosed. Stephens said Georgia lost a potential move of Kmart's corporate headquarters from Detroit to Atlanta for the same reason.
"Many tell us it's because we couldn't keep our mouths shut," Stephens said.
(4-15-05, The (Savannah) Business Report & Journal which I came across reviewing a great source for Georgia news, FitzLew's Georgia Daily Digest.)
Gov. Perdue also has indicated that he will once again work for passage of HB 218 during next year's legislative session.
The bill, which would have exempted negotiations between the state and businesses it is courting from the Georgia Open Records Act, passed the House but bogged down in the Senate, and was ultimately tabled at the end of the session.
The bill enjoyed wide support from the business and economic development sectors, but was targeted for elimination by media outlets and First Amendment groups that alleged it would add another barrier between the government and the public's right to information.
Stephens contended relentless vilification of H.B. 218 by the media made it difficult for senators to explain to constituents the bill's true purpose.
"The press essentially made this into a local issue of secrecy for landfills, dumps, that kind of stuff, and it had nothing to do with that," Stephens said. "It would have just given us an equal footing with other states in that when companies come to Georgia and ask for confidentiality, that we not disrupt their business."
Stephens provided as an example a large Fortune 500 company currently based in Indiana that is considering relocating to Georgia. If this company's 5,000 employees in Indiana get wind that it's about to move to Georgia, Stephens said, the company would have union problems.
[From personal experience I can attest that examples such as this are really at the heart of HB 218.]
"You can understand how this would disrupt their business back home," Stephens said. "That in a nutshell is what the essence of the legislation is all about."
Georgia Economic Development Commissioner Craig Lesser said H.B. 218 is necessary to put Georgia on a competitive footing with other Southeastern states.
"There was a misunderstanding about the intention of the bill. There's no conspiracy here. This isn't about secrecy," Lesser said. "This is about companies who may want to come to Georgia and until they come to some conclusions, they want to protect their shareholders. The surrounding states have those protections, and Georgia should as well."
The Georgia First Amendment Foundation led the charge to kill the bill.
"H.B. 218 could dramatically undercut the public's ability to find out almost anything that government officials decide to call 'a program of economic development.' That could include a new factory that creates much needed jobs, or, it could include a waste treatment plant, a dump for out of state garbage, or a private prison," wrote foundation board member Hollie Manheimer in a letter to Senate Research Office Director Eric Robinson. "H.B. 218 would add to the ever growing number of exemptions to the Georgia Open Records and Meetings Act, which are slowly and methodically being undermined by the addition of unnecessary exemptions such as this one."
Manheimer cited among the foundation's objections that "H.B. 218 gives no real definition to "economic development programs" and that "the proponents of H.B. 218 have never been able to cite to any project that Georgia lost as a result of its open government laws."
But Stephens said he can provide several examples. He believes, for instance, that America Online did not come to Georgia because of details of negotiations would be disclosed. Stephens said Georgia lost a potential move of Kmart's corporate headquarters from Detroit to Atlanta for the same reason.
"Many tell us it's because we couldn't keep our mouths shut," Stephens said.
(4-15-05, The (Savannah) Business Report & Journal which I came across reviewing a great source for Georgia news, FitzLew's Georgia Daily Digest.)
Gov. Perdue also has indicated that he will once again work for passage of HB 218 during next year's legislative session.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 3:38 PM
2 Comments:
My pleasure.
A nice post covering an important issue. The only remark would be,
you never know what are the requirements for your editor, until you have completed at least a level.
Term papers
Post a Comment
<< Home