IDEA
Optimize government transparency for civic engagement by modernizing the ways state and local entities conduct open meetings, gather and report public data, and make information accessible to citizens and the news media and more useful for civic engagement. State and local governments should adopt the policy that the default for data about and generated by government should be open — not closed.
PRECEDENTS: Colorado has a long open government tradition, having passed the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) in 1968, two years after Congress enacted the federal Freedom of Information Act. In 1972,
Colorado was the first state to enact a sunshine law requiring open meetings. In 2017, CORA was amended to require that electronic records be provided to the public in useful formats (not only in printouts) and in 2019 opened records on police internal affairs investigations.
Colorado state government has taken several actions to make it easier for the media and public to access government data. The Governor’s Dashboard approach being implemented by Gov. Jared Polis to track progress on his agenda names the public as one of the audiences and frames the data in easy-to-understand ways. The state also produces the Colorado Information Marketplace, which links to data produced by state government agencies grouped by topic, making it easier for residents to find government information. Another good example of data presentation is the Colorado secretary of state’s Go Code Colorado competition, which since 2014 has challenged multidisciplinary teams to turn public data into useful business insights and tools.
Colorado Attorney General Candidates. (Denverite)
In addition to the state, OpenColorado provides links to local government data sets. The City and County of Denver and other municipalities and state governments nationwide have used Balancing Act, a highly customizable, visual budget data simulation tool, to help residents understand and discuss government budgets.
Other local governments in Colorado partner with the Open Media Foundation to apply its software and technology to present, record, and enhance public access to local government meetings. The Colorado General Assembly uses this technology to record and access its floor proceedings. A case study shows that civic engagement increased in the communities where the technology was employed.
HOW IT COULD WORK IN COLORADO: As the number of journalists working in Colorado has dropped significantly, it is more important than ever that they and the public have streamlined access to meetings of government officials and the vast amount of data collected by government agencies.
The legislature and executive branch could take several actions to improve public access to government information. Colorado could adopt a policy that information about or produced by state government is, by default, open to the public and media.
State and local governments collect reams of data stored in machine-readable formats. However, they do not regularly provide this information to the public unless compelled by an open records request. The state could adopt a policy like that in Fort Collins, which requires public data to be posted online in machine-readable formats.
To ensure that meetings and records are open to the public and media, government officials in Colorado also need to better understand Colorado’s laws governing open meetings and records, including how and when they apply. The legislature could do what Florida has done and require all state and local officials be trained on Colorado’s Open Meetings Law and CORA. The governor’s office could also expand the use of the dashboard model and do more to ensure consistent collection and presentation of data on state government operations. Colorado’s Department of Local Affairs could provide technical assistance to local governments, resulting in expanded access to local government data.
Colorado currently has no statewide standards on the number of hours that can be charged for responding to CORA requests or the length of time that electronic records such as emails must be retained. The legislature capped the amount that can be charged to journalists and citizens for “research and retrieval” of open records, currently $33.58 per hour after the first hour. But there is no limit on the amount of time that can be charged to comply with the request, nor is an itemized receipt showing the costs required. Members of the Colorado Press Association and the Colorado Broadcasters Association report the high cost of CORA requests as a top barrier to being able to produce timely and high quality accountability journalism in Colorado. The high costs can discourage citizens and the media from pursuing some requests. The legislature could set uniform standards that limit the total costs of CORA and criminal justice records requests, require itemized receipts, and direct all state and local government agencies to maintain electronic records for a uniform period. These would all improve access to government data and records, expanding transparency.
CONSIDERATIONS: There could be some additional costs to state and local government to comply with the recommended changes. For example, there could be additional cost to improving the collection and posting of government data and limiting the costs of responding to CORA requests. However, most of the costs of collecting government data are currently built into the budget, and posting them online in machine-readable formats should be cheaper than printing and physically distributing them.
There would also be costs associated with developing and implementing a training curriculum for government officials to learn how to better comply with open meetings and open records laws. The cost to local government of implementing technology to improve access to meetings using the Open Media Foundation technology is modest for most and free to the smallest jurisdictions. In fact, communities found that the technology saved them staff time and costs. Implementing Balancing Act is projected to entail 15 to 40 hours of staff time per local government. All these costs appear to be minimal when compared with the benefits of expanding government transparency and improving civic engagement.
