Let a little sunshine in

By Jean Maneke

"It is the public policy of this state that meetings, records, votes, actions, and deliberations of public governmental bodies be open to the public unless otherwise provided by law." So begins the text of Missouri's Sunshine Law.

This policy of openness in records of public bodies ensures that citizens will be able to access information on how public funds are spent.

Citizens find this ability to inspect the flow of public tax dollars critical in monitoring that they are receiving good government.

This public trust that is inherent in the spending of tax dollars imposes an obligation on governmental officials to ensure that those funds are spent for the greater good of the taxpayer. The Missouri constitution, in various places, details that governmental entities may collect and spend public funds only for a "public purpose." The term "public purpose" in terms of governmental actions has been held to mean "the promotion of the public health, safety, morals, general welfare, security, prosperity, and contentment of all the inhabitants or residents within a given political division...." Indeed, the framework created by the legislature and the state statutes regarding the expenditure of public funds is broad, and meant to ensure all citizens benefit from the actions of government. Cities, for example, are required to have budgets, and the ability to make expenditures outside of the framework of the budget is severely limited. All expenditures must be approved by certain officers within cities before checks can be written. All of this is to safeguard the public dollars which are confiscated from your pocket for the operation of public bodies, presumably for the public good.

It makes sense, then, that there should be limitations on how those dollars may be spent. Requiring a budget and approval of expenditures is one of those limitations. But perhaps there should be others.

Back in 1960, a group of citizens filed suit over actions of a school board in Lockwood, Mo., that printed and widely distributed a brochure in connection with an upcoming school bond election, setting out the election date, details of the building plans, the cost, and the plan for retirement of the bonds. The citizens argued that the publicity was evidence of the fraud of the district in conjunction with the election.

The court, however, found that the board's efforts were reasonable in seeking to obtain fair and full distribution of the publicity throughout the district.

A few years later, the Missouri legislature decided to address in its election statutes the issue of whether public bodies could spend money in publicity regarding elections. The statute that passed, now codified as Section 115.646 of the Missouri Statutes, states that "No contribution or expenditure of public funds shall be made directly by any officer, employee or agent of any political subdivision to advocate, support, or oppose any ballot measure or candidate for public office. This section shall not be construed to prohibit any public official of a political subdivision from making public appearances or from issuing press releases concerning any such ballot measure." Since that statute was passed, there has been limited litigation over the actions of public bodies in spending tax dollars on elections. In 1995, a group of citizens brought a suit against the Board of Election Commissioners for the City of Creve Coeur, claiming the city sent out an "information sheet" prior to an election seeking an increase in the city business license fee. It was clear the document was prepared and mailed using tax dollars, which they said was a violation of Section 115.646 above. The evidence showed that the statement was endorsed by the city aldermen and the statements it contained were in favor of passage of the proposition.

The court held that this statement did constitute an "irregularity" in the conducting of the election. However, the court said the statement's contents were all factual and true and that the petition of the citizens did not allege the voters were misled or that the vote would have been different if public money had not been spent, so although the court felt the conduct was possibly unfair, it did not rise to be sufficient to affect the outcome of the election, so the election was not overturned.

In recent years, public bodies have become highly sensitive to the issue of using public funds in regard to ballot issues, but they have found another way to influence opinion using public dollars. Unfortunately, this new method doesn't appear to have generated much public scrutiny at this time. Governmental bodies are spending money to pay dues to special interest groups which then advocate in the state legislature for that governmental body's special interests, whether or not they are the special interests of you, the citizen.

In particular, there are three groups which have received those funds recently. Almost every school board in the state is a member of the Missouri School Boards Association. Almost every county in the state is a member of the Missouri Association of Counties. And many cities in the state are members of the Missouri Municipal League. Those three groups are involved in significant lobbying efforts in Jefferson City with your legislators.

And what citizens may not realize is that the lobbying by those three groups on a regular basis focuses on closing public records. In just the last few months, the Missouri Municipal League has spoken to limit publication of the county budgets in local newspapers. And on a regular basis when the Missouri Press Association is working to make changes in the Sunshine Law in an effort to open more governmental records for citizens in this state, those three groups will be talking one-on-one with legislators, explaining why these groups oppose these measures.

When Missouri law espouses the basic principal that governmental records in the state should be open, when citizens generally express the opinion that they prefer access to information on their governmental bodies, does it make sense that your taxpayer dollars should be used to support organizations that work to close records? Should tax revenue ever be spent for that purpose? It is important that the voice of citizens in this state be heard on this issue. You need to tell your local governmental bodies that you do not want your tax dollars spent in this way. That you are opposed to closing public access to public records. That it is wrong for public bodies to spend money supporting groups that support closing access to records.

A little sunshine is healthy for all of us.

Jean Maneke is the Missouri Press Association Legal Hotline counselor.