Bill will hurt public info access
|
|
There is great ignorance among many movers and shakers in Arizona. They are ignorant of what rural really means. That lack of knowledge may result in a new form of discrimination.
The state’s top political leaders throw cities of 10,000 or more and small towns with populations of 700 into the same pot to concoct a political Mulligan stew that too often has a bitter taste. Surprisingly, the Arizona League of Cities & Towns, an organization with knowledge of what is truly rural, has joined the ranks of those who seem to believe that one size fits all when defining what is rural.
The League is backing legislation that would require public notices to be published only on a city or town Web site. What if a municipality does not have a Web site? Neither Clifton nor Duncan, the only two incorporated municipalities in Greenlee County, have a Web site to speak of. The towns, including Greenlee County, presently publish their public notices (which no longer include meeting minutes) in The Copper Era, Greenlee’s official newspaper and the only paper with a general circulation in the county.
Those notices also appear on the Arizona Newspapers Association Web site. They can be accessed from anywhere on the Web, and always are in one location, not spread among more than 500 Arizona government entities. To see them go to www.publicnoticeads.com/az. Publishing notices is not inexpensive, but neither is publishing a newspaper, which is constantly hit with skyrocketing costs for newsprint and other rising costs faced by most businesses. Municipalities such as Duncan and Clifton may eventually establish full Web sites and save some money by publishing public notices online, but what about the availability of those notices to the public?
A large segment of Clifton’s and Duncan’s population consists of retirees living on fixed incomes or are people living at or below the poverty level. Many do not have a computer, nor do they have access to one. With online-only public notices, many would be denied information about the function of their government and the ability to participate in it. Granted, most public hearings generally do not attract much of an audience, but the lack of access to those hearings only ensures even less participation. How are citizens better off if they are less aware of what their government is doing?
Why don’t those without computers simply go to a local library and gain access to a local government Web site? Again, when it comes to our older population, there are many who do not know how to use a computer, nor do they have any desire to learn how to operate something they cannot afford. Even for those among the elderly who do have computers, the chance of seeing and paying attention to a public notice is far more likely when reading a newspaper.
It is unlikely that those who have computers will, while sipping a morning cup of coffee, take the time to specifically log onto a town’s Web site to see when a public hearing or an election is scheduled. Public notices in the newspaper play a critical role in disseminating information to the public about elections. One particularly important notice is a list of polling places and other election information. The information is far more visible in the notices than it is in a news story. Furthermore, the election information notice is printed in a format that people can clip out and have handy.
Counties already have won the right through the State Legislature to no longer print their Board of Supervisors meeting minutes in local newspapers. The minutes were very well-read when published in the Era. It will be interesting to see just how accessible they will now be to the public. County officials claim publishing minutes in the Era was expensive. We can easily come up with some ideas where the county can cut costs to make up for the cost of publishing its minutes.
We are surprised that the League of Cities & Towns would support legislation that would be all-encompassing for towns as it should know full well that some towns do not have Web sites. People at the League have always understood what communities are truly rural. The League is an outstanding organization that does a great deal of good for municipalities, particularly small towns. Why then does it support legislation that will leave many citizens of rural towns out in the cold when it comes to obtaining critical information about their respective governments, particularly the elderly and the poor?
Legislation limiting public notices to Web sites amounts to discrimination through technology, or the lack of it. The Arizona League of Cities & Towns and Arizona State Legislature should have no part in limiting anyone access to public information through veiled discrimination.
