At it again . . .

Long-time readers may remember last year's discussion of changes to the Freedome of Information Law (FOIL), which I predicted wouldn't be of much practical effect, and would spur the usual suspects to lobby for more changes. What was particular irksome was that few newspapers last year disclosed that the lobbying effor for the proposed changes was . . . the assocation of newspaper publishers. To be clear about my position, I agree with sunshine laws philosopically, but find that too often they are used more to harass than to enlighten. Anyway, here's an article about this year's changes: PATAKI STRENGTHENS FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW:

A new law should make it faster and cheaper for New Yorkers to gain government records and Gov. George Pataki is considering another bill that could strengthen the Freedom of Information Law.

A bill signed into law last week by Pataki allows New Yorkers to use e-mail to request most government records.

Common records sought under FOIL are minutes of closed-door meetings, correspondence by officials about development projects and competitive bidding, and government use of taxpayers' money.
...
[Robert] Freeman said the law could speed release of public records as well as eliminate the cost of copying. That per-page cost can total hundreds of dollars and has deterred some people from actually taking possession of records disclosed under FOIL.

But the biggest change in the post-Watergate law aimed at keeping government honest is still on Pataki's desk.

That law would allow courts to force local and state governments and school districts to pay attorney fees to a citizen, group, business or news organization denied access even if there isn't a broad public interest in the records. The law would also allow a court to force government and school districts to pay court costs if officials had no "reasonable basis for denying access" or they failed to respond to a request within the time required by law.

In practice, the measure could prevent any denials of records by officials who knew individuals, groups or news organizations didn't have the resources to sue to overturn the denial.