One of the measures of a Nevada legislative session is whether lawmakers made government more open or more secretive.
In the 2009 session, although they missed some opportunities, legislators generally advanced the cause of open government. For one, they restored your right to free speech - even if you never realized it had been taken away.
Sometimes, it's what legislators don't do that helps keep government open and accessible.
For example, they didn't approve SB32, which would have closed the evaluations of city and county managers.
The arguments for the bill went something like this: City councils and county commissioners may feel more comfortable being frank in a personnel evaluation of their top managers if they can do it in private. Also, people carrying a grudge can get nasty when allowed to air their criticism in public.
I can't really disagree with either of those observations. Still, these are public officials whose biggest decision in any given year is probably whether to keep or fire the manager - and why. That people may be uncomfortable, or rude, isn't enough to keep the discussion behind closed doors. In my mind, it's all the more reason to do it in public.
Legislators also didn't move public notices, such as assessor rolls and city financial reports, exclusively to government Web sites. The Internet is a handy supplement, but you shouldn't have to go hunting through government-run sites to find public notices.
AB99 was a bill that, while I understood the intent behind it, presented a dilemma. It would have allowed judges to create "fictitious" addresses for themselves on some public documents so they couldn't be stalked by people wanting to do them harm.
I hate the thought of people using public documents to help stalk a judge. But I could never reconcile the idea of judges, who demand the whole truth and nothing but the truth, being able to propagate a legal falsehood. The bill was approved in the Assembly but never came to a vote in the Senate.
As for missed opportunities, the Legislature had at least three.
One was AB50, introduced by the State Contractors Board, which would have allowed the public to see complaints filed against contractors. It stalled in committee.
The usual argument against such disclosures is that someone with an ax to grind can abuse the system by filing unfounded allegations - by the dozens, if they want. But AB50 would have made public a complaint only after an investigator had found there was at least some probable cause for it. It seemed pretty straightforward to me.
A second opportunity was a bill by Assemblyman Joe Hogan to make campaign-finance reports more timely and easier to read. It was a good idea and, unfortunately, went nowhere.
The other opportunity for the Legislature was to hold more of its discussions of controversial tax plans in public. Although there were formal opportunities for debate and public comment, we know that much of the wheeling and dealing among legislators went on behind closed doors.
The 2009 Legislature made a few significant strides forward on open government, and no steps backward. On some issues when it had chances to progress, though, it's still limping along.
Barry Smith is executive director of the Nevada Press Association.
