Podcasts about Open government

Marinella Belluati"IA quotidIAna"IA quotidIAnaA Torino, un nuovo ciclo di incontri sull'Intelligenza Artificiale  al Circolo dei lettori  Un progetto di Università degli Studi di Torino, Fondazione Circolo dei lettori, Società Italiana per l'Etica dell'Intelligenza Artificiale e Magazine Intelligenza Artificiale MagIA 14 ottobre - Sex, lies and AI; IA oltre la vita28 ottobre - L'IA proietta luci e ombre sulla medicina?; IA e conflitti13 novembre - L'IA influenzerà le elezioni?; La deriva della tech economy: Utopia o distopia?Ore 18, Circolo dei lettori, Torino A due anni dall'avvento di ChatGPT, la chatbot basata sull'Intelligenza Artificiale ad apprendimento automatico sviluppata da OpenAI, questo nuovo assistente digitale potenziato, “interfaccia domestica” che rivela solo alcune delle enormi potenzialità dell'Intelligenza Artificiale, è entrato stabilmente nelle nostre vite. Ma l'IA ha il potere di influenzare o addirittura alterare, non sempre in positivo, innumerevoli aspetti della quotidianità: dalle relazioni sentimentali e sessuali al modo in cui intendiamo l'identità, dall'informazione alla medicina e alla guerra, persino il nostro rapporto con la morte.  Lunedì 14 ottobre, alle ore 18 in Sala Grande, la seconda edizione del ciclo prenderà avvio con l'incontro Sex, lies and AI, un dialogo tra Marco Scarcelli (sociologo dei Media Digitali, Genere e Sessualità, professore presso il Dipartimento di Filosofia, Sociologia, Pedagogia e Psicologia Applicata, Università degli Studi di Padova) e il giornalista Francesco Marino, moderato dalla professoressa di sociologia dei media Marinella Belluati: l'intelligenza artificiale sta assumendo un ruolo sempre crescente anche negli aspetti della sessualità e della vita intima delle relazioni personali, esperti e divulgatori discuteranno delle sfide etiche e della presenza dell'IA nelle dinamiche intime. L'intelligenza artificiale sta entrando anche nel complesso rapporto con i concetti di vita, morte ed eternità digitale, cambiando il modo in cui affrontiamo il lutto, la sua elaborazione, la memoria dei defunti e la potenziale immortalità. Ne discuteranno nel talk a seguire, IA oltre la vita, Davide Sisto (tanatologo, Università degli Studi di Trieste) e Simona Stano(semiologa, professoressa Associata presso il Dipartimento di Filosofia e Scienze dell'Educazione, Università degli Studi di Torino), con la moderazione di Adriano Favole (professore di Antropologia culturale presso il Dipartimento di Culture, Politica e Società, Università degli Studi di Torino).La rassegna proseguirà lunedì 28 ottobre alle ore 18, in Sala Grande, con l'incontro L'IA proietta luci e ombre sulla medicina?: l'intelligenza artificiale sta già trasformando il mondo della sanità, quali sono le potenzialità dell'IA nella diagnostica e nelle cure personalizzate? E quali i rischi legati alla privacy, all'etica, alla sicurezza e al controllo umano del sapere medico? Ne discuteranno Fabio Pammolli (professore di Economia e Management al Politecnico di Milano, presidente della Fondazione AI4Industry) e Guido Giustetto (presidente dell'Ordine dei Medici Chirurghi e Odontoiatri di Torino), moderati dal prof. Guido Boella. A seguire, IA e conflitti, durante il quale Francesca Farruggia (sociologa e ricercatrice presso il Dipartimento di Scienze Sociali ed Economiche, Università della Sapienza di Roma), Ettore Greco (Vicepresidente dell'Istituto Affari Internazionali) e Serena Danna, vicedirettrice del quotidiano digitale Open, si confronteranno sul ruolo dell'intelligenza artificiale nella gestione delle crisi, nella sicurezza e nella guerra, affrontando le implicazioni etiche e i rischi di una tecnologia sempre più centrale negli scenari geopolitici  e nei contesti di conflitto globale.Il ciclo terminerà mercoledì 13 novembre, sempre alle ore 18 in Sala Grande, con L'IA influenzerà le elezioni?, un confronto tra Fabio Malagnino (giornalista, coordinatore dell'ufficio stampa e direttore della testata giornalistica del Consiglio regionale del Piemonte e responsabile delle politiche di Open Government, cofondatore Fondazione Italia Digitale) e Luca Rinaldi (commissario dell'Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni), moderati da Marinella Belluati, su quale sia l'impatto dell'intelligenza artificiale sui processi elettorali contemporanei, su come possa influenzare il voto, compromettere la sicurezza elettorale e manipolare le informazioni. Il ciclo si conclude con un confronto su La deriva della tech economy: Utopia o distopia? con Azzurra Rinaldi (economista femminista, Ricercatrice presso l'Università UnitelmaSapienza di Roma, dove dirige la School of Gender Economics) e Francesca Coin (sociologa e Docente-ricercatrice RS presso il Centro di competenze lavoro welfare società del dipartimento di Economia aziendale sanità e sociale Deass della Supsi, Svizzera), moderate da Paolo Griseri (giornalista La Stampa), su come le trasformazioni della società guidate dall'innovazione tecnologica aprano prospettive di un futuro sempre più automatizzato, il cui rovescio della medaglia è rappresentato dal rischio di concentrazione del potere, disuguaglianze e perdita di controllo umano. Il dialogo apre una riflessione sul destino della tech economy e il suo impatto sul mondo reale.Gli appuntamenti di IA quotidIAna sono a ingresso libero, fino a esaurimento posti. IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarewww.ilpostodelleparole.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.

On this episode of The Tyler Tech Podcast, Tyler's director of state data solutions, Elliot Flautt, sits down with Nevada state controller Andy Matthews to discuss his inspiring journey through public service and his unwavering commitment to government transparency. Andy reflects on his early career in political campaigns, his path to the Nevada State Assembly, and everything that led him to his role as state controller.Andy shares the story behind his successful campaign to bring accountability and transparency to state spending, highlighted by the launch of the Nevada Open Finance Portal—a groundbreaking initiative created in partnership with Tyler Technologies. This innovative platform provides taxpayers with unprecedented access to detailed government expenditure data. Andy understands the critical role of modern technology in transforming state financial systems and offers practical insights into the strategic decisions involved in selecting and implementing cloud-based solutions.We also detail our latest white paper about the five main risks of legacy systems. You can download that here: Is Your Legacy Digital Infrastructure Putting You at Risk?Learn more about the topics discussed in this episode with these resources:Tyler Technologies and NASACT: Modernize the Digital Infrastructure in Your StateBlog: Interns Bring Energy, Vision, to Delaware's Open Data PortalBlog: Future-Proofing Government Through Technology ModernizationVideo: Increase Efficiency with the CloudVideo: Empowering States and Residents with Software and ServicesAnd you can listen to other episodes of the podcast at this link: www.tylertech.com/resources/podcastLet us know what you think about the Tyler Tech Podcast in this survey!

Hour 3: Deborah Fisher, Executive Director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, joins Mark Reardon to share what she has found while closely following all the furry over the leak of police records in the Covenant case. Then, Paul Muro, a Fox News Contributor, retired NYPD inspector, and founder of the OpsDesk.org, joins Mark Reardon to discuss the latest on the illegal immigrant crime wave, on Eric Adams and Kathy Hochul saying no more masks on subways, and more. Later, Mark brings you the Audio Cut of the Day.

Deborah Fisher, Executive Director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, joins Mark Reardon to share what she has found while closely following all the furry over the leak of police records in the Covenant case.

Open government is a good idea, but you can never let up efforts to keep it what way. Now the General Services Administration has launched what it calls the Open Government Federal Advisory Committee. It has to do with the U.S. Open Government National Action Plan. Joining the Federal Drive to sort it out for us, GSA's associate administrator for governmentwide policy, Krystal Brumfield. https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/newsroom/news-releases/gsa-launches-open-government-federal-advisory-committee-to-advise-on-governmentwide-transparency-efforts-04262024 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Carolina Pozo, an economist, innovation expert, and speaker, hails from Quito, Ecuador. She studied Economics at York University and holds a Master's in Public Management from Università SDA Bocconi. Carolina founded Cacao EcoVillage, MUZE Chocolate, and Avanti, focusing on innovative social impact projects. Her accolades include being a former member of the Global Shapers Community and being recognized by The McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University. Carolina led Quito's first open government and innovation lab and has been involved in creating the Public Innovation Lab in Honduras. Currently, she is driving initiatives in the chocolate industry and mobile banking for financial inclusion.   In this episode, Carolina discusses the transformative power of open innovation in government and how it can foster significant societal improvements. She shares insights from her time as the Director of LINQ, Quito's Innovation Lab, emphasizing the lab's role in pioneering open government policies. Carolina's stories from the front lines of innovation highlight the challenges and triumphs of implementing new policies that are transparent and citizen-centric.   Carolina also delves into her current projects, which marry her expertise in economics and her passion for social entrepreneurship. She talks about the creation of MUZE Chocolate, a social business aimed at transforming the chocolate industry by prioritizing sustainability and community involvement. Furthermore, she explains her role in advancing mobile banking solutions to enhance financial inclusion, detailing the impacts of these services on underserved populations in Ecuador. Listener Engagement: Discover the songs picked by Carolina and other guests on our #walktalklisten here.  Connect with Carolina: Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn, Muza: Twitter and Instagram and Avanti: Instagram and Twitter. Share your thoughts on this episode at innovationhub@cwsglobal.org. Your feedback is invaluable to us. Follow Us: Support the Walk Talk Listen podcast by liking and following us on Twitter and Instagram. Visit our website at 100mile.org for more episodes and information about our initiatives. Check out the special WTL series "Enough for All" featuring CWS, and as well as the work of the Joint Learning Initiative (JLI).  

The US public's trust in the media, and the government, is markedly low. A recent Gallup poll found only about 30 percent of Americans trust the media — and Pew Research found only 16 percent trust their government. Bloomberg's Jason Leopold is using records to try to change that. He's filed over 9,000 requests through the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA — a Cold War era law meant to ensure the right to transparency from the US government. On this week's Big Take DC, host Saleha Mohsin and Jason dissect the FOIA process, the challenges of sifting through redacted documents from secretive government entities and the stories FOIA records have brought to light. Subscribe to the FOIA Files newsletter: https://www.bloomberg.com/account/newsletters/foia-filesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Farragut Board of Aldermen's whiplash-inducing reversals on the Knox County growth plan fueled local political drama last week. It leads off this week's episode as Jesse and Scott talk through the different parties and pressures brought to bear on the usually overlooked town legislature. Also: TDOT's big I-40 announcement; Knox County Schools wrestles with objections to library materials; and GOP opposition to state Rep. Gloria Johnson's reelection campaign evaporates. In the interview segment, the guys talk with Deborah Fisher of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government about the controversies and complexities of public comment at public meetings. They also look ahead to a host of meetings next week, including yet another moment in the spotlight for the Farragut BOMA. And they hear from special guest/show producer Lord Seth Barber about the plans for the upcoming Holleroo celebration in Happy Holler. CompassKnox.com

His efforts sparked our interest. Listen into our conversation and learn what's going on...you just might want to get involved. Your voice should be heard.

March 15, 2024 - Before the sun sets on Sunshine Week in Planet Albany, we're checking in with Shoshanah Bewlay, executive director of the New York State Committee on Open Government. We discuss the committee's ideas for improving the Freedom of Information Law and consider the future of remote participation in public meetings.

Rulemaking Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) A process that requires agencies to publish proposed rules, allowing the public to comment before final rules are enacted, ensuring transparency and public participation. Exemptions and Exceptions to Notice-and-Comment Requirements Certain situations, such as emergencies or matters of minor significance, may exempt agencies from the full notice-and-comment process. Final Rule Issuance and Publication After considering public comments, agencies finalize and publish rules in the Federal Register, making them official and enforceable. Legislative vs. Interpretative Rules and Policy Statements Legislative Rules: Have the force of law and affect individual rights and obligations. Interpretative Rules: Clarify or interpret existing statutes or regulations without the force of law. Policy Statements: Indicate how an agency intends to exercise its discretionary powers. Adjudication Formal vs. Informal Adjudication Formal Adjudication: Involves a trial-like hearing with an administrative law judge. Informal Adjudication: Less formal processes without a hearing, often based on written submissions. Due Process Requirements in Agency Adjudications Agencies must follow due process, providing fair notice and an opportunity to be heard, ensuring decisions are made impartially and based on evidence. Hearings, Evidence, and Decision-Making Hearings allow for the presentation of evidence and arguments. Agencies must base their decisions on the evidence presented, adhering to legal standards. Appeals and Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions Decisions can be appealed within the agency and may be subject to judicial review, where courts examine the agency's compliance with the law and due process. Judicial Review of Agency Actions Standards of Review: Chevron Deference, Skidmore Deference, Arbitrary and Capricious Standard Chevron Deference: Courts defer to an agency's interpretation of ambiguous statutes it administers. Skidmore Deference: Courts give weight to an agency's interpretation based on its persuasiveness and expertise. Arbitrary and Capricious Standard: Courts review whether an agency's action was based on a consideration of relevant factors without clear error in judgment. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies Individuals must typically go through all available administrative remedies before seeking judicial review. Standing, Ripeness, and Mootness in Challenges to Agency Actions Standing: The right of an individual to bring a lawsuit based on their stake in the outcome. Ripeness: Whether a dispute has developed sufficiently to be ready for judicial review. Mootness: Whether there is still an actual controversy to resolve, affecting the court's ability to provide relief. Administrative Procedures Act (APA) Overview and Significance of the APA The APA is a key statute that governs how federal administrative agencies may propose and establish regulations, ensuring transparency, fairness, and public participation. Procedural Requirements under the APA for Rulemaking and Adjudication The APA sets out detailed processes for rulemaking and adjudication, including notice-and-comment procedures and requirements for formal hearings. Judicial Review Provisions in the APA The APA provides standards and procedures for courts to review agency actions, ensuring they comply with the law and respect individual rights. Open Government and Accountability Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) FOIA allows for the full or partial disclosure of previously unreleased information and documents controlled by the United States government, promoting transparency. Government in the Sunshine Act This act requires that meetings of certain federal agencies be open to the public, further ensuring transparency and accountability. Ethical Standards and Conflict of Interest Regulations for Agency Officials and Employees --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

On this week's episode of Inside Olympia....It's been more than half a century since Washington voters approved the Public Records Act. Now a new report from the Washington Coalition for Open Government warns the spirit and letter of that law are being undermined. We talk with the Mike Fancher, the nonprofit's president about recommendations for strengthening it.

 The Chino Y Chicano mark National Sunshine Week, a time to shine a light on the importance of public records and open government.  But according to Mike Fancher, retired Seattle Times executive editor and currently the president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government that sunshine is lacking especially in our state legislature. The independent, non-profit, non-partisan organization released a report that is highly critical of Washington's public agencies and state lawmakers for their lack of transparency. The Coalition argues they are making it harder for the public to access information and that is eroding the state's Public Record's Act.  Read: https://www.washcog.org/in-the-news/your-right-to-knowRead: https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/the-legislatures-sunshine-committee-has-fallen-into-darkness/Read: https://www.cascadiadaily.com/2024/feb/29/weakening-of-state-public-records-act-affects-your-right-to-know-every-day/Read: https://www.futuromediagroup.org/suave-pulitzer-prize/Read: https://pulitzercenter.org/people/maria-hinojosaRead: https://murrow.wsu.edu/symposium/the-edward-r-murrow-achievement-award/Read: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/sinclair-nixes-univision-affiliation-ending-local-spanish-broadcasts/Read: https://www.chronline.com/stories/group-of-washington-state-faith-and-community-leaders-call-for-cease-fire-in-israel-hamas-war,329305Read: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/us/lahaina-fire-families.html#:~:text=The%20F.B.I.,survivors%20wonder%20what%20comes%20next.: Read:https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2022/apr/15/fentanyl-involved-in-more-than-half-of-overdose-de/Read: https://pharmacy.wsu.edu/2021/08/23/how-one-professor-is-combating-a-silent-epidemic-in-eastern-washington/Read:https://www.courts.wa.gov/appellate_trial_courts/supreme/bios/?fa=scbios.display_file&fileID=gonzalezRead: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/mental-health/seattle-libraries-transit-branch-into-social-work-to-take-on-mental-health-drug-use/: Read:https://www.seattletimes.c...

Melanie Majors of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government explains why Sunshine Week is important for government accountability on News Radio KKOB See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Every year some elected officials in our state work to make it more difficult for journalists to hold them accountable and you to have the right to know what they're up to. Here's our annual look at government transparency.

Every year some elected officials in our state work to make it more difficult for journalists to hold them accountable and you to have the right to know what they're up to. Here's our annual look at government transparency.

Every year some elected officials in our state work to make it more difficult for journalists to hold them accountable and you to have the right to know what they're up to. Here's our annual look at government transparency.

Every year some elected officials in our state work to make it more difficult for journalists to hold them accountable and you to have the right to know what they're up to. Here's our annual look at government transparency.

Importance of open government laws on display with shocking stories. Jason Mercier of the Mountain States Policy Center discusses two recent stories that illustrate the lengths that some public officials will go to evade public accountability. https://tinyurl.com/mwyxsuan #Opinion #Columns #Commentary #JasonMercier #MountainStatesPolicyCenter #OpenGovernmentLaws #PublicAccountability #PublicOfficials #PublicRecordsLaws #AWellFunctioningRepublic #ClarkCountyToday

Keeping government open, accessible and accountable is one of those few policy areas where groups on all sides of the political divide can agree – and yet, it remains one of the most challenging public-policy fights we face on a daily basis. From police departments to local school districts, public officials and institutions routinely deny activists and journalists access to otherwise “public” information.     Michelle Rindels is a journalist and the president of The Nevada Open Government Coalition, and she joined the program to talk about the importance of open government, the challenges we face in Nevada and what ordinary citizens can do to keep their public officials accountable to the people they serve.   

Local government agencies collect a wealth of information about their citizens, assets and environment. However it is rarely effectively used to inform decision making with security, custodianship and cost related barriers. The City of San Rafael, California shares how they cost effectively and quickly built a data program from scratch. Sean Mooney, Director, Digital Service and Open Government and Vedika Ahuja, Product Manager - Data and Insights at the City of San Rafael This episode of the Public Sector Podcast is brought to you by AWS.  Digital transformation can be daunting. AWS Partners can help customers by transforming technical and security challenges into solutions. See the power of public service in the cloud. Read AWS Partner Innovator stories today.  For more great insights head to www.PublicSectorNetwork.co

There is now an expectation that the public should be consulted on constitutional change. However, traditional routes for gaining public legitimacy – such as referendums and elections – can result in binary choices, or unclear mandates.  So is there a greater role for deliberative democracy? Processes including citizens' assemblies, with informed discussions amongst a representative group of citizens, can offer many benefits to decision-makers, but getting them right is a challenge and getting them wrong can do more harm than good. When and how the public should be involved in constitutional decision making? How could options for deliberative democracy best be implemented? What are the challenges and benefits of this approach? Speakers: Sarah Allan, Director of Capacity Building and Standards at Involve Joanne Anderson, former Mayor of Liverpool Doreen Grove, Head of Open Government at the Scottish government Professor Alison L Young, Sir David Williams Professor of Public Law at the University of Cambridge This event was chaired by Dr Rebecca McKee, Senior Researcher at the Institute for Government. This event was part of the IfG and Bennett Institute's joint conference on the Future of the UK Constitution.

Links I Liked Who Decides What Constitutes ‘Knowledge' on Climate Change? Links I Liked The World Order Seems to be in Turmoil – What's Going on?How more Open Government can bolster USAID's Localization Agenda 

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Washington State government reporter for McClatchy, Shauna Sowersby! They discuss the failure of an anti-trans referendum campaign, a self-proclaimed white nationalist country musician playing at the Washington state capitol, new state laws going into effect, AG Ferguson continuing to avoid disclosing his donors, and another lawsuit filed against the Washington State Legislature for withholding public records under “legislative privilege.” The conversation continues with federal pandemic relief aid getting funneled into police surveillance technology, no-notice sweeps being ruled unconstitutional by King County Superior Court, and an audit showing that the Seattle Police Department could do more with existing resources to address organized retail crime. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Shauna Sowersby at @Shauna_Sowersby. Shauna Sowersby Shauna Sowersby was a freelancer for several local and national publications before joining McClatchy's northwest newspapers covering the Legislature. Before that, Shauna worked for the US Navy as a photographer and journalist.   Resources “PRIMARY WEEK RE-AIR: Teresa Mosqueda, Candidate for King County Council District 8” from Hacks & Wonks   “PRIMARY WEEK RE-AIR: Becka Johnson Poppe, Candidate for King County Council District 4” from Hacks & Wonks   “PRIMARY WEEK RE-AIR: Sarah Reyneveld, Candidate for King County Council District 4” from Hacks & Wonks   “PRIMARY WEEK RE-AIR: Jorge Barón, Candidate for King County Council District 4” from Hacks & Wonks   “With referendum failure, WA just dodged a bullet of hype and hate” by Danny Westneat from The Seattle Times   “‘Heretic' group to offer unbaptisms at WA Capitol Campus” by Shauna Sowersby from The Olympian   “New Washington state laws go into effect Sunday. Here are some of the key ones” by Shauna Sowersby from The Olympian   “WA AG Bob Ferguson should come clean about donors” by The Seattle Times editorial board   “WA judge fines AG's office, DSHS in ‘cavalier' withholding of lawsuit evidence” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times   “New lawsuit alleges WA state Senators were ‘silently withholding' public records” by Shauna Sowersby from The Olympian   “Federal aid is supercharging local WA police surveillance tech” by Brandon Block from Crosscut   “Summary judgment in ACLU case could end ‘no-notice' sweeps in Seattle” by Tobias Coughlin-Bogue from Real Change   “Audit: Police Could Do More, Without Hiring Extra Cops, To Address Retail Theft Rings” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen. In preparation for the primary election on next Tuesday, August 1st, we've been re-airing candidate interviews for the open City [County] Council seats all this week. Be sure to check them out if you're still deciding whom to vote for. Today, we are continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome to the program for the first time, today's co-host: Washington state government reporter for McClatchy, Shauna Sowersby. Hello. [00:01:09] Shauna Sowersby: Hello, thanks for having me. [00:01:11] Crystal Fincher: I am so excited to have you on the show today. I think I told you before - followed your work for so long and your reporting has been really important for quite some time now, so very excited. To begin the conversation, we will start talking about the failure of a referendum for a piece of legislation that would benefit the trans community. What happened here? [00:01:35] Shauna Sowersby: During the State Legislature this year, there was a bill that was passed, 5599, that was sponsored by Senator Marko Liias. And that bill expanded a law that was already in place and included teenagers trying to seek gender-affirming care as well as abortion care. So it wasn't really a new law, it was just expanding on something that was already there - to try and protect these other factors that were involved. [00:02:04] Crystal Fincher: This is really about protecting populations within our homeless community. This is about shelters and whether shelters have to mandatorily divulge information, or if they wait to determine, or discriminate in any way. So it's not - as it was couched by some people - this is about medically intervening with youth, this is about intervening in family matters, or they wanna take people from your homes. This is about a population that's already unhoused and legislation that's trying to keep teens from really being vulnerable when they're homeless and out on the street with nowhere else to go, which is a very, very dangerous and harmful place to be. This became what a lot of people refer to as culture war stuff - is really what we're dealing with in this whole time now, where people are targeting trans people, trans rights, really the broader LGBTQ community in a lot of these situations. And anything that could potentially make life easier or just not as extraordinarily difficult for trans people in things that they may be dealing with. There are a lot of LGBTQ youth that get kicked out of their homes for that reason - and so if they are there, or people who are seeking abortion care - that can't be a reason for someone to be turned away or submitting information, divulging information to other people. Basically just protecting them like we protect everyone else. But I was happy to see, personally, that this referendum failed. And I think it's just another statement that overall - we don't play that, we don't do that in Washington. Certainly these elements are active, but they are nowhere near the majority of community and we need to keep making sure people know and understand that and make that visible. [00:03:44] Shauna Sowersby: And I just wanted to point out, too, that it failed by a lot - I think it was like 5,000 signatures or something that it failed by. So I don't think it had quite as much support as the writers of that referendum had intended. [00:03:57] Crystal Fincher: When you look at the facts of what is and isn't happening and why, and what gender-affirming care means in the context of the broader community - it's got broad meanings. People who are not even trans access that all the time. It's not a controversial thing. This is not really about kids. This was an attack on the entire community and an attempt to claw back rights. [00:04:17] Shauna Sowersby: And I think the Danny Westneat article in The Seattle Times brought up a really good point too. This wasn't even an issue until gender and reproductive rights got brought into the mix. It wasn't a problem before that. These two things are very popular topics throughout the country right now. [00:04:35] Crystal Fincher: I also wanna talk about a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist country musician playing at the Washington State Capitol. What went on? [00:04:43] Shauna Sowersby: He'll be there Friday the 28th. There was a Rolling Stone article that came out a while ago about him. He was open about being a white nationalist - seemed to be proud of the fact that he is a white nationalist country musician. So he'll be there at the Capitol with Turning Point USA, which I'm sure a lot of folks listening might be familiar with. But the House of Heretics will be there and they will be doing unbaptisms and gender affirming rituals. I believe one of their quotes was something like they wanted whenever Sean plays on Friday night for it to be the devil's ground for him to play on. So I thought that was pretty interesting. [00:05:24] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it is. And Turning Point USA is a radical organization - you have a self-described white nationalist, like a Charlie Kirk, that is associated with and promoting white nationalists. And it's just not that wonderful. And like I said, these things are here and they're around and people are trying to introduce this in the community, certainly trying to make it seem more mainstream. But it's not. And I think all of our responsibility is making that known and visible. Other news this week - and especially with you as a legislative reporter covering so much that happened in the legislative session - we passed legislation, but there's usually a little bit of time before it's passed and when it completely takes effect. But we do have a number of new laws about to go into effect this Sunday. What are some of the key laws coming? [00:06:09] Shauna Sowersby: Our legislature did a really good job on housing this year. And one of the laws that went into effect on the 23rd was more access to ADUs, so that's a positive thing. That's something that the legislature had been going after for several years, if I remember correctly, but finally got that one. So those are allowed in certain cities with a certain population. Hopefully that will help ease the lack of housing situation that's going on pretty much everywhere around the state. So I think that's a good one. Another one that goes into effect is landlords' claims for damages. So that extends the timeline landlords have to provide documentation to show that they are in the right in retaining a tenant's deposit - which is a really important one, I feel - that's also another thing that they've been trying to get passed for a long time. They also need to keep receipts that they can actually show to their tenants before they can charge them, so I think all of those are really good. It also prevents them from charging past normal wear and tear, which anybody who's ever rented, I'm sure, has probably run into an issue like that. So I think that type of law will be a positive for a lot of renters out there. And then another one I thought was interesting, just because I'd never really heard of this before this year, but they're making pill presses illegal in the state. I had no clue what these were, to be honest with you, before they passed this law. It's basically trying to prevent people from overdosing on fentanyl when they take things that they think might be something else, such as a Percocet. These can look very legitimate with these pill presses, but can include amounts of fentanyl in them that can kill you. So obviously that is another positive law that went into effect just recently. [00:08:04] Crystal Fincher: And that's how people can identify pills. They're registered, marked for different types of pills. You can actually look up and Google them. If a pill gets lost or dropped or something and you pick it up and see markings on them, you can find out what it is by that. But yeah, people have been abusing that to pass off some substances. And when we have such dangerous and harmful drugs out there that can be so easily mixed into other substances or look like something else, that's really important. As well as the accessory dwelling unit, or the ADU, bill - a lot of people think of them as mother-in-law houses, but allowing people to add density or add a unit to their existing property is an important element in the whole web of increasing the amount of density, or preparing communities to responsibly absorb more people living there without having real estate prices go sky high as we've been seeing. So some really, I think, good laws coming in, some progress being made. And so it'll be interesting to see how these are enforced, especially when it comes to those landlord ones - to see if they actually do materially improve the situations that they are seeking to improve. Also wanna talk about Attorney General Ferguson's campaign for governor and a call for him to come clean about his donors, especially in a piece that was published in The Seattle Times this week. What's happening with this? [00:09:27] Shauna Sowersby: The Public disclosure Commission was set to have a ruling a few weeks back that outlined and reinforced the idea that if you're moving money from one campaign to another campaign - so Ferguson moving from going for Attorney General again to governor - so you can move a certain amount of money over into your other campaign without having to disclose those donors. Like you were saying earlier, it's something that could be done - they were saying you shouldn't be doing it this way. And right before that date came in, they clarified that he switched all that money over - and I believe it was $1.2 million, is that correct? [00:10:05] Crystal Fincher: It's about $1.2 million and they received notice that a clarification was coming. They transferred it the day after that notice, which I think was a day before they officially did it. That is a detail that I don't know we all knew and understood before. And it's confusing. With the PDC, there's an underlying law and the PDC issues guidance and interpretations. This entire time, the actual law has not changed. The PDC's guidance about the law is what changed. And a person was looking at the law and looking at the guidance - unconnected to the campaign, I think to any campaigns - and was - Hey, it looks like your guidance does not actually say what the law does, or it leaves a hole. The bigger issue is - say you transfer these things over - we have campaign finance limits. If you can only donate - say a limit is $1,000, it changes year to year - if you transfer money over from some of those same donors, it could put people over the limit for this race and you can't be over the limit. The PDC said - Oh, that is correct. We overlooked that or got that wrong. Called the campaigns to say - Hey, we realized we got something wrong and we're going to be issuing formal guidance tomorrow. After that call, the campaign said - Oh, let's transfer it. Then we find ourself here. There's the law. Should this have been done? The answer appears to be no, but it's also hard because people are following guidance. I followed a PDC guidance before. And so the fact that it was done in the first place - I completely understand you're relying on the PDC for guidance - it's the muddy area of when they say - Ooh, this guidance is wrong. And it's not like they're saying the law is going to change. If it's not the law, it's not the law. It's not illegal if you do it before it's a law. It's a little dicey in that they were notified that they weren't going to be able to do it and then rushed to do it before it was written on paper when basically they got the tip off. [00:11:57] Shauna Sowersby: And now the fact that they're being called on to disclose those donors and they're not doing it - that's another issue as well. [00:12:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's something that the PDC is taking up again. I believe they're having a meeting - we're recording this on Thursday - I think they are having a meeting today, potentially as we speak. Big issue that we're left with - because the issue of democracy, small-d democracy, is the disclosure of donors. This is foundational to our system. And from near and far, every state has campaign finance regulations. Some are enforced better than others, but this is really important so that within campaigns - there's dark money with PACs - within campaigns, it's really defined that someone can donate, but they have a limit and they can't donate above that limit. That helps, from the campaign perspective, make sure that people with money can't crowd out everyone else or just dominate the conversation financially within that campaign. I do find it concerning that right now, there's $1.2 million worth of donors that we don't know. If you have pledges that you're not accepting money from these people or who's that? We see in other races - Oh, whoa, this Trump supporter donated or this, on the Republican side, Biden supporter did this. Or you're wondering why they're donating and what promises may have been made. I'm not saying that promises are always made for donations, but usually people donate to who they find themselves aligned. That's a reasonable thing to explore and debate, which is why our law mandates that. I hope that they are disclosed. Even if they find that he shouldn't have transferred the money at all, I do think it is realistic and very doable to disclose them. Disclosure is easy. For them to have been able to transfer the money, they had to get permission from the donor. So they have all of those records - that the transfer couldn't have happened without it. It'll be really interesting to see how this winds up. [00:13:48] Shauna Sowersby: One more thing too that I wanted to add about the whole Ferguson thing is that - for the state's highest attorney's office, him being in that office for so long - he obviously knows these rules. He knows that he should be holding himself to a higher standard. One of the things that concerns me - not just about the PDC and his campaign finance stuff - is that his office was recently fined for withholding hundreds of thousands of documents in a lawsuit against a developmentally disabled woman. Documents that would have helped this woman and her case, but appears that a lot of these documents were intentionally withheld. Not saying that Ferguson himself was responsible for doing these things, but it is his office. The mixture between that and then the recent PDC guidance that - as a candidate for governor, he should really be putting himself in a higher standard. [00:14:44] Crystal Fincher: Like you said, who knows how much he was aware of going in - and most of these donors are probably above board - I would assume most of them are not above the limit. How much money is it, really, from donors who are above the limit here? Practically looking at correcting this issue - say it's even half a million dollars worth, he still has a significant financial lead over other people and it gets this thing that's dogging his campaign. Just disclose the donors - you have the money, just disclose donors. [00:15:15] Shauna Sowersby: You're already in the lead. Hilary Franz said she wanted to make sure that this was a fair transfer and that everybody was going by the same rules. Even with somebody else calling him out for it, still wasn't doing it. [00:15:28] Crystal Fincher: There's a reason why he's the front-runner. There's a lot of things about him that excite people, but I don't think you're ever above having to answer questions. Even if you are the front runner in the race, we all wind up better. And it sets a precedent - people may be comfortable with Ferguson and he may make a wonderful governor, but for successive governors, I don't want a precedent set where they don't have to follow the rules. I want to talk about another lawsuit filed against the Washington State Legislature for withholding public records under "legislative privilege." What's happening this time? [00:16:03] Shauna Sowersby: Nothing new here. I believe it was Friday of last week - me and some other requesters got back a set of documents - this is from a request that was filed, I want to say, in January and closed out in February. We were told that we had all records from every lawmaker that was withholding records under "legislative privilege". Lo and behold, Friday, we get another batch of records that have suddenly been found. The petitioner in this lawsuit, Arthur West, also filed one of the previous lawsuits for "legislative privilege." He believes that in this case, it's called "silent withholding" - it's still part of the same lawsuit that he's filed before, but this is an addendum where he believes they may have intentionally been withholding these final documents - they should have been found, they should have been captured in our request, so it's odd they're showing up now. This is an additional lawsuit into what's already happening - I believe WashCOG, Washington Coalition for Open Government, they also have a lawsuit pending. I don't think it has a hearing date until later in September. So not looking good so far for lawsuits and lawmakers. We'll see how this all turns out. I'm assuming it'll be a slow process, but we're finally getting things kicked off. [00:17:25] Crystal Fincher: I'll be curious to see what comes of it. Also want to talk about a story that came out this week - just a couple of days ago or yesterday, I think - about the amount of federal aid going towards police surveillance. When we say police surveillance, what are they talking about? [00:17:40] Shauna Sowersby: An article from Brandon Block in Crosscut - looks like they are using federal aid money that was supposed to go to other things to basically spy on people. It seems like there's a lot of concerns from groups like the ACLU who say that the surveillance equipment can be used - not just for immigrants and for trying to deport people, but it can also be used for people who are seeking out-of-state abortions coming into Washington. So there's multiple concerns here what the surveillance equipment could be doing. And it looks like a lot of it is - from the article - license plate surveillance and the drones that they were using - makes you wonder why these smaller towns are spending so much money on surveillance equipment. [00:18:29] Crystal Fincher: I don't think people realize that this much money was going to these things. And at a time when lots of people are talking about wanting more police funding, wanting to hire more officers, saying that there's not money to do it - there's so much money being spent and being siphoned from other areas where it seems like it was originally intended to go and being spent on this surveillance technology, like drones and automatic license plate readers, going through communities and looking up everyone's license plates everywhere. And usually - one, these are not equitably used, equitably deployed. A lot of times they are deployed much more heavily and ubiquitously in lower income communities and BIPOC communities. Is the community aware of this? Are people aware of this? Like you said, we have other states trying to - actually have criminalized abortion care, gender affirming care. There aren't policies, strong policies with enforcement that really limit how this data can be used, how it can be shared, how it can be spread. This is where we can have bad outcomes where potentially someone from another state, someone with a nefarious purpose can find this information to track people down and inequitably enforce laws that are on our books in communities, causing disproportionate harm. At minimum, this should be something that is very intentionally discussed in these communities. I definitely recommend that people do read this article by Brandon Block - we'll include it in the podcast show notes and on the website. It's really concerning to see so much money diverted for this purpose - was supposed to help people survive the pandemic, help people not get evicted, help cities support small businesses - that this was diverted for this purpose and in a way I don't think was transparent or consistent with what people intended within their communities or even federally. [00:20:25] Shauna Sowersby: Yeah, it seems like people weren't asked about that. I'm sure there was probably no conversation for that, but like you're saying, it could have been diverted for a number of purposes and instead goes to surveillance equipment. [00:20:39] Crystal Fincher: We will see if there's any follow up on that. There was another case this week that was really important and reiterated what other cases have found and that is that no-notice police sweeps that are used in lots of localities, including Seattle, were found to be unconstitutional. What did this ruling hold and what are some of the impacts that it may have? [00:21:01] Shauna Sowersby: In this article from Real Change, it talks about how the court ruled the city's sweep policies are not carefully tailored, in some circumstances, to pursue the city's valid governmental interests and require more disclosure than is reasonably necessary. The rules define obstruction so broadly, the city can invade unhoused people's privacy rights without notice, offers of shelter and preservation. [00:21:27] Crystal Fincher: This is an issue that many cities are dealing with. We've been talking about the unfortunate circumstances in Burien, certainly in Seattle. Every community is really looking at this and facing this. So many of our neighbors are now homeless - and the City of Seattle and Burien have really gone too far. It had been established before that it is illegal for a city to conduct a sweep if there is no offer of shelter provided. Basically, if you have nowhere for someone to go, it is found to be unconstitutional to sweep someone in that instance. There's a reason why the CDC recommends against it, why it is not recommended, especially in extreme weather situations. These are people's whole possessions. Though outwardly sometimes they may not look like much to someone walking by, this is what they have and this is critical - the few things they do have for work, their ID, the few mementos that have meant the absolute most to them that they've been able to keep when they've lost everything else is what they have. Just coming through unannounced - and you leave, you come back, and your stuff is gone. Or you have an hour and the stuff is gone is really destabilizing. We have to do a better job of supporting this. Most people have also seen that when there is nowhere for someone to go, it doesn't do anything to solve the problem. We're really just moving the issue of homelessness around. We're not doing anything to solve it. It's this game of musical chairs and most people are just moving from property to property or place to place within a city most of the time, certainly within the region. So we've got to expand our response. We can't keep doing the same thing over and over again. The biggest problem here is that people don't have housing. If housing is not an element in the solution, it's not a solution. And yes, that is complicated. Yes, it's costly. But it really is not as costly as allowing the situation to continue. I don't think there's anyone left, right, or anywhere who is satisfied with seeing people on the street within encampments, but I think people just don't want to double down on that failure, spend so much money on police resources - all the resources that we're spending in a way that doesn't solve the problem. So the City of Seattle is gonna have to go back to the table and figure out what they're gonna do. Other cities are gonna have to look at this ruling and modify what they're doing, or potentially face the same lawsuit and legislation, and wind up having to do it by force rather than proactively. [00:23:58] Shauna Sowersby: The governor and the legislature - they've been trying to tackle this issue too with the rights-of-way - the whole idea there was that they weren't gonna move people out unless they had some sort of housing situation set up for those folks. So instead of just shuffling them around from one place to another, it's still a small pilot program at this point - and can't do it on a large scale, obviously. I think instead of sweeping folks, this is a better alternative - not the best alternative, for sure - but it's better than shuffling folks around one other part of the city like you were saying. [00:24:33] Crystal Fincher: And this ruling did say that the use was overbroad. There are still circumstances where it is legally permissible to do this if really obstructing a sidewalk. It is constitutional for a sweep to happen. The issue is that they're happening in so many more situations where there's imminent harm or obstruction. The last story I wanted to talk about today was an audit that came out about the City of Seattle, but really applicable to many cities - saying police could do more without hiring extra cops to address retail theft rings. This is really important - we see stories almost every day on the news about theft. If you're online, you see surveillance photos from stores and theft happening. People are trying to figure out the way to address this, and the biggest problem that seems solvable from a public safety perspective is going after these retail theft rings. But in a way, going after petty theft is not going after retail theft and this audit addressed that. This report basically said targeting organized retail theft is important. And some cities like Auburn have been successful at doing that, but they've succeeded by trying to "cut off the head of the snake" - as they put it - and not going after petty theft. What this study found is that Seattle really likes going after petty theft and calling it going after retail crime. Most of the crimes are theft under $750, they are individuals doing this. They find them participating in task forces, but as for action on the ground - action that they're taking - it doesn't appear that they're doing much to actually go after the heads of these organizations, the organized part of that organized crime. According to the audit - in PubliCola that came out on the 25th - responding to calls from just the top 100 retail locations in the city used almost 19,000 hours of police time, equivalent to nine full-time officers that could be streamlined by using tools like rapid video response instead of deploying officers out all over town. So if they need to interview employees, they can do those interviews by Zoom. They can do those in a more proactive way, in a more efficient way - that saves officers time, that saves employees time, that is really less impactful to both the business and the department. And can also get them that information quicker, so it gives more of a chance to get closer to the people who are in these fencing rings, who are making it profitable for these people to steal. And the audit found that the City does participate in task forces and stuff, but they should also invest in place-based strategies like environmental factors, the actual design, better lighting, activating vacant lots, and other non-law enforcement approaches to make hotspots less appealing places for people to operate illegal street markets. There were 68 strategies proposed last year, but the City's only implemented three. So we have these conversations - they're really visible in Seattle, but they're happening all over the place in cities from Auburn to Kent to others - having these community meetings and saying - Wow, we're really trying to do this. If you look under the hood, you see that they continue to go after petty criminals at the expense of the ability to go after the heads of these organized crime rings and using other tools besides just a cop responding to something to prevent these things from happening. How did you see this? [00:28:00] Shauna Sowersby: Yeah, this is something that could probably not just apply to Seattle, even down here in Olympia, Tacoma. This is a result of the other media outlets making a bigger deal about shoplifting and focusing on that as a narrative - that could be inspiring more resources to be going into those sorts of things, as opposed to - like you were saying - the areas where they really could be focusing on instead. We're just going for the wrong thing. [00:28:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and you raise a good point. If you are seeing this highlighted - and we've seen lots of stories of theft used in a way that's really propaganda, we've seen situations here locally and nationally where the impact of theft has been overstated and the cause is muddied. If people really care about this, they'll take these findings into account and implement them. If all you hear them saying is the same thing over and over again, that seems more like a campaign tactic or like a scare tactic. We have to use all of the tools at our disposal. We have to get more intentional about wisely using the resources that we do. You have people saying the only way that things can be improved is to hire more cops. There's no way to get more cops online without basically a year lead time because they have to be accepted, go to the academy - there's a long lead time before you get them on the street. Wow - how bleak and hopeless is that situation? Seemingly nothing else can be done - after we have already taken so many steps and allocated so much money, extra money - retention bonuses to stay, high salaries, how many officers are clearing money that other people in the community aren't making? And so using that money effectively, finding ways to use the existing assets more efficiently - this is gonna save officers' time. We should see action taken on these. And certainly within SPD, when there are 60-something recommendations and only three have been implemented, we need to keep ticking down that list. I hope we get beyond the talk when there's so much that needs to happen to keep us safe and to hopefully prevent crime instead of just responding to it. There are things identified and hopefully they choose to do them. And with that, we thank you for listening to this Hacks & Wonks on Friday, July 28th, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful cohost today was Washington State government reporter from McClatchy, Shauna Sowersby. You can find Shauna on Twitter @Shauna_Sowersby - Shauna underscore Sowersby. You can - and that's S-H-A-U-N-A. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter and you can find me on all platforms @finchfrii, that's two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, please leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in, vote by August 1st, and we will talk to you next time.

NMiF Senior Producer Lou DiVizio opens the show with headlines from around the state, including an update on the criticism surrounding New Mexico State University. According to reporting from the Las Cruces Sun-News, Athletic Director Mario Moccia is getting some support from area business owners and athletic boosters after Moccia signed a 5-year contract extension amid allegations of sexual harassment, assault and intimidation on the school's men's basketball team. Gene Grant and The Line Opinion Panel take up three stories developing around the state. First, Gene asks the panelists if a new advisory council at the state's Children Youth and Families Department has any chance to help solve the longstanding issues within the agency. Then, Gene updates the back-and-forth over the proposed PNM-Avangrid merger as the state Supreme Court weighs whether to end the case or send it back to the Public Regulation Commission. Plus, the panel addresses the latest on allegations of sexual harassment and assault in the ongoing scandal surrounding the New Mexico State University men's basketball program.  Host: Lou DiVizio Line Host: Gene Grant    The Line Opinion Panel:  Justine Fox-Young, Republican former NM state Representative  Steve Terrell, retired reporter, Santa Fe New Mexican  Dede Feldman, Democratic former NM state Senator  For More Information: Morning Word - Santa Fe Reporter Biden Plan Would Open Leases to Conservation, Not Just Drilling and Grazing - Associated Press Enhancing Delivery of Services Steering Committee – New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department  Foundation for Open Government statement on CYFD's action to close special council meetings – New Mexico Foundation for Open Government   Attorneys and Advocates Issue Statements in Response to Kevin S. Settlement Co-Neutrals' Report on Status of Implementation – Pegasus Law  CYFD policy advisory council begins work, even as questions persist about beleaguered agency's core structure – Albuquerque Journal  PRC commissioner recuses himself from merger issue – Santa Fe New Mexican  New Mexico court denies challenge to PRC reforms – Albuquerque Journal  Public Regulation Commission stumbles into the new year – Source NM  PNM-Avangrid merger rejected by PRC – Albuquerque Journal  State Supreme Court holds PNM, Avangrid second chance at merger in the balance – Santa Fe New Mexican  PRC, utility lawyers had one-sided talks ahead of filing – Santa Fe New Mexican  PRC modifies position on public hearings for PNM-Avangrid merger – Albuquerque Journal   Allegations of misconduct surround proposed Avangrid-PNM merger – KRQE   At New Mexico St, a meltdown that runs beyond basketball – The Associated Press  Ex-NMSU basketball players say teammates targeted coaches – ESPN   New Mexico State AD Mario Moccia receives 5-year extension – The Associated Press  Governor will push for anti-hazing bill – Santa Fe New Mexican  --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nmif/message

New Mexico Foundation for Open Government sounds off on CYFD's new advisory council intention to meet in secret for some discussions, calling on the panel to instead hold all of its meetings in a public forum on News Radio KKOBSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

NMiF Senior Producer Lou DiVizio introduces the podcast this week with a roundup of headlines around the state. That includes the new ESPN report detailing the alleged hazing and sexual assaults that took place on the New Mexico State men's basketball team. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland announces $12.6 million for a desalination facility in Alamogordo meant to remove of 'forever chemicals' from area groundwater. And, the state's Children Youth and Families Department is facing criticism from a state lawmaker and the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government over a new advisory council that will be closed to the public. Gene Grant and The Line Opinion Panel discuss the ongoing fight to restrict access to reproductive healthcare in New Mexico. Gene asks why the town of Edgewood moved to pass an anti-abortion ordinance shortly after Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed a new law that prohibits municipalities from creating laws that restrict access.   Gene speaks with Sam Cobb, mayor of Hobbs, to discuss Cobb's decision last fall to pass an ordinance that restricts abortion access to residents. Gene asks the mayor if lawmakers in Santa Fe are hearing concerns and alternative viewpoints from his city.  Then, Gene and The Line Opinion Panel reconvene to discuss the statewide anti-abortion movement and consider the local impact of out-of-state activists on smaller, Republican-leaning communities across New Mexico.  Finally, NMiF correspondent Gwyneth Doland talks with civil rights attorney Laura Schauer Ives about how local anti-abortion court cases could impact people nationwide.  Host: Lou DiVizio The Line Host: Gene Grant The Line Opinion Panel: Elise Kaplan, investigative reporter, Albuquerque Journal  H. Diane Snyder, former NM Republican state Senator  Martha Burk, political psychologist and author    Guests: Sam Cobb, mayor, Hobbs Laura Schauer Ives, civil rights attorney Correspondent: Gwyneth Doland For More Information: After hours of debate Edgewood passes ordinance restricting access to abortion – Albuquerque Journal  Edgewood's anti-abortion ordinance: Here's what people said – Albuquerque Journal  City of Eunice sues governor and attorney general over abortion rule – Source NM  Hobbs adopts new abortion ordinance – KRQE   New Mexico passed laws protecting access to abortion. Opponents ready for legal fight — even to U.S. Supreme Court. – Albuquerque Journal  ‘They're fearful:' What New Mexico abortion providers are seeing as their patient numbers soar – Albuquerque Journal  New Mexico was once among a handful of states where abortions later in pregnancy were available. That changed in January. - Albuquerque Journal  New Mexico passed laws protecting access to abortion. Opponents ready for legal fight — even to U.S. Supreme Court. – Albuquerque Journal  Signup for the NMiF Newsletter NMiF on Facebook  NMiF on Youtube  NMiF on Instagram  NMiF on Twitter    --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nmif/message

Public trust of the media is down, and political polarization is rampant. But studies show the answer to both of these problems lies in local journalism.  Today we talk with journalists and scholars about the media landscape in Middle Tennessee. How do we address issues of funding, access, and diversity in our newsrooms? And how does that impact the information that is spread? But first, host Khalil Ekulona and senior digital producer Anna Gallegos-Cannon address listener feedback in @ Us. Guests: Levi Ismail, NewsChannel5 investigative reporter Emily Cochrane, southern correspondent for the New York Times Samar Ali, founder and CEO of Millions of Conversations, co-chair of the Vanderbilt Project on Unity and American Democracy  Deborah Fisher, executive director of Tennessee Coalition for Open Government, director of MTSU's John Seigenthaler Chair of Excellence in First Amendment Studies

Opinion: New bill proposes open government ombuds study. The bill would authorize a legislative task force to study the creation of an office to help provide a nonpartisan and independent resource for citizens to access public records. https://bit.ly/3KzZsNL #Opinion #Columns #Commentary #JasonMercier #WashingtonPolicyCenter #WashingtonStateLegislature #2023LegislativeSession #HouseBill1856 #HB1856 #HouseRepublicans #OpenGovernmentOmbudsStudy #LegislativeTaskForce #AccessPublicRecords #WashingtonState #ClarkCountyWa #ClarkCountyNews #ClarkCountytoday

Strengthening civil society and citizen participation is of utmost importance. Anabel Cruz, Founding Director of the Communication and Development Institute (ICD), has spent three decades doing that work.  In the last episode of Voices of Open Government, Anabel tells us how her experience fleeing her home country of Uruguay as a political refugee inspired her to work on democratic initiatives and why strengthening civil society is crucial in our current political climate. -- For any questions, please email communications@opengovpartnership.org Twitter: ⁠⁠@opengovpart⁠⁠  |  Facebook: ⁠⁠@opengovernmentpartnership⁠⁠  |  LinkedIn: ⁠⁠@opengovernmentpartnership⁠⁠  |  Instagram: ⁠⁠@opengovpartnership⁠

This week, we're talking to Melanie Majors, the executive director of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government. FOG was created because citizens have a fundamental right to know what their government is doing, and that includes the right to inspect public records and the right to attend public meetings. FOG works to make sure these rights are strong and available to everyone. Sometimes, this means assisting individual citizens who are denied information by local or state government. It also means strengthening and broadening freedom-of-information laws through legislation and litigation. And it means educating the public and public officials about the letter and spirit of sunshine laws. With New Mexico's 60-day legislative session having just wrapped up, several bills of interest were winding their way through the legislature — bills that would have a tremendous impact on transparency and the state's Inspection of Public Records Act. For instance, Senate Bill 63 — sponsored by Sen. Bill Tallman, an Albuquerque Democrat, would shield the names of applicants of high-level government jobs, including city managers, school superintendents and police chiefs. Tallman contended the bill's passage would attract a better pool of candidates. We'll talk to Melanie about FOG's opposition to that bill and what became of it. Another proposed bill, House Bill 232, would revise New Mexico's public records law to exempt from release certain cybersecurity records and law enforcement video of death notifications, nudity or certain other images. It would also require people requesting law enforcement video to include either a police report number, computer dispatch number or a date range. A request using a date range would need to include the officer's name, time or location of what the requester is seeking. While FOG was involved in discussions surrounding the bill, the organization did not formally oppose the changes.

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, political consultant and host Crystal Fincher is joined by elite advocate, member of The Urbanist Election Committee, and Political Manager at the Washington Bus, specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people, Jazmine Smith! They catch up on legislative updates from Olympia, including free school meals and other education bills, housing and transportation, public safety, voter rights and name change legislation. They also discuss the legislature's desire to exempt themselves from many public disclosure requirements that other elected officials are subject to. They also discuss the state's first auction of carbon pollution allowances after the passage of the Climate Commitment Act and what that might mean for green investment and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, several school districts planning school closures and layoffs because of funding shortfalls that require legislative funding to solve, the impact of SNAP food assistance benefit reductions for families. Crystal and Jazmine conclude with a discussion of speed camera traffic safety enforcement in response to the need to improve safety on our streets and the impacts of police increased surveillance within BIPOC and lower-income communities, as well as some proposed mitigations to those issues. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Jazmine Smith at @jazzyspraxis. Jazmine Smith Jazmine Smith is the Political Manager at the Washington Bus, specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people.   She also is an urbanism organizer, serving on The Urbanist's Election committee, with the Queen Anne Community Council as the Transportation Committee co-chair, the Uptown Alliance's Land Use Review Committee and is a WSDCC Rep for the 36th LD.   Resources “Marc Dones and the State of King County's Homelessness Crisis Response” from Hacks & Wonks   “Announcing our 2023 Legislative Priorities!” | The Washington Bus   “WA legislators scrap plan for free school lunch for all students” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times   “Washington's Middle Housing Bill Is Still Alive with Further Amendments” by Stephen Fesler from The Urbanist   “As Density Bills Move Forward, It's Statewide Housing Goals vs. "Local Control"” by Ryan Packer from PubliCola   “This WA bill could make it easier and safer to change your name” by Taija PerryCook from Crosscut   “New Drug Possession Bill Emphasizes Coercive Treatment” by Andrew Engelson from PubliCola   “Member of WA's ‘Sunshine Committee' quits, cites lawmakers' inaction” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times        “WA's government transparency committee is ready to call it quits” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut   “WA enters new era of putting a price on greenhouse-gas pollution” by Hal Bernton from The Seattle Times   “Cap-and-trade takes Washington businesses, ratepayers into the unknown” by Don Jenkins from Capital Press    “First auction held for ‘licenses to pollute' in Washington” by Bellamy Pailthorp from KNKX   “Seattle Schools notifying employees of possible layoffs” by Monica Velez from The Seattle Times   “Local school district estimates $12 million deficit without staffing, program changes” by Aspen Shumpert from The News Tribune   “Everett schools may slash 140 jobs to deal with $28M deficit” by Jerry Cornfield from The Everett Herald   “Additional pandemic-era SNAP benefits to end March 1” by Bridget Chavez from KIRO 7 News   “Seattle has ignored concerns over SPD use of surveillance technologies, community members say” by Guy Oron from Real Change News   “What's Next for Traffic Cameras in Seattle?” | Whose Streets? Our Streets!   “OPINION | Seattle's Automated Traffic Cameras Disproportionately Target Neighborhoods of Color” by Ethan C. Campbell and Nura Ahmed for The South Seattle Emerald   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday midweek show, Marc Dones, CEO of the King County Regional Homelessness Authority, returned to catch up on how the response to the homelessness crisis is faring since our conversation last year. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome to the program for the first time today's cohost: member of The Urbanist Election Committee, one of my favorite follows on social media, and Political Manager at the Washington Bus, specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people, Jazmine Smith. Hey! [00:01:18] Jazmine Smith: Hi, thank you so much for having me. I'm really excited. [00:01:22] Crystal Fincher: Excited to have you, excited to welcome you for the first time and so serious when I say that you're one of my favorite follows on social media all across social media, whether it's Twitter or TikTok or whatever. But there's a lot happening this week, starting with what's going on in the Legislature, which you are involved with a lot there and following closely. So what are we excited about? What are we sad about? We just passed another cutoff, meaning that if bills didn't make it through the hoops that they needed to that some people have issues with calling them dead, but at least dormant until next session at minimum. So what is still alive and what's not? What's caught your eye? [00:02:07] Jazmine Smith: Yeah, the ones that I've been mostly following are the ones that we cover for work because we have a whole lot of different issues that we're covering four main buckets and so I've been really focused on those. One of the big ones being the wealth tax and guaranteed basic income that's the tax the rich, fund the people stuff. The free school meals, which had a floor vote yesterday and we'll talk more about. But a whole host of democracy access bills as well, and just making sure that we improve our system every way. So there's a lot going on and it's been wild trying to keep track of all of them. [00:02:46] Crystal Fincher: It is. Let's talk about the school meals because this is a bill that I was extremely excited about. We have tons of data, even got more through the pandemic and some of the extra provisions that were provided that show providing meals and assistance to kids helps reduce hunger. And hunger is an impediment to learning. So this should be something that is uncontroversial yes, we're requiring kids to be in school, we should feed them while we're there. This is uncontroversial and sailed through to passage, right? [00:03:21] Jazmine Smith: Right? You would think. I remember back when - I was teaching before this, I was working in elementary school - and during COVID and that shift back to in-person that happened in that spring, it was so nice having kids just be able to grab their lunches - we were doing half days and whatnot - and breakfast and not have to worry about checking in, and getting the codes in, do they have money for this? And then there were a number of students that I talked to that don't normally pick up lunches, but really appreciated the opportunity to have some extra food and whatnot. It was really great to see and I was really excited to hear in the fall that this was a priority for not just OSPI, but from the Legislature. And so that's why when fiscal cutoff hit last week - and it was really surprising to see that it had been reduced down. [00:04:15] Crystal Fincher: So when you say reduced down, what has happened to the bill? [00:04:19] Jazmine Smith: So it went from free school meals for all, breakfast and lunch, to being specifically targeted at K-4 schools and with specific percentages of free and reduced lunch qualified students. So it's no longer a universal for all - which is what was promised - what we were doing during the pandemic, and what I think the starting point and ending point should be. [00:04:46] Crystal Fincher: And there's a big conversation tangential to this about means testing and how that adds an additional layer of bureaucracy at quite a significant expense. And as we talk about school funding later, that absolutely contributes and makes a difference in how that cuts a lot of people who are still in need and even some who may qualify - that is a barrier to access. And means testing, being one of those - I don't want to say neoliberal - but one of those ideas that came with justifications like - we can't allow people who are just rich, who can pay for it to do it. But why not - why is it wrong to feed kids who are hungry, no matter what their background is? And again, if we're requiring them to be there, why don't we just do that? But throwing means testing back into this and paring it down so much is certainly not what we wanted to see - better than nothing, definitely - but let's push and do all we can. There are Democratic majorities in the House and Senate and we have a Democratic governor, so this was something that I was hoping could get through. When it comes to school funding, there are also challenges across the board that several school districts are paying attention to when it comes to special education funding and different things like that. Where do we stand in terms of education policy in this legislative session? [00:06:17] Jazmine Smith: We have a lot of catching up to do with funding for schools - that's where issues with the wealth tax will come in - and just how dramatically underfunded our schools are, both in the general, but also in special ed programmings. And so was, again, really excited to see special education funding remove a cap - we should be supporting all of our students, but then that gets switched back. And so we have a lot of catching up to do and we need to fund our schools and I'm not seeing that happen to the level that it needs to. [00:06:53] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. What is happening in terms of housing and transportation? [00:06:58] Jazmine Smith: Housing - we have a lot of bills coming through where we're attacking all issues. We've got transit-oriented development, TOD - wanted to, thinking about transit on demand, like I wish - transit-oriented development. And then the missing middle bill being back - watching for that - it passed through the House and wanting Senate to keep it going through the - we've been hearing a lot of conversations. And so with the city council meetings that I've been popping in on, watching - we're hearing a lot from different governments being nervous about 1110, the missing middle bill, and a lot of conversations about local control and whatnot. But this is beyond a local control problem. This is a problem where we need all the housing everywhere and we need to be doing everything we can. And it's been shown that local control hasn't been working. And when each individual city and town says - We're not against housing, we just don't want housing here - who are we excluding and where are we passing the buck to? And where are people allowed to live? And then it's just a rehash of the 1923 problem where zoning restricted all of these places where people could live and created the problem where we're standing now with the Comp Plan - comprehensive plan process. [00:08:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and so middle housing is still alive - increasing development near transit centers and in more dense areas are still alive. But we've talked before about a lot of cities talking about the issue of local control saying - Hey, yeah, there may be a problem, but one-size-fits-all policy from the state is not how we feel comfortable addressing this. That if we could make our own requirements that fit our own city - what works for Seattle is not necessarily what works in Spokane or Cle Elum or Gig Harbor and different things. And so we all need to do this differently. The challenge in what a lot of people are saying and what has grown the coalition in support of this legislation has been - Well, you've been saying that for years. And we've been waiting for you, while you've been saying that for years, to take the action that you feel is appropriate for your city. And what has happened in most cities is that no action has been taken, while housing prices continue to skyrocket. A lot of times we hear about these pricing issues, predominantly in Seattle - is the highest-priced region, area in the state - but this is impacting Spokane, it's impacting Southwest Washington, Pierce County. It's a statewide issue. And since cities have not taken appropriate action to address the massive housing shortage driving an increase in long-term prices across the board, it's now time for the state to step in and take action, which is how a lot of these things work. But that has resulted, as these conversations happen, in - some might call it negotiation, others might call it watering down or compromise in these bills. And so when they talk about the requirement of cities going from - Hey, any city with 6,000 residents or, and now that's moved to 25,000 residents. Okay - bigger, larger-size cities we're exempting, smaller cities we're exempting the types of areas that this would apply to. If they're in a watershed or different types of areas of development, they're exempting them. So these are the conversations going on in these negotiations. It looks like certainly these bills will pass. The question is how will they be amended and what compromises will occur in order to get them to pass both houses. So they continue to move through the process, but this is an area where staying engaged is definitely helpful. Now there's another bill that I think is really important to talk about - in addition to rolling back police pursuits, which we've talked about before - and now they're asking to expand, once again, the conditions under which they can pursue vehicles. They can pursue vehicles now. Sometimes in the conversation, it sounds confusing - and some people talk about it as if they're prohibited from pursuing anyone now, but they certainly can. But there's another piece of legislation which would make it more efficient, easier, more streamlined to change someone's name. And this is very impactful for the trans community, for people who've experienced intimate partner violence, for refugees who - having an old name and some of the requirements like advertising publicly that you intend to change your name - we don't require that for a lot of other things. These are unnecessary hoops to jump through. They also cost money. We have to have people to administer these things and especially with all of the attacks on the trans community, particularly, but also in terms of intimate partner violence - if someone has a stalker, advertising publicly, Hey, I'm changing my name, just flies in the face of the safety that people are seeking from changing their name. If someone can just easily find out that they're changing their name, that doesn't address any issue there. So excited to see that moving through the process and hope it does. Any other legislation that you have your eye on right now? [00:12:39] Jazmine Smith: We've got a couple of democracy-related bills that we've been following - updating the online voter registration system is going to make it more accessible. Currently, if you have a driver's license, that's the only way - or Washington state ID - that's the only way to utilize the online voter registration system, which leaves out a lot of folks who are recently moved, don't have that specific form of documentation - and that's disproportionately impacting of poor folks, folks who are experiencing homelessness that might've lost their ID, young people who are not interested in driving. I know I've heard that there's a huge bump in young people that just aren't interested in being drivers at this point, and so they don't have a driver's license and there's barriers to that. So that has passed. It has a hearing in the House side now. And then also updating the automatic voter registration so that it - the way it currently sits, folks are asked when they're updating their driver's license or going and registering for the first time - and it can put people who aren't actually eligible to vote in a position where they might accidentally register, not realizing. 'Cause different countries have different rules on who can and can't vote and whatnot. And just in a quick transaction, then, that could put someone's future citizenship at risk because they accidentally registered - so making that both more streamlined and safer for everyone involved. And then also moving city and town elections to even years. So we did that in King County this last election and there are other jurisdictions, say Seattle, that want the opportunity to be able to have their elections when the most people are voting - when they have a full electorate of young people, Black and Brown people, the people who don't have water views, being fully represented and having that turnout that we want in any election. Any representative should be representing their whole community of constituents. And so allowing other towns to join in - will be really exciting to see that move. [00:15:00] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And then when it comes to some of the public safety bills - unfortunately, the bill banning solitary confinement has died again this year. They're still working on the legislation in response to the Blake decision from our State Supreme Court, which - that decision made personal possession of substances - just decriminalized them, legalized them across the board. Our Legislature stepped in a couple of years ago and set some uniform standards that did recriminalize them across the state, albeit lesser penalties. And it looks like they're staying on that path with that legislation this year. The reason why they have to take it up is that there was a sunset provision in the prior legislation for this year. So they have to do something new and it looks like they're not substantively changing, necessarily, their approach to that. They're not looking at decriminalization further, it appears, but we will see. And the deadline for bills to make it out of their house of origin is March 8th, which will be coming up next week. So we will certainly see then what has survived and what has not. Also in news this week - just looking at some legislative transparency problems. While they're doing all this legislating and having all these conversations - there's a lot of information, a lot of deliberation, a lot of communication and testimony that happens. And they talk about their actions and their reasoning. And typically this is available to the public via public disclosure. Lots of times we see in the paper - investigations or information that is found via requests for this information, because these are public servants being paid for with public dollars. The theory is, and how it has worked largely, is that their work is subject to public disclosure and accountability. And the Legislature holds themselves to some different standards, and it has been continuing to raise eyebrows. What is happening here? [00:17:07] Jazmine Smith: That's what I really wanna know, and that's the heart of the question - is what is happening. And with legislative privilege - finding that line between working on the bills and the issues and all of the different nuances - but we do have a right to know what's going on - why did this bill die? What happened behind the scenes? And not all of that is in the public record. A lot of that is conversations that you're having with a person face-to-face or whatnot. But been seeing in the courts with a lawsuit regarding legislative privilege, and also some things that came up last year that were subject to a public disclosure request. And now we're starting to get bits and pieces through someone who used to work at the Legislature, Jamie Nixon, and what they've been able to release. Their Twitter has been keeping a lot of information up-to-date, but then also different reports from other folks following the Legislature. So it will definitely be interesting to see - what is going on, how does legislative privilege hide what's happened, and what is that line? We're still actively working on an issue, but everyone deserves to know - why aren't things getting passed? Why did this happen? What is the background on all of these issues? [00:18:30] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and essentially to your point, what they're doing is claiming legislative privilege for things that - if they were discussed or happened in other areas of government, if it was a city council or a mayor or county council, school board, that they would be subject to disclosure - but we're receiving heavily redacted documents in response to public disclosure requests and them saying - No, we don't have to turn this over. And over time, they continue to implement exceptions and loopholes for different situations or circumstances where they don't have to disclose public documents. And this has raised the ire of certainly several journalists, of the Washington Coalition for Open Government. This is not really a partisan issue - this applies to both parties. There was a hearing where there was a Republican member defending these exceptions, and we've had plenty of Democrats do that, but it does raise questions about - if we don't know what's going into these deliberations, if there is no lever of accountability, what is really happening behind closed doors - and does that foster more productive, ethical, legal conversation? Or even just - there may be plenty of things that don't have anything to do with legality, not saying that people are doing things wrong, but the public should be able to see how decisions are made, how these discussions are going, and there is significant resistance to doing that to the degree that has become the standard for everyone else in the Legislature. I hope that there are more people there that see the light. There is basically a committee that has been tasked with doing this that is basically throwing their hands up. A lot of people are throwing their hands up - they've had some resignations 'cause they're going - What is the point at this point in time? They seem to be fighting back, not taking our recommendations as they once did, and moving in the opposite direction. So we'll continue to follow that and see how that pans out, but it certainly is a challenge. And we see the importance of public records in so many different things, whether it was understanding how dysfunctional our redistricting process was and what happened with that, whether it was issues like deleted texts that we've seen in the City of Seattle and elsewhere - a lot of investigations and accountability work and making sure that people are just doing what they're supposed to be doing is brought to light as a result of these public disclosure requests. So hopefully we see progress on there. Another thing that happened this week that's pretty significant is a big new step as a result of the Climate Commitment Act, which was a huge monumental piece of legislation meant to address climate change - to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by establishing a price for carbon and essentially setting up a market where there is a cap - saying, Hey, we say that this level of pollution that's currently going on, we're gonna cap it at this level. If you wanna pollute above that level, then you have to buy these credits - or essentially get a permit to pollute above and beyond the established cap. And over time, that cap is supposed to ratchet down - impacting the price that organizations, companies, particularly ones that pollute, and reduce and emit a lot of greenhouse gases can emit. And so whether they are called pollution coupons or credits or that, we just had our very first auction in the state where organizations bought those credits to be able to essentially pollute. Now, a criticism of this system is that - can you really bank on reducing emissions if all someone has to do is pay to continue polluting. And the number of credits you make available - does that negate the cap, if you just continue to allow people to buy pollution credits basically and continue to do that - which in other areas where this has been implemented, most notably in California, hasn't gone well in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So we'll see how that works in our state. But one thing that's undeniable is that this raises a ton of money. This is supposed to raise hundreds of millions just with this first quarterly auction. Over the first couple of years, it's supposed to raise over a billion dollars. And this money raised is supposed to go into investments that help transition to a green economy, to things that reduce greenhouse gas emissions - whether that's electrification, whether that's different initiatives that reduce commuting, whether that's transit, or helping transition companies that are heavy polluters and workers of those companies who are being impacted by the change in their industry to different sectors, investing in solar, the green economy, just a bunch of things. So it'll be interesting to see what these - to get the final tally on what was raised from this auction this time and follow the process to see how those are going to be invested. And to see if the promise of listening to impacted communities - the communities that are hardest hit by greenhouse gas emissions, by climate change and pollution - are we focusing investments in the areas where they're needed most? Are we helping rural areas transition in this area? So a big opportunity, certainly, and look forward to following through this process to see how that turns out. What do you think about it? [00:24:22] Jazmine Smith: I think that any way that we can bring in more money for the state is great. We have a lot of different areas that we need to address the revenue deficit. If we can't fund schools, then where are we going to - where's the line? Everything, so looking specifically at cap and trade and whatnot, agree that I'm skeptical about anything stopping pollution, especially when you're giving these licenses to pollute, but at the very least, we should be able to have the revenue available to start doing that transition. And I know that with the gas tax and all of those things, then we can only use them on specifically cars and whatnot. So being able to have that freedom and different areas to invest in more green areas and having a green economy would be very great. [00:25:24] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. In other statewide news, there is - education is so integral in everything that we do in our economy, in terms of public safety, just in the future for our kids. And several school districts around the state are really struggling right now, because despite it being enshrined in our Washington State Constitution as a paramount duty to fully fund the public education, we are not doing that in a number of school districts, including Seattle, Everett, the Peninsula School District, and others are saying - Hey, we've been saying we're at a funding crisis. We've been raising this alarm and now we are at the point where we're going to have to lay off employees, we're going to have to make cuts in really significant ways. Several districts are talking about school closures and consolidating things, which is just extremely disruptive to kids and to communities. And this is really a result of a shortage of funding there and over-reliance on local levies and bonds that - in the absence of state funding, they have to pass property taxes and increases in property taxes in order to fund the areas of public education that are necessary that are not being funded by the state. And everything from special education to librarians to school nurses to different arts and cultural programming, just what is required for an education that fully prepares people to be successful in life, however they define that, are on the chopping block. How do you view this and what's the way out? [00:27:07] Jazmine Smith: Yeah, as someone that came from an elementary school up in Ballard - so there was a lot of PTA funding that supported the school, nice-sized auctions and whatnot. It was still funding staff members - the counselor at the school was partially funded by PTA funding, folks at the front desk that are absolutely crucial to making sure that everything runs smoothly in the school - these are the folks that are gonna be first on the chopping block. And those staff members that are those connection points with students who are struggling, who might be the ones that are organizing backpacks of food to go home over the weekend, and the counselor that you talk to about what's going on. These are the people that are facing layoffs because we are not funding our schools, because there's massive deficits and that we're over relying on, as you said, those levies. And it just hit this breaking point. And I know that we had the McCleary decision a while back and there was some influx of funding that happened that did help raise wages - wages are still too low for what is appropriate for education professionals and whatnot. And here we are with Seattle with $100 million deficit, Peninsula Schools, Everett - millions of dollars that are leading to 70 here being laid off. And it's just heartbreaking for the children, for the community, for what happens when neighborhood schools close and consolidate, and the disruption that has, the additional barriers that that poses on families. I remember when we had to move to a temporary school and it was on - still in North Seattle, but on the other side - so all of those families that had to commute for multiple school years outside of their district - and so to, or not outside of their district, but outside of their attendance area and whatnot. And so really frustrating to see - when it's entirely preventable - again, we have a trifecta, we have a Democratic governor and Legislature - we can fund schools. It's our duty to fund schools and we're not doing that. And it's hurting a lot of our communities. [00:29:36] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely is. It is once again, not lost on me that when it comes to our public education system, even within the same district, it is predominantly the schools that are attended by a larger percentage of lower income students or BIPOC students who are being disproportionately impacted - whether it's from school closures or cuts that are going to impact them - they always seem to be on the chopping block first there. And this is not an exception, whether it's the conversations happening right now about potential school closures in the Bellevue School District or what we've seen continuing to happen in Seattle, different districts - it really is a big challenge. And really more districts are sounding the alarm and saying - Hey, we see a number of districts struggling with this now. This may not be us today, but hey, State of Washington and Legislature, if you don't take action this year, this is gonna be us next year. This is something that is a structural problem with education funding throughout the state. And although school boards can certainly impact and school leadership can certainly impact the conditions around that, everyone is starting from behind square one because of these structural deficits and inefficiencies that can only be addressed by our State Legislature. And again, the mandate was clear from this past election - even in battleground districts - lots of Democrats ran on the importance of fully funding public education. This is not controversial. This is supported by the public by and large. There were a number of teacher strikes that were trying to avert issues like this earlier in the year. And so I really hope our Legislature, particularly Democrats who are in power in the Legislature right now, step up to help address this significantly. Also, a challenge that a lot of people are facing this week - especially as so many more people are struggling with the rising costs of housing and food and everything - is a cut to SNAP benefits or Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Programming benefits for people, whether it's EBT, food stamps, however you wanna call it. Hunger is a problem and we have no excuse in this country to have people being hungry. We have no excuse in this state. But we are seeing, as of March 1st, a reduction in the pandemic-era increase to SNAP benefits. So people, as of March 1st, who are receiving food assistance are going to be receiving about $90 less per month, which is very significant. We saw that additional investment reduce child hunger and reduce child poverty by significant substantial amounts, and allowing this to expire and go away is disappointing. But it really has an impact on a lot of people and a lot of news reports are saying - Hey, food banks around the area are expecting a real big influx of people relying on them to feed their families, because not only is this cut happening - and it would be painful at any time - there are so many more increases in food costs overall. Food is just more expensive than it was a year ago, two years ago. And so I hope for everyone listening, you do donate to your local food bank. If you can, help people who are hungry - donate to your local mutual aid organizations - because we're about to see more people fall into hunger and be exposed to poverty now with that. How do you feel about this? [00:33:16] Jazmine Smith: It's really frustrating. I think when we first lost the child tax credit that was expanded, then that was something that - it was not only like losing something that really helped a lot of people during the pandemic, which is still going on. So the first level of everything is that we are still in a pandemic and still living with all of the inflation and all of the issues that are still around with the pandemic - increased health costs and whatnot. So it's still happening even if we've declared that the state of emergency is over. And so first thing when the state of emergency was pulled, both at the state and federal level, is that all of these things that have been helping people - having access to certain levels of healthcare, being able to take a COVID test and get free COVID tests without having to worry - that writing on the wall of everything falling. And now to lose SNAP benefits, or have that drastic reduction, is not only devastating and frustrating from that aspect of people are still needing it and more so right now. But also just - for what reason, why would we do this? And there's - we can't pretend that people aren't still struggling with the pandemic, that it's gone, and that everything's all right, and everything can go back to normal - it can't. We need to continue to be supporting all of our communities through everything. [00:34:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. In other news, we certainly have talked over and over again about our street and traffic safety crisis that we're facing across the board when it comes to cars speeding, acting irrationally, hitting pedestrians and people on bikes - this is happening so frequently. We are seeing so many challenges. Just a couple miles away from me, a few nights ago, there was a fatal hit and run from someone who hit a pedestrian on a street. We've seen several other vehicle collisions in the region this week that have resulted in major injury or death of pedestrians - certainly talked a lot about this on the show. And one potential fix that has been talked about is automated traffic enforcement - speed cameras, basically. And hey, this is something that we don't rely on traffic stops, just sees if you're speeding or not. This has been implemented in some school zones. They're talking about implementing it in others, and potentially expanding to other areas in the city and areas where there are a higher amount of vehicle-pedestrian collisions. And lots of people going - Hey, these speed cameras do show that they reduce speeding, they reduce collisions and injuries. While also - the fact of the matter is that the communities impacted the worst, the people who were being hurt and the communities where these deaths are occurring are predominantly lower income and BIPOC communities because of the historic lack of infrastructure investment and safety investments that occur in other areas. So these accidents, because of the way these communities have been built and designed, are more likely to happen in these areas. But if we do focus solely in these areas, not only does that potentially have the benefit of addressing these traffic collisions and making the area safer, it submits these communities to increased surveillance. And there are talks about expanding the use of cameras or the availability of data and information from these cameras for uses beyond traffic. So this is in the realm of possibility. And if we're saying - Hey, if we're talking about in the south end on Rainier Avenue, and hey, if you're down there - everyone who drives by, everyone who walks by is gonna be on a camera, they're gonna have their license plate scanned, they're gonna do that - that can potentially be used for any kind of situation. We have seen this repeatedly result in increased interactions with police, increased scrutiny in these areas that doesn't occur in other areas. That doesn't mean that these problems are not occurring in other areas. It just means that we're not looking for them to the degree that we are in lower income and BIPOC communities. And there is a very valid conversation to be had about - do we allow the expansion and the proliferation of surveillance of communities of color, basically. And we have to talk about this. This is an impact that should not be ignored. And someone who cares deeply about pedestrian safety and mobility and absolutely wants action to be taken on this, I also do not want to subject these communities to continually expanding surveillance, and the consequences and harm that results from that. So this is something that is a conversation that's talked about. Guy Oron had an excellent article about this - I believe the South Seattle Emerald, had a great piece on this. But as this conversation evolves and adds this tension between - hey, this is something that can increase safety, and also this is something that can increase harm - are things that we have to continue to grapple with and that the community needs to be involved with working through this. How do you feel about this? [00:38:37] Jazmine Smith: It's definitely complicated because that gut instinct is that if it is proven to change driver behavior and whatnot, then in that sense, then it works where it's at or where it's put in place. And so it should be everywhere - or to a certain extent - it certainly shouldn't be concentrated on communities of color, which is where there currently are a lot of focus points. And so it is that balance between wanting people to be alive, not wanting people to have to risk crossing Rainier and worry about their family all being hit in one interaction with a vehicle. But at the same time, I guess I hadn't realized that there was - I just assumed that all of the cameras everywhere are always watching - I'm just so numb to this current state of the surveillance state. There's cameras on top of the sign across the street from me and whatnot. I remember asking my landlord - You think that they can see into my apartment and whatnot? There's so much surveillance going on. And I guess part of my question is - How much is already happening just universally, but at the same time not wanting to expand it, expand that harm. And I think a bigger emphasis needs to be put on designing safe streets from the get-go. Putting that design - and I know we've already built out a lot - and so it's patching up as things come up and whatnot, as buildings get built and whatnot. We can't just reinvent the whole city in one snap. But yeah, that first investment should be in designing streets and fixing streets to be safer for everyone as we walk by, while not focusing on that punitive element. And finding ways to address driver behavior that isn't in that punitive way, but really just encourages safe behavior. So it's really complicated in that - well, what works and what has been working, versus what is best for communities and what is most equitable across the board. [00:40:56] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And the point you raised about it needing to be everywhere are some points that people say - Okay, if we are gonna do this, we should be mitigating the potential harm. We should be making sure we're doing this in as equitable a way as we can. Certainly to your point, the road design impacts more than enforcement will, certainly. This is a conversation that we've been having, especially with the recent release of the Seattle Department of Transportation's Vision Zero review, which lots of people noticed did not seemingly adequately address the impact of road design or plans to impact design to address this. But when it comes to cameras, one of the suggestions was - Okay, so make sure they are distributed equitably throughout the city. Make sure they're not just concentrated in certain areas. We have an interest in people not speeding or driving dangerously in all areas of the city. So let's not just concentrate it there. Let's do it in all areas. And suddenly when you talk about implementing something in Laurelhurst, people get more concerned about what the potential ancillary impacts could be. And so that's a positive thing. And we're not only doing that. Another suggestion that was brought up was - currently right now, the revenue from traffic cameras goes into the Seattle General Fund. And in many cities, it goes into general funds because - certainly this is not just a Seattle-only problem, several cities have traffic cameras and are contending with this across the state - and it largely goes into general funds. And if this becomes a revenue driver, if the goal isn't simply making the streets safer, and the goal becomes - in declining revenues and things you want to fund, this is another area of revenue. It is not, personally, what I think - is not a productive, is not a good place to be to rely on enforcement for revenue. That is a bad incentive and incentivizes them to continue to find things that go wrong - in fact, to not address some of the structural design issues because - Hey, we're getting revenue from the way things are happening now. So restricting that - instead of going to the general fund, restricting it to investments in traffic safety and road safety, maybe dedicating it to being able to implement some of the design changes that would make things safer. But if we restrict that and only allow reinvestment in areas that increase safety, that seems like that's - one, more aligned with what this revenue is really targeted for and supposed to do and reduces the incentive for ticket's sake. Because when it comes to cameras, they do ticket a lot more than officers just standing in different spots will, which is one of the reasons why it's more effective. It's always there, and it targets everyone. But it does then create this as a revenue line item. So lots of people, as we've seen in many different areas, will do toxic things, whether it's seizing property or giving speeding tickets to raise revenue, and that is not a positive thing. So we'll continue to follow this conversation. We will continue to follow along and see how this goes. The Seattle Department of Transportation, certainly - and I'm sure many others across the state - are interested in community feedback about this as they try and navigate through this issue. Automated enforcement is one thing that a lot of cities across the state are looking at to address pedestrian safety. So this is something that lots of people need to engage with and need to make sure that we just don't implement this willy-nilly and have unintended consequences, which sometimes may not be as unintended if people see this as a potential for revenue. So to reduce the harm done on the other side - because harm is harm, and increased targeting, increased stops and contacts that are concentrated in one community does lead to a lot of the problems that we've seen in trying to reduce that. So we'll continue to follow along with that. That is our time today. So we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, March 3, 2023. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is a member of The Urbanist Election Committee, one of my favorite follows on social media, and someone who is doing the work every day as the Political Manager at The Washington Bus, as a volunteer for so many other issues, and specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people, Jazmine Smith. You can find Jazmine on Twitter @jazzyspraxis. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me @finchfrii, two i's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the podcast to hear the full versions of our Friday almost-live show and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Thank you, Jazmine, for joining us, and we will talk to you next time.

Republican lawmakers who run the Arizona Senate have exempted themselves from Arizona's public records law. One expert says the move goes against a long history of open government. Plus, could humans live in caves on Mars? That and more on The Show.

The Monologue: An update on the house speaker. The Interview: Pierce County Prosecutor Mary Robnett sounds the alarms -- there are not enough state beds for criminal suspects who need mental health care prior to trial. It's costing them a lot of money, it's delaying justice, and it's filling up their jail. The Interview: George Erb (board member for the Washington Coalition for Open Government) says the state legislature is trying to use a made-up privilege to stop complying with public records requests.LongForm:  Matt Markovich lays out the legislative agenda for the start of the session on Monday.Quick Hit:  Rantz's top 5 movies of 2022.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.