One of the most basic facts about government is that its work is done for the public, therefore the public has a right to know what, exactly, its government is doing.

At the federal level, there is the Freedom of Information Act, and at the state and local levels, there is the state’s Right to Know law. Pennsylvania’s law is far from ideal, however, as we learned in the Tuesday, Aug. 13, edition of the Butler Eagle.

On Monday night, the Connoquenessing Township board of supervisors voted to prohibit right-to-know requests that don’t have a name attached. The 2008 right-to-know law allows municipalities to bar such requests, as long as they pass an ordinance to do so.

At the meeting, township solicitor Andrew Menchyk of the Stepanian & Menchyk law firm said the township has been getting requests with no name.

Menchyk also argued that such requests are a burden.

“Obviously, right-to-know requests can present a financial and administrative burden on any municipality,” Menchyk said. “The goal is to minimize both the administrative and financial burden.”

Menchyk failed to explain exactly how much of a burden those requests have been for the township. He just noted that there have been requests with no name.

How many? How much time has fulfilling such requests taken?

It’s also not clear why a request without a name is somehow more onerous than one made under someone’s name. One of the bedrock principles of any right to know law is that it doesn’t matter who is requesting the document or why they want it — public records are available to the public.

Deciding to prohibit requests with no name attached without offering any proof that requests are a burden is at best an empty gesture and at worst a sign of disregard for the importance of transparency.

— JK