Bozeman Daily Chronicle, May 29, on services for victims needing financial support:
State prosecutors want to increase a surcharge levied on convicted criminals for programs to help crime victims from $50 to $100. It’s hard to think of reason not to. In fact, state lawmakers may want to raise it even more.
The victim surcharge has been stuck at $50 for at least 20 years, according to Gallatin County Attorney Marty Lambert. It seems like an oversight it has not been adjusted to keep up with inflation.
The charge is important because it goes into a fund for victims services programs, and that is the only money many counties have for those programs. Victims have many specific rights spelled out in state law, including notification when an offender is to be released from jail and information on how to get a restraining order against someone who poses a threat. Gallatin County has ample resources and provides aid to victims on multiple fronts. But many counties and cities lack the resources and victims’ rights are honored very unevenly throughout the state.
This is something state lawmakers need to address. Convicted criminals often have scarce financial resources and collecting large sums may be difficult in many cases. But exacting $100 per conviction should be doable and would be eminently justifiable. And when enacting the higher surcharge, lawmakers should include a formula for automatic increases to keep up with the increasing costs of provided those services.
For victims of violent crime, life can be changed irrevocably. Any sense of safety can become a thing of the past, and the threat of another crime can loom over victims for the rest of their lives. And that doesn’t even account for the physical injuries that can result.
There is no way to change all that. Despite best efforts, crime will always be a threat we must deal with. But the least we can do is provide victims with all the help we can. And increasing the surcharge on convicted criminals - and distributing those funds to all counties - is a good place to start.
Editorial: https://bit.ly/2sq5E3J
___
Daily Inter Lake, May 27, on school boards illegally blocking public input:
Maybe school boards in Montana should replace their public comment period with a moment of silence, since that is what they seem to prefer to hear from the public.
For some time now, the Montana School Boards Association has been advising its members that the public’s right to participate in public meetings does not include the right to talk about people - “unless that person is present and the board chair gives permission.”
The Fair-Mont-Egan School Board took this position to restrict speech at a recent meeting when the public wanted to comment on the board’s decision not to renew the contract of Principal David Allen.
But according to Montana Code, Section 2-3-103, public comment should be allowed on any public matter “that is within the jurisdiction of the agency conducting the meeting.” The only exception granted is regarding “contested case and other adjudicative proceedings.” Therefore, a comment by the public regarding the job performance of school staff members should be allowed, whether positive or negative, unless they are party to a lawsuit or other grievance proceeding.
The taxpayers are the real employers, after all, and they should have a right to opine on how well things are going in THEIR school district.
We hope that the school boards, as well as all public agencies in Montana, will heed the advice of Helena attorney Mike Meloy, who works on behalf of the Montana Freedom of Information Hotline.
“Since information from the public cannot, as a matter of law, be ’private,’ there is no basis for closing the meeting or otherwise interfering with the public’s right to comment on school matters, including the performance of employees,” Meloy told the Inter Lake.
Unfortunately, despite Montana’s Constitution and statutes both supporting the people’s rights to know and to participate in public business, it is too easy for boards, councils and agencies to hide behind legal jargon to avoid transparency. They know, after all, that the only way for citizens to force them to follow the rules is for someone to spend thousands of dollars on legal proceedings.
But there is another, better way to make sure that school boards follow the rules. That’s because Section 2-3-103 of the Montana Code Annotated actually spells out that it is up to the governor “to ensure guidelines (are) adopted” that “facilitate public participation.”
We therefore call upon Gov. Steve Bullock to inform school boards across the state, and other agencies as needed, that it is inappropriate and illegal to restrict public comment except in the rare instance of contested cases and other matters being adjudicated.
The public’s right to participate is a crucial pillar of Montana government, and must be reinforced against any efforts to weaken it.
Editorial: https://bit.ly/2skmSPD
Please read our comment policy before commenting.