The Florida Legislature is in special session, called by the governor, to ratify an incentive package to bring the Scripps Research Institute bio-medical center to Palm Beach County. Scripps is not investing any money, although it may pay back half the incentive back from royalties on products developed there. But wouldn`t you know our guardians of the public have included a section that would exempt some records and meetings from public oversight. If we understand the provisions correctly, and our incomplete understanding is a work in progress, here`s what the bill would do. The state is setting up a corporation/agency to administer the $310 million in government aid to the firm - essentially an accountability watchdog to ensure the public gets what the firm has promised in the deal. In theory, such an agency would be under the jurisdiction of the Sunshine Laws. But SB 8E and HB 7E exempt the Scripps Florida Funding Corporation or Tourism, Trade & Economic Development Office from public records and public meetings statutes regarding research materials, "actual and potential trade secrets," and "other proprietary business information." It includes exempting meetings of those bodies when those records or presented or discussed. Here is the material in question, some of which seems reasonable, some not: * Materials that relate to methods of manufacture or production, potential trade secrets, patentable material, actual trade secrets, or proprietary information. * Federal employer identification numbers; unemployment account numbers; Florida sales tax registration numbers; agreements and proposals to receive funding, including grant applications, but specifically excluding the agreement by the state agency to release funds to Scripps or its grantee; materials that relate to the recruitment of personnel; and the identity of donors or potential donors. * Personal identifying information of individuals who participate in human trials or experiments. Any medical or health records relating to participants in clinical trials. Among the concerns, according to the First Amendment Foundation analysis, is the section specifically exempting "detailed documentation . . . which is used to substantiate the performance of the grantee or the Scripps Research Institute . . ." The whole point of this agency is oversight. We won`t know how much money the state is giving to Scripps, what Scripps is doing with that money, or how well they`re doing what they`re supposed to be doing. Another section exempts "agreements and proposals to receive funding, including grant applications," meaning any funding agreement between the state and the corporation would be exempt. It does not provide simply for redacting confidential information in the grant application. Exempting unemployment account numbers and federal employer identification numbers makes it difficult to confirm that the Scripps deal is create the number of jobs in the state that justify the hundreds of millions of dollars we`re giving them. The bills` stated rationale is "The Legislature finds that the economic development of the state is greatly enhanced by the diversification of the industries that are located in the state. In an effort that will greatly benefit the state through economic stimulation, the diversification of industries in the state, and job creation.... In other words, the public`s right to know how its money is being spent is trumped by the state`s desire to attract new business. Questions or comments, contact chapter FOI Chair Bill Hirschman at muckrayk@aol.com | 
