EDITORIAL: Freedom of info, or privacy?

The situation between Woodbridge resident Mark Hjelm and the Prince William County Public School System raises interesting questions about the need for privacy versus the people's right to government information. In the end, the right to know should win out.

Here's what you need to know by way of background:

n PWC Schools' automated security system matches visitors' identification cards against the sex offenders registry.

n In December 2007, Hjelm requested information about visitor identification at certain PWC schools. He was denied, the rationale being that the information was exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

n Since his initial request, Hjelm has also asked for a copy of the contract with Raptor, the company responsible for the automated security system's software, and for a copy of all attorney fees relating to his previous FOIA request. These requests, too, have been denied.

n The case has gone to court -- meanwhile Del. Rich Anderson, R-Woodbridge, sponsored a bill that would officially exempt from FOIA information such as that Hjelm requested. The bill died in committee, thank goodness.

While it is admirable to try to protect privacy, does it trump the freedom of taxpayer-funded information?

In the end, the answer is no. Weighing the two competing desires on the scales of societal good, we find that they tilt in favor of freedom of information rather than personal privacy.

Beyond the fact that the taxpayers have a right to see the information they pay for, when that information concerns the safety of children, the schools have an even higher responsibility to keep taxpayers informed.

Furthermore, by denying Hjelm information related to the schools' contract with Raptor and attorney fees regarding his FOIA request, the school system has shown that its desire to control information trumps its fealty to the taxpayers.

To a certain extent, the school system's desire to protect the privacy of visitors can be understood, but information regarding the contract and attorney fees should never have been denied.

And we understand that the rationale given for not releasing the attorney fees was more technical than privacy related, but nevertheless, it is the school system's responsibility to work that out.

The people pay for the schools and its employees. The people pay for the automated security system. The people pay for any resulting information that is compiled. That information belongs to the people and if any one of them wants it, it is his or her due.

So, hand it over to Hjelm.

Perhaps what he might find, and what we suspect, is that this security system isn't such a great use of taxpayer dollars anyway.