Minnesotans’ everyday lives are affected by the decisions of governing bodies. A school board explores school realignment due to budget constraints. A city council deliberates tax incentives for a commercial development. A county board decides the summer road construction program. State lawmakers debate tax policy.

In most circumstances, individuals enjoy broad and timely access to government meetings and data, thanks to the fact that Minnesota has some of the strongest laws in the nation. That’s changing, however, especially when public officials face sensitive and challenging decisions.

And when Minnesotans are denied access, their options are limited. The avenues for resolving complaints can be cumbersome and costly. The Minnesota Newspaper Association – representing the interests of all citizens – is lobbying the Legislature to ease the process for citizen redress. Authoring the legislation is Rep. Gene Pelowski, DFL-Winona, a longtime proponent of open government.

Reminding citizens and public officials about the public’s right of access to government information is the focus of “Sunshine Week: Your Right to Know,” March 14-20. At its foundation, Sunshine Week underscores the importance of the free flow of information for an open, effective and accountable government.

Our state’s laws may be well meaning, but — in practical terms — they fall short in functionality and enforcement. Witness the complaints filed in 2009 with the Minnesota Department of Administration, the state’s official referee when citizens are rejected in their attempts to bring “sunshine” to public meetings and government data. For example:

The city of Palisade ignored two requests from a constituent seeking information on the purchase of a fire rescue truck. The same citizen filed a similar complaint against the city in 2008.

The city of Montrose refused to release its agenda in an electronic format.

Winona Public Schools stalled on a request from the Winona Daily News for copies of an e-mail exchange involving the superintendent.

The Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association denied a request by the Hibbing Daily Tribune for information presented by a private energy company.

Ramsey County denied a request by KSTP-TV to view the rejected absentee ballots in the U.S. Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken.

In these instances, and many more, the Department of Administration ruled in favor of the complainant — though the release of this public information was unnecessarily delayed. The postponement is often welcomed by public bodies on the hope that the news value is diminished by the lapse in time.

These opinions are a valuable asset to open government as many governing bodies take their cue and release the information. But some do not. In those cases, citizens’ sole recourse is to seek relief in the courts — a process that deters many from even pursuing due to its complexity and cost.

That could change in the legislation being spearheaded by the Minnesota Newspaper Association this year.

Under the proposal, citizens would take their complaints to the state Office of Administrative Hearings, a respected judicial agency that is part of the executive branch.

Complaints would be resolved at lightning speed compared with the present process – a tremendous benefit to all parties. Under the envisioned timetable, the government body would have 10 business days to respond to a complaint. The judge would conduct a hearing within 20 days and rule within another 30 days. In contrast, the process today can last months in the overburdened district court system.

The administrative law judge would conduct a fact-finding process where facts are in dispute, thus giving the review more weight.

Complainants would have to pay a $1,000 filing fee. However, if the judge ruled in their favor, there would be a $950 refund and the violating party would have to pay attorney fees.

Governing bodies benefit, too. Their litigation costs will be minimized by the speedier process, and the filing fee will help deter frivolous claims.

Don’t misinterpret. For the most part, citizens have broad access to public meetings and government data in Minnesota. It’s no surprise, however, that access is suddenly restricted when public officials are faced with rendering decisions or releasing information on sensitive issues that are certain to stir controversy.

Yet, the determinations and government data framing the final vote arguably demand the greatest scrutiny and the participation of all stakeholders. Everyone wins when policy-makers have the broadest perspective when registering a final “aye” or “nay.”

Newspapers are not asking for special privileges. At their foundation, editors and reporters represent the eyes and ears of all Minnesotans. In the end, everyone – including policy-makers at all levels — will be better served by ensuring the sun always shines broadly on Minnesota government.

Jim Pumarlo is president of the Minnesota Newspaper Foundation Board of Directors.