The gentleman above probably is not how most of us define "gang member," yet when I searched for Utah gang images on Google, this is one of the photographs which appeared.

Some of the defense attorneys I spoke with last week would use this as a point. How do we know who is being called a gang member?

Reporter Melinda Rogers and I asked that in an article about gang databases and a forthcoming statewide database. The federal government regulates who police input into such a database and how those names can remain.

If you want to know whether you're in the database, the easiest thing to do is call your local police jurisdiction and ask. If you don't receive an answer, you can file a request under the Utah Government Records Access and Management Act. But that may not yield your answer, either.

The act grants you some records when you are the subject. But the law also permits law enforcement to withhold records deemed part of ongoing investigations.

— NC

Labels: GRAMA, Police, technology

Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank has seven friends.

At least, that's what his department's MySpace page said this morning, a few minutes after the I received an e-mail announcing the creation of the site.

Right now, the page is pretty blank. But in the release, Burbank promises "pictures, videos and blogs about and by the more than 700 men and women of the Department on our MySpace page.”

Ooh. I can hardly wait.

In the meantime, if you're considering "friending" the SLCPD, you might also consider what that means — they'll be able to access all your photos, blogs entries, music and a list of all your other MySpace posse members.

I'm not saying you've got anything to hide, but do you really want Burbank leafing through all those photos you took in Cancun last summer?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

-mdl

Labels: Police, SLC, spotlight site, technology

Rep. Steve Urquhart has a noteworthy posting on his blog about transparency in the Legislature.

He points to the institution's wonderful website -- and it really is terrific -- with a wealth of information. It contains everything from the full text of bills to audio of floor and committee speeches to voting records. All easily searchable.

Urquhart's point is that transparency makes for better government because it opens up the process to the governed. He leaves out any mention of the deliberation and decision-making that takes place out of public earshot or cyber-viewing. But still he raises a very legitimate link between transparency and good government.

I also give Urquhart credit for honesty. He quickly admits a large hole in the website that existed until relatively recently.

"When I entered the Legislature 8 years ago, information was hidden from voters," Urquhart said. "Though the Legislature had an advanced website, the decision was purposely made to not make legislators' votes readily accessible on the site. Why not? With straight faces, legislative leaders would say, because such information, taken out of context, could confuse voters."

I remember it well. And the arguments were even more ludicrous than he suggests. Some members claimed the release of such information on the Internet could be downright dangerous.

"Sometimes too much information can be as damaging as not enough information," then-House Majority Whip David Ure said in 2001.

The Legislature's top senator was right there with him.

"I can see all kinds of problems coming out of that," then-Senate President Al Mansell said.

Democrats pushed hard for the initiative though. And when Republicans saw that it was inevitable, they took it over as their own and made it happen.

Now it's hard to imagine that tracking a lawmaker's voting record would be any more difficult than a click of the mouse. And the good thing about technology -- it will never revert to the old way.

-dh

Labels: Legislature, technology