Our tug of war with the state alcohol task force over a report has a kind of happy ending and a sad ending.

We ended up getting a version of the report. But it wasn’t thanks to Oregon’s public records laws.

If you are a regular reader of Bulletin editorials, you may know we made a public records request for the latest draft report of the House Bill 3610 task force. The task force is looking at alcohol treatment and maybe also new taxes on alcohol to pay for more treatment.

The task force said no, we can’t see that report.

We wanted to know why and followed up with another records request. It turned out the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission had internally suggested a way our initial request could be denied seemingly before the task force was even asked if it wanted to release it — so much for the presumption in Oregon of openness. Also, according to the exemption the OLCC cited for denying the request, there is supposed to be a justification, a balancing test, of why the exemption applies. We never got any justification.

Since then we have seen a draft copy of the task force’s report, apparently from late October. Was there something in the draft worth hiding? We don’t believe so. It is clearly a work in progress with highlighted edits. There may be a more recent draft.

The draft report might have been withheld because it is not final and/or when government can be secretive or open, it chooses secrecy. The task force’s topic also can breed controversy. The task force is a mixed group of lawmakers, representatives from industry and from health care. People have strong feelings about alcohol addiction. Manufacturers of alcohol have strong feelings about taxes on their products. It’s a fizzing cocktail.

What was also interesting were other internal documents shared with the task force we got to see. There was particular concern about statements often made during task force meetings like this: “Startling new research shows Oregon now ranks second in the country for addiction and last in access to treatment.” How should that be used in the task force’s report?

Variations on that statement were reported in various Oregon news outlets in 2022. Researchers, though, have cautioned how the data should be used. For instance, the internal documents we saw say the author of an Oregon Health & Science University/Portland State University study on substance use disorder “voluntarily withdrew references to state rankings in her report after she discovered the issue about statistical significance.”

It’s not scandalous that people raised concerns about that premise underlying the task force’s discussions. It doesn’t defeat the task force’s work. There are plenty of other indicators that alcohol addiction is a problem in Oregon. Debate and questioning of assumptions is what should happen in policy discussions, especially when they may be fuel for new taxes.

What would be sad is if state task forces or public agencies try to keep such deliberations from the public. Is Oregon government committed to openness and transparency? Not when there might be a whiff of controversy.