Public records not so public

Pennsylvania still has a way to go when it comes to residents' ability to access public documents.

Three years after a strengthened "Right to Know" law was approved, access to public documents is still not a smooth, uniform process across the state. In a survey this year, 10 percent of requests for public documents were flatly refused, while others were treated with suspicion, delaying tactics or aggressiveness.

Ten percent does not sound like a large problem, but just 67 of the 130 school districts surveyed presented their superintendents' employment contracts to surveyors upon request. Forty percent of the surveyed police departments either did not make their police blotters available or did not have one.

Centre County, on the whole, did much better than average in responding to requests. Surveyors sought 18 public records from four police departments, three district judge offices and two school district offices. They received full access to the records on 14 of the 18 occasions, partial access twice and no access twice. All four of the less-than-open access cases occurred at police stations, where press releases appear to have replaced the daily police log as the means of informing the public.

Across the state, delays added to surveyors' frustrations. While just 10 percent of the requests were turned down outright, a further 20 percent of the documents could not be obtained within a few days.

The overall results do not show much improvement since 1999, when the statewide survey was last conducted. This time, reporters or employees from 50 Pennsylvania newspapers, including the Centre Daily Times, fanned out in February to almost 700 government offices asking for public documents from the courts, counties, municipalities, school districts and police stations, according to The Associated Press, which coordinated the survey.

In some cases, requests for information were handled more quickly when it became apparent that the person requesting the information had ties to the media. In other cases, requests were declined or more scrupulously examined just because a media person was involved.

This is precisely why a strengthened "Right to Know" law is needed: Such decisions -- to release or not release public documents -- should not be made on a case-by-case basis and should not be dependent on who is seeking the information.

These records are public for a reason. They give the public the right to monitor whether taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely, whether law enforcement is doing its job, and whether judges are handing out justice in a consistent and fair manner. It is part of the wonder of America that an empowered citizenry can keep its government's toes to the fire and remind local officials whom they work for. This is part of a newspaper's job, of course, but that certainly doesn't mean that reporters should have more access than anybody else.

Many of the cases in which the surveyors were denied access to the records came down to a lack of training or a lack of time, misinformation, or a clerk's unwillingness to act without a boss's authorization, the survey found.

With proper training, such problems can be avoided.

As one judge told the AP: "It's an ongoing battle trying to get longtime court employees to understand that the records belong to the public."

Articles

• Scottsdale changes public records rules
• Gregoire signs bill on public records
• 22 exemptions added to public records laws
• Yuma's state lawmakers divided on public records bill
• Governor's office agrees to make public records more accessible
• Statewide survey finds getting public records can be a challenge
• Public records not so public
• Obtaining public records can be a challenge
• Court rules donor names not public records
• Nevada public records bill moves ahead
• Public records reveal inside look at planning
• In our view: Protect access to public records

Public Records | Net Detective Info

Content Criminal Records Background Check