 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
SPRING 2005 NEWSLETTER Local police departments tested on public records: Most pass, many drop the ball By Richard Halicks Atlanta, March 13, 2005 -- Georgia's laws on open records and open meetings are clear, if not particularly powerful. But sometimes local government is only as open as the courthouse politicos and bureaucrats want it to be. That accounts for the nearly 70 complaints a week that pour into the state attorney general's office from Georgians who have run into a closed door or a locked filing cabinet in their government. It also provides a backdrop for a recent test by the Journal-Constitution in which the paper tried to find out how many serious crimes --- such as murder, rape and burglary --- occur in the many cities and counties that make up metro Atlanta. It was a simple request --- statistics on serious crime recorded by each of 66 metro Atlanta police departments during 2004. But it became an object lesson in open government: Getting even the simplest data out of your local officials can be difficult, time-consuming and expensive. The newspaper filed the request under my name, with a post office box and an e-mail address, to see how police departments would respond to a petition from a private citizen rather than from a large news organization. Here's what happened: Nineteen departments followed the law or went beyond it, supplying the requested information within three business days, as required by law. Thirteen more eventually complied with the request but some took weeks to do so. Seventeen departments did not respond to the request. When the newspaper called three of them to find out why, each, upon learning that the request was from the Journal-Constitution, said there would be no problem in getting the documents together. Seven demanded payment for research and photocopying in advance. Hapeville police, for example, said it would take 1 1/2 hours to locate a one-page document, and they demanded $29.05 up front for doing so. The law allows government agencies to charge reasonable sums for research and photocopying. Ten responded initially to the request but did not follow through with documents. The quest for open government often plays out in legislative chambers and high courts. But the ultimate test of those laws and rulings comes when a citizen tries to make them work at his county courthouse or her local police station. "It's really difficult for ordinary citizens. They frequently get the runaround," says Kathryn Allen, who retired six weeks ago as the state's top enforcer of open government. "I got all kinds of calls from them when I was in the attorney general's office." Assistant Attorney General Stefan Ritter, who now runs the Attorney General's Open Government Mediation Program, said he takes 10 to 12 calls a day from people around the state who think they've been improperly shut out of government files or meetings. In its open-records test, the newspaper asked the police departments for their "uniform crime report," a statement that each must file monthly with the Georgia Crime Information Center. It specifically sought the accounting of "Part I" crimes --- murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft and auto theft. This is information that the departments have already generated and typically exists on 12 pages, one for each month. In addition, the Georgia Crime Information Center creates a one-page summary of a full year's crimes and sends it back to most departments. "I'm disappointed," said Hollie Manheimer, executive director of the Georgia First Amendment Foundation, when told of the results of the Journal-Constitution's test. The foundation advocates for open government and actively lobbies the state Legislature. "It also shows to me that this is a continuous battle. We keep having to fight the same fights, teach the same knowledge." Manheimer points out that the GBI created a 38-page booklet nicknamed the "Blue Book" that instructs police on how to deal with open-records issues. Copies of the booklet were sent to every police department in the state. The Journal-Constitution's request was ignored by big departments and small ones, from DeKalb County and Cobb County police to the departments in Lilburn, Smyrna and Powder Springs. Fulton County police said fourth-quarter statistics wouldn't be available until the end of February, but the department still hasn't sent a report. Experts say private citizens typically have a tougher time getting information from governments than news organizations do. Indeed, when they learned that the request had come from the Journal-Constitution, Smyrna authorities were quick to fill it. Records supervisor Eleanor Butts confirmed that she received the request, but said, "You never did say where you were from." Asked why she didn't write or e-mail the requester, Butts replied: "We didn't know where the Hotmail address went. We have to be very careful as far as viruses are concerned." A short time later, Capt. Fred Brack called the newspaper. "We didn't know what agency you were with," Brack said. But he acknowledged that "what you requested here is an open record, so there's no problem with that." The faxed report arrived shortly. DeKalb and Cobb police had similar responses. Officers at both said they had no idea where the request went but offered to fill it promptly if the paper would resubmit it. Above and beyond The test had bright spots, too. Many departments went beyond the requirements of the law. "If possible, could you please call me so that I can make sure you are provided with the information you are looking for without causing you to pay an excessive fee for information that you might not want?" wrote Tim Milligan, records supervisor for the Marietta police. To that e-mail, Milligan attached a file that complied with the request, at no charge and within the three-day limit. Fairburn police e-mailed the crime reports within one day, at no charge. "We are striving to get our Web site up and operational and this information will be more readily available in the near future," wrote records clerk Paula Driscoll. "Until that time if there is anything I can assist you with further, please do not hesitate to contact me." Police in Conyers, Newnan and Roswell were similarly helpful, as was the sheriff's office in Forsyth County. Atlanta police promptly post crime data online and include exhaustive breakdowns and year-to-year comparisons. The departments in Peachtree City and East Point also put their crime data on the Internet. ''We stopped publishing these statistics on our Web site because the public continued to misunderstand what they were reading," wrote Morrow Police Chief Charlie Sewell. His department e-mailed the information a day later. When government agencies refuse to supply information, or kick the public out of a meeting, the ordinary citizen doesn't have a lot of options for fighting back. Manheimer at the Georgia First Amendment Foundation insists that the remedies for open records violations should be stronger. "Since 1998, you can call on the attorney general's office, the mediation program. That's one," she said. "The second is to call on a nonprofit organization such as mine and ask it to intervene and follow up with a letter. "Your formal remedy, of course, ultimately is litigation. . . . It's impractical, inefficient and uneconomical for a citizen to have to sue in the Superior Court of a county to get a record that's already there. . . . There's gotta be a more effective way than lawsuits." 'I didn't get nasty' Kathryn Allen, the former assistant attorney general, said she has already had a taste of what some people find when dealing with their local government. "I had an experience as a citizen the other day that I just couldn't believe," she said. "I was trying to get guidelines from the DeKalb County Historic Commission. The guidelines are not on the Web. I went to their office twice and couldn't get them. Nobody seemed to know where they were." Allen plans to add a deck to her house and wanted to make sure she was proceeding according to the rules. "I said, 'Would it make any difference if I told you that I used to enforce the Open Records Act?" Evidently not. "It was just like the Open Records Act didn't exist," she said. "I didn't get nasty with them, because I couldn't afford to. . . . I figured citizens frequently are in this position. I want them to approve my application, so I don't want to cause trouble."
|
