The U.S. Supreme Court has let stand an appellate-court ruling in Illinois that "The state's anti-eavesdropping law violates free-speech rights when
used against people who tape law enforcement officers," the Chicago Tribune reports. "Opponents of the law say the right to record police is vital to guard against
abuses." (Read more)
Monday, November 26, 2012
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Judge rules U of L's hospital is public and subject to Open Records Act; it may appeal
The University of Louisville's hospital is a public entity, a Jefferson Circuit Court judge has ruled in a lawsuit filed to get access to the university's deals with other health providers.
Judge Martin McDonald ruled yesterday in favor of The Courier-Journal, WHAS-TV and the American Civil Liberties Union, noting that the university makes or approves all appointments to the hospital's board of directors. The university had argued that the board, and thus the hospital, was not a public agency under the state Open Records Act.
The hospital said it might appeal the ruling. McDonald gave it 30 days to give him the records being sought, along with arguments about why they should be exempt" under exceptions to the law, reports The C-J's Andrew Wolfson. "He gave the news organizations at the ACLU 20 days to respond to any claimed exemptions." The hospital has said revealing contracts would put it at a competitive disadvantage.
The suit began after the university refused to let the plaintiffs see records related to its proposed merger with Jewish Hospital & St. Mary's HealthCare and Lexington-based St. Joseph Health Care System. Gov. Steve Beshear vetoed the merger on grounds that a public hospital should not be bound by a religious organization's health-care policies. This month the hospital announced a new deal with KentuckyOne Health, which includes the Catholic system, but said reproductive services would not be affected. (Read more)
Judge Martin McDonald ruled yesterday in favor of The Courier-Journal, WHAS-TV and the American Civil Liberties Union, noting that the university makes or approves all appointments to the hospital's board of directors. The university had argued that the board, and thus the hospital, was not a public agency under the state Open Records Act.
The hospital said it might appeal the ruling. McDonald gave it 30 days to give him the records being sought, along with arguments about why they should be exempt" under exceptions to the law, reports The C-J's Andrew Wolfson. "He gave the news organizations at the ACLU 20 days to respond to any claimed exemptions." The hospital has said revealing contracts would put it at a competitive disadvantage.
The suit began after the university refused to let the plaintiffs see records related to its proposed merger with Jewish Hospital & St. Mary's HealthCare and Lexington-based St. Joseph Health Care System. Gov. Steve Beshear vetoed the merger on grounds that a public hospital should not be bound by a religious organization's health-care policies. This month the hospital announced a new deal with KentuckyOne Health, which includes the Catholic system, but said reproductive services would not be affected. (Read more)
Federal judge keeps ban on contacting jurors but will contact them on behalf of Herald-Leader
U.S. District Judge Greg Van Tatenhove is allowing the Lexington Herald-Leader to contact certain jurors in the groundbreaking case of kidnapping and assault of a gay man in Harlan County, but he declined to strike down a Kentucky federal-court rule against contacting jurors in criminal trials.
"Jason and Anthony Jenkins were charged with attacking the victim, Kevin Pennington, in April 2011 because of his sexual orientation," a hate crime, Bill Estep of the Herald-Leader recounts. "The Jenkins cousins were the first people in the nation tried under a section of the federal hate-crime law that makes it illegal to injure someone because of the victim's real or perceived sexual orientation."
The jury convicted the cousins on kidnapping and conspiracy charges Oct. 24 but acquitted them of the hate-crime charge. "That was a setback for the government in its first attempt to win a conviction at trial under the gay-bias section of the hate-crime law," Estep notes. "The Herald-Leader refrained from contacting jurors for comment on their reasoning in the decision because of a court rule."
The newspaper asked Van Tatenhove to strike down the rule as an unconstitutional infringement of its First Amendment right to gather news. The judge declined, but noting that the rule allows journalists to contact jurors with a judge's permission, said he would ask the jurors if they are willing to be interviewed and provide the names to the paper. (Read more)
"Jason and Anthony Jenkins were charged with attacking the victim, Kevin Pennington, in April 2011 because of his sexual orientation," a hate crime, Bill Estep of the Herald-Leader recounts. "The Jenkins cousins were the first people in the nation tried under a section of the federal hate-crime law that makes it illegal to injure someone because of the victim's real or perceived sexual orientation."
The jury convicted the cousins on kidnapping and conspiracy charges Oct. 24 but acquitted them of the hate-crime charge. "That was a setback for the government in its first attempt to win a conviction at trial under the gay-bias section of the hate-crime law," Estep notes. "The Herald-Leader refrained from contacting jurors for comment on their reasoning in the decision because of a court rule."
The newspaper asked Van Tatenhove to strike down the rule as an unconstitutional infringement of its First Amendment right to gather news. The judge declined, but noting that the rule allows journalists to contact jurors with a judge's permission, said he would ask the jurors if they are willing to be interviewed and provide the names to the paper. (Read more)
Friday, October 19, 2012
AG: Cabinet hid too much information from Inez newspaper about case of 2-year-old who died
The Mountain Citizen, a weekly newspaper in Inez, asked for all information the cabinet had on Watson Adkins, whom the state had removed from his mother's home and placed in the custody of his maternal aunt, Gladys Dickerson of Prestonsburg. The boy was found unresponsive there in September 2011.
The cabinet "initially did not provide two previous unsubstantiated reports of abuse against Gladys and Jason Dickerson to the newspaper but later supplied the reports with much of the information redacted," reports Beth Musgrave of the Lexington Herald-Leader. "The opinion said the cabinet could not redact some of that information, including the names of perpetrators involved in the unsubstantiated reports."
Conway said the cabinet also violated the records law "by failing to cite either state or federal law that allowed it to withhold or redact certain information," Musgrave writes, noting that the case is the latest "in a more that three-year legal battle between the media and the Cabinet for Health and Family Services over what can be released after a child is killed from abuse and neglect. . . . What information can be redacted or blacked out of those files is currently on appeal."
The cabinet has 30 days from Monday, the date of the open-records decision, to appeal it to circuit court.
Citizen Editor Gary Ball told Musgrave that he sought the information after hearing that the cabinet had been told the Dickersons were mistreating the boy and his four siblings. “I got heavily redacted information,” he said. “I wanted all records from the time that they were removed from the home to the time of the criminal charges.” He said the mother had taken photos of suspicious injuries to the children.
"Ball said that the cabinet had investigated two reports of alleged abuse against Gladys and Jason Dickerson before September 2011," Musgrave writes. "Ball received the reports from the cabinet but it’s difficult to tell why those reports were not substantiated." He told Musgrave, “I want the records that will show me how they made that determination that those reports were unsubstantiated.” (Read more)
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
AG says Danville solons broke open-meeting law by deciding secretly to buy a building
UPDATE, Oct. 23: The city has appealed the decision to Boyle Circuit Court, The Advocate-Messenger reports.
The City of Danville violated the state Open Meetings Act by taking action in closed session to buy a building and failing to respond to a complaint about it from the local newspaper, Attorney General Jack Conway has ruled in a decision both sides received yesterday.
"The disputed action in an executive session took place July 23 during a City Commission meeting. There was no public vote regarding purchasing the building during open session that day," reports Stephanie Mojica of The Advocate-Messenger. "It wasn’t until Aug. 13 that commissioners publicly approved the purchase . . . a decision that has stirred some controversy, partially because Commissioner Ryan Montgomery’s father, Mike Montgomery, conducts business with the property’s now-former owner, Mitchell Barnes of Lexington. On Aug. 13, commissioners said they had reached a 'consensus' during the July 23 executive session that allowed City Manager Ron Scott to move forward with plans to hire a bidder and secure the property through auction. However, a consensus is still a vote, according to the attorney general’s decision."
The commission had told the attorney general's office, "The Commissioners collectively stated to the City Manager that they could potentially approve of a purchase of the . . . building if the sale price was less than the appraised value" and that all of them supported the City Manager hiring "a professional bidder as its agent … so as not to showcase that it was the City bidding." The commission argued that it acted as the Florence City Council did when it agreed in closed session to settle a lawsuit, then approved the settlement at a later, open meeting. Conway's office said that didn't apply "because the appeal before us does not involve a settlement conference in litigation," and noted that "a commitment or promise to make a positive or negative decision" constitutes "taking action" under the open-meetings law. It also faulted the city for not responding to a follow-up complaint the Advocate-Messenger filed Sept. 14. For the decision, click here. For the story, go here.
The City of Danville violated the state Open Meetings Act by taking action in closed session to buy a building and failing to respond to a complaint about it from the local newspaper, Attorney General Jack Conway has ruled in a decision both sides received yesterday.
"The disputed action in an executive session took place July 23 during a City Commission meeting. There was no public vote regarding purchasing the building during open session that day," reports Stephanie Mojica of The Advocate-Messenger. "It wasn’t until Aug. 13 that commissioners publicly approved the purchase . . . a decision that has stirred some controversy, partially because Commissioner Ryan Montgomery’s father, Mike Montgomery, conducts business with the property’s now-former owner, Mitchell Barnes of Lexington. On Aug. 13, commissioners said they had reached a 'consensus' during the July 23 executive session that allowed City Manager Ron Scott to move forward with plans to hire a bidder and secure the property through auction. However, a consensus is still a vote, according to the attorney general’s decision."
The commission had told the attorney general's office, "The Commissioners collectively stated to the City Manager that they could potentially approve of a purchase of the . . . building if the sale price was less than the appraised value" and that all of them supported the City Manager hiring "a professional bidder as its agent … so as not to showcase that it was the City bidding." The commission argued that it acted as the Florence City Council did when it agreed in closed session to settle a lawsuit, then approved the settlement at a later, open meeting. Conway's office said that didn't apply "because the appeal before us does not involve a settlement conference in litigation," and noted that "a commitment or promise to make a positive or negative decision" constitutes "taking action" under the open-meetings law. It also faulted the city for not responding to a follow-up complaint the Advocate-Messenger filed Sept. 14. For the decision, click here. For the story, go here.
Mount Olivet violated both open-meetings and open-records laws, attorney general rules
By Taylor Moak
“I started going to the meetings because I don’t want to be within the city limits,” Beach said.
He said over the years, the city has not been run in an organized fashion.
Over the summer, he went to attend a meeting of the city council where plans to replace a vacant city council seat would be discussed.
But he said the special meeting wasn’t advertised, and he was told that it wasn’t a special meeting. He said he was allowed to stay at the meeting, but he filed a complaint after that meeting because the people of the city did not have an opportunity to attend the meeting.
When he asked for the minutes of the meeting, the council couldn’t produce them, Beach said.
In his July 26 request to the council, Beach asked for eight items, including the minutes from the July 16 and July 23 special meetings, and all emails, correspondence, minutes or notes from meetings pertaining to current or future annexation plans. Beach also requested the names of any news media that have requested to be notified of the council’s special meetings.
Beach said in an appeal letter that he filed with the Attorney General’s Office that he never received a written response to his request, but when he attended a council meeting on August 6, he was handed two of the eight items he requested without explanation.
W. Kelly Caudill, an attorney from Maysville, represents the city council. In his Aug. 13 response to the attorney general, Caudill said of the July 23 meeting that “some council members met for the purpose of introducing themselves to a prospective new council member who was interested in filling a vacancy on the council. That council and the mayor did not conduct any city business.”
Caudill said he advised the mayor and the council “that any time there is a quorum that they must comply with the Open Meetings Act and treat same as a special meeting providing at least 24 hours notice.”
In his response to Beach’s request, Caudill said the city council “must respectfully deny same as they are in the excess of what the statute requires.”
A worker at Caudill’s law firm said she spoke with Caudill and “he indicated that he has no comment.”
Beach said the attorney general’s decisions puts the city council “on notice that someone is watching” and his primary focus remains not being annexed into Mount Olivet.
“My biggest concern is being annexed into a city that doesn’t know how to be ran correctly,” Beach said.
The Mount Olivet City Council
violated the Kentucky open meetings and open records acts in its actions
surrounding special meetings and a request for documents, the attorney
general’s office ruled in August.
The first attorney
general’s decision about the council, which was released Aug. 24,
said the council violated the Open Meetings Act for not complying with notice
requirements before holding a special meeting on July 16.
The council also committed a violation for failing to issue until Aug. 8 a written response to two complaints made July 26, and it committed a violation if public business was discussed in an “admitted meeting of a quorum of members without proper notice,” according to the decision.
The second decision, released Aug. 30, said the council violated the Open Records Act when it did not respond in a timely manner to an open records request.
Tony Beach, a resident of Robertson County, where Mount Olivet is the county seat, filed the appeals with the attorney general’s office.
Beach said he had been attending the city council meetings to hear discussion of plans to annex a new school that is a few miles outside of the city limits. The proposed annexation would also include his home.
The council also committed a violation for failing to issue until Aug. 8 a written response to two complaints made July 26, and it committed a violation if public business was discussed in an “admitted meeting of a quorum of members without proper notice,” according to the decision.
The second decision, released Aug. 30, said the council violated the Open Records Act when it did not respond in a timely manner to an open records request.
Tony Beach, a resident of Robertson County, where Mount Olivet is the county seat, filed the appeals with the attorney general’s office.
Beach said he had been attending the city council meetings to hear discussion of plans to annex a new school that is a few miles outside of the city limits. The proposed annexation would also include his home.
“I started going to the meetings because I don’t want to be within the city limits,” Beach said.
He said over the years, the city has not been run in an organized fashion.
Over the summer, he went to attend a meeting of the city council where plans to replace a vacant city council seat would be discussed.
But he said the special meeting wasn’t advertised, and he was told that it wasn’t a special meeting. He said he was allowed to stay at the meeting, but he filed a complaint after that meeting because the people of the city did not have an opportunity to attend the meeting.
When he asked for the minutes of the meeting, the council couldn’t produce them, Beach said.
In his July 26 request to the council, Beach asked for eight items, including the minutes from the July 16 and July 23 special meetings, and all emails, correspondence, minutes or notes from meetings pertaining to current or future annexation plans. Beach also requested the names of any news media that have requested to be notified of the council’s special meetings.
Beach said in an appeal letter that he filed with the Attorney General’s Office that he never received a written response to his request, but when he attended a council meeting on August 6, he was handed two of the eight items he requested without explanation.
W. Kelly Caudill, an attorney from Maysville, represents the city council. In his Aug. 13 response to the attorney general, Caudill said of the July 23 meeting that “some council members met for the purpose of introducing themselves to a prospective new council member who was interested in filling a vacancy on the council. That council and the mayor did not conduct any city business.”
Caudill said he advised the mayor and the council “that any time there is a quorum that they must comply with the Open Meetings Act and treat same as a special meeting providing at least 24 hours notice.”
In his response to Beach’s request, Caudill said the city council “must respectfully deny same as they are in the excess of what the statute requires.”
A worker at Caudill’s law firm said she spoke with Caudill and “he indicated that he has no comment.”
Beach said the attorney general’s decisions puts the city council “on notice that someone is watching” and his primary focus remains not being annexed into Mount Olivet.
“My biggest concern is being annexed into a city that doesn’t know how to be ran correctly,” Beach said.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Judge closes hearing in case involving mother accused of sexualizing 6-year-old at pageants
A judge in Campbell County closed a hearing in a high-profile child custody case Saturday and put a gag order on the mother, who had "claimed that her ex-husband was using [her daughter's] participation in child
beauty pageants as a reason for the court to award him full custody," reports Meaghan Murphy of WXIX-TV. Family Court Judge Rick Woeste also ordered that 6-year-old Madisyn "Maddy" Verst and her mother could not participate in any pageants "until further notice," Murphy reports. The proceedings are to resume Aug. 31.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Hustonville officials refuse to release text of proposed ordinances after first reading
Here's one we've never heard before: A city refusing to provide the text of proposed ordinances on which its city council has held first reading. It is happening in Hustonville, the small Lincoln County town on US 127 between Danville and Liberty, reports Ben Kleppinger of The Interior Journal of the county seat of Stanford:
"Hustonville City Council has passed first readings of five ordinances aimed at curtailing certain behaviors within city limits, but the city has refused to release the text of the ordinances to the public. The ordinances were read aloud by Mayor Marc Spivey at the city's Aug. 7 regularly scheduled meeting. City Attorney Carol Hill refused to give the weekly newspaper copies of the ordinances, claiming they are "preliminary documents," and City Clerk Rita Clem denied a written open-records request, saying "The Open Records Act only governs access to the existing records and not to records that will be created in the future."
Kleppinger reports, "Kentucky Press Association Attorney Jeremy Rogers, who specializes in open meetings and open records law, said there's no question ordinances that pass first reading are open record. Rogers said Hustonville's argument that the ordinances do not exist doesn't make any sense because they have all already received first readings. . . . There's nothing preliminary or private or secret about it. They've read it in an open meeting."
The newspaper is appealing denial of its open-records request to Attorney General Jack Conway. The ordinances deal with littering, illegal parking, jaywalking, wearing of masks and one that would ban "formation of any type of line and/or congregating on the sidewalks, streets or any other public property." (Read more)
"Hustonville City Council has passed first readings of five ordinances aimed at curtailing certain behaviors within city limits, but the city has refused to release the text of the ordinances to the public. The ordinances were read aloud by Mayor Marc Spivey at the city's Aug. 7 regularly scheduled meeting. City Attorney Carol Hill refused to give the weekly newspaper copies of the ordinances, claiming they are "preliminary documents," and City Clerk Rita Clem denied a written open-records request, saying "The Open Records Act only governs access to the existing records and not to records that will be created in the future."
Kleppinger reports, "Kentucky Press Association Attorney Jeremy Rogers, who specializes in open meetings and open records law, said there's no question ordinances that pass first reading are open record. Rogers said Hustonville's argument that the ordinances do not exist doesn't make any sense because they have all already received first readings. . . . There's nothing preliminary or private or secret about it. They've read it in an open meeting."
The newspaper is appealing denial of its open-records request to Attorney General Jack Conway. The ordinances deal with littering, illegal parking, jaywalking, wearing of masks and one that would ban "formation of any type of line and/or congregating on the sidewalks, streets or any other public property." (Read more)
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Judge tells Owensboro police to give newspaper records of probe into public information officer
Daviess Circuit Judge Joe Castlen ruled Monday that the Owensboro Police Department must give the Messenger-Inquirer newspaper records relating to the department's investigation of its former public information officer.
The judge "said the city must release two documents that say why the police department's Professional Standards Unit began two investigations of [Marian] Cosgrove prior to her resignation in November," James Mayse reports for the M-I. The police department's attorney had argued that the documents were exempt from the Open Records Act because they were "internal" and because Cosgrove resigned before any administrative action was taken against her.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Editor, lawyer say open-government laws being obeyed more, but the battle will never end
By Al Cross
Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues
Public officials in Kentucky are doing better at obeying open-government laws, but many still have a ways to go, but Kentuckians are making increasing use of the laws to hold officials accountable.
So said the chief author of the laws, and one of the leading users of them, in an interview being broadcast on statewide television this week to mark the 20th anniversary this month of the laws' major rewriting. They also said the battle for open government will never end.
"We have to re-educate our local officials every four years about open meetings and open records," John Nelson, executive editor of Danville-based Advocate Communications, told Bill Goodman on "One to One," broadcast on KET Sunday afternoon. The show is airing on KET2 Tuesday, July 24 at 7:30 p.m. ET and Wednesday, July 25 at 7:30 a.m. ET and on KET Sunday night, July 29 at 12:30 a.m. ET. It is available online by clicking here.
Nelson, a leader in using the Open Records Act, said "We use it or consider using it at least weekly" at the company's papers in Danville, Winchester, Nicholasville and Stanford. He said he has seen recently seen an increasing use of open-government laws by the public, and "I would love to see more citizens become more aware of the law."
The General Assembly passed the laws in the mid-1970s and revised them in 1992. Since them, users of the records law have made some progress in reducing an attitude among public officials that records were "their business, not the public's business," said Jon Fleischaker, a Louisville attorney who helped draft the first laws and was the Kentucky Press Association's chief counsel on the rewrites.
Fleischaker said one powerful aspect of the laws is the ability of anyone to appeal the denial of a record, or access to a meeting, to the state attorney general and get within 20 days a ruling that has the force of law unless overturned in court. He said the process for "a quick and easy determination that is inexpensive" is "close to unique" among the states.
He said the attorney general's office has become increasingly helpful with successive attorneys general: "They're very consumer-friendly, citizen-friendly." He said later that most judges have also been a boon: "The courts in Kentucky have been very favorably inclined toward openness."
A key court decision, opening the donor records of university foundations, stemmed in part from a better definition of "public agency" included in the 1992 rewrite, Fleischaker said. The loser in his lawsuit for The Courier-Journal was the University of Louisville, which claimed privacy but had "wrongly assured" donors they would remain anonymous, he said. "In most of those cases there was a deal being made" with the donor. "That's not a private matter."
KPA and others began pressing for improvement of the laws little more than a decade after their passage because newspapers had become concerned about repeated violations of the laws and difficulty in achieving their goal of open and accountable government.
In 2004 KPA, The Associated Press and journalism schools in the state conducted an "open records audit" by sending strangers to local agencies to request specific records. Nelson, KPA president at the time, said there was "largely a positive outcome, but we did find that there were problems."
Nelson said the "glaring weakness" that remains in the laws is a light penalty for non-compliance. Fleischaker said it is "a very small fine that almost never gets implemented," and "That takes litigation and expense," usually against a public agency that can "go to court at the drop of a hat."
Fleischaker said it is also rare for courts to grant attorneys fees in open-government cases, but noted that the state Cabinet for Health and Family Services was ordered to pay in its dispute with major newspapers and the Todd County Standard about child-abuse fatalities and near-fatalities.
He said the case has "become a procedural nightmare" as the state Court of Appeals considers several procedural questions and the cabinet gives The Courier-Journal and the Lexington Herald-Leader documents that are "being redacted much more than they should be," including "names of people charged in criminal court with murder." He added, "This has nothing to do with children and protection of children; it has to do with protection of people in the cabinet."
Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues
Public officials in Kentucky are doing better at obeying open-government laws, but many still have a ways to go, but Kentuckians are making increasing use of the laws to hold officials accountable.
So said the chief author of the laws, and one of the leading users of them, in an interview being broadcast on statewide television this week to mark the 20th anniversary this month of the laws' major rewriting. They also said the battle for open government will never end.
"We have to re-educate our local officials every four years about open meetings and open records," John Nelson, executive editor of Danville-based Advocate Communications, told Bill Goodman on "One to One," broadcast on KET Sunday afternoon. The show is airing on KET2 Tuesday, July 24 at 7:30 p.m. ET and Wednesday, July 25 at 7:30 a.m. ET and on KET Sunday night, July 29 at 12:30 a.m. ET. It is available online by clicking here.
 |
| Host Bill Goodman shares a laugh with Nelson, center, and Fleischaker |
The General Assembly passed the laws in the mid-1970s and revised them in 1992. Since them, users of the records law have made some progress in reducing an attitude among public officials that records were "their business, not the public's business," said Jon Fleischaker, a Louisville attorney who helped draft the first laws and was the Kentucky Press Association's chief counsel on the rewrites.
Fleischaker said one powerful aspect of the laws is the ability of anyone to appeal the denial of a record, or access to a meeting, to the state attorney general and get within 20 days a ruling that has the force of law unless overturned in court. He said the process for "a quick and easy determination that is inexpensive" is "close to unique" among the states.
He said the attorney general's office has become increasingly helpful with successive attorneys general: "They're very consumer-friendly, citizen-friendly." He said later that most judges have also been a boon: "The courts in Kentucky have been very favorably inclined toward openness."
A key court decision, opening the donor records of university foundations, stemmed in part from a better definition of "public agency" included in the 1992 rewrite, Fleischaker said. The loser in his lawsuit for The Courier-Journal was the University of Louisville, which claimed privacy but had "wrongly assured" donors they would remain anonymous, he said. "In most of those cases there was a deal being made" with the donor. "That's not a private matter."
KPA and others began pressing for improvement of the laws little more than a decade after their passage because newspapers had become concerned about repeated violations of the laws and difficulty in achieving their goal of open and accountable government.
In 2004 KPA, The Associated Press and journalism schools in the state conducted an "open records audit" by sending strangers to local agencies to request specific records. Nelson, KPA president at the time, said there was "largely a positive outcome, but we did find that there were problems."
Nelson said the "glaring weakness" that remains in the laws is a light penalty for non-compliance. Fleischaker said it is "a very small fine that almost never gets implemented," and "That takes litigation and expense," usually against a public agency that can "go to court at the drop of a hat."
Fleischaker said it is also rare for courts to grant attorneys fees in open-government cases, but noted that the state Cabinet for Health and Family Services was ordered to pay in its dispute with major newspapers and the Todd County Standard about child-abuse fatalities and near-fatalities.
He said the case has "become a procedural nightmare" as the state Court of Appeals considers several procedural questions and the cabinet gives The Courier-Journal and the Lexington Herald-Leader documents that are "being redacted much more than they should be," including "names of people charged in criminal court with murder." He added, "This has nothing to do with children and protection of children; it has to do with protection of people in the cabinet."
Monday, April 23, 2012
Appeals court allows Christian County cops to keep identifying information on police reports secret
The Kentucky Court of Appeals has ruled that the City of Hopkinsville can "withhold home addresses, telephone numbers and driver’s license numbers
of people listed in arrest reports and criminal complaints," including people charged
with crimes, crime victims, and witnesses in criminal cases, the Kentucky New Era reports. Mayor Dan Kemp told the newspaper he did not interpret the decision to apply to closed cases, but writer Jennifer P. Brown noted, "The ruling makes no distinction between police cases that are open or closed."
The case began when the New Era asked city police for records "related to allegations of stalking, harassment and terroristic threatening," Brown reports. The city refused to give the paper "reports in open cases and all reports involving juveniles. (Juvenile court proceedings are closed and the names of juvenile defendants are not released. However, state law does not require police to withhold the names of juvenile who witness or are victims of crimes.) Of the records released in the city’s initial response, the city redacted a wide range of identifying factors, including a person’s race, gender, date of birth, ethnicity, address and telephone number."
The newspaper appealed to Attorney General Jack Conway, who ruled in its favor. The city appealed to Christian Circuit Court, and after losing initially, got a ruling that it could "routinely redact addresses, telephone numbers, driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers," Brown writes. "The newspaper did not dispute the practice of withholding Social Security numbers." Soon afterward, police adopted a policy of "redacting addresses and telephone numbers on the reports it makes available every day to media outlets." The Christian County sheriff has no such policy.
Privacy trumps public interest: A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals upheld the policy, citing the exemption in the Kentucky Open Records Act for "records containing information of a personal nature where the public disclosure thereof would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" and the court's 1994 decision that allowed redaction of employees' names, addresses, phone numbers, birthdate and Social Security number from state workers' compensation injury reports.
That court "reasoned that disclosure of such information would infringe upon the employees’ right to privacy in the home," Judge Laurence VanMeter wrote. "Such a right, which this court described as 'the right to be left alone,' is one of 'our most time-honored rights' and 'has long been steadfastly recognized by our laws and customs.'"
The law requires courts to balance the privacy right with the public's interest in disclosure, and the New Era argued that lack of the contact information would make it more difficult to report on the activities of the police department. But the court said the information itself would reveal "nothing about the Hopkinsville Police Department’s execution of its statutory functions."
The newspaper's attorney, Jon Fleischaker of Louisville, said the court failed to understand the role of journalists to investigate citizen reports that the police did not handle their cases properly. “It is often the case that we are investigating inaction as opposed to action,” he said. “The way you investigate inaction is to go to people who wanted action and didn’t get it.”
The paper was investigating police handling of such cases after a 2009 apartment fire started by a Molotov cocktail. "A man suspected of throwing the Molotov cocktail also doused a resident with gasoline, according to police. Neighbors told the New Era the suspect had threatened the couple living in the apartment, and according to court records, he had previously threatened a woman living in the apartment. He was later charged with arson."
Impact is limited, but implications may be great: Because the court said on its opinion that it was "not to be published," the decision has no precedental authority outside Christian County, but Fleischaker said it has statewide implications because another part of it defies everything he knows about the state Open Records Act, which he helped write and rewrite.
"On the question of redacting information from police reports, the appeals court shifted the burden from a public agency to those making open records requests," Brown reports. "This means that a public agency could withhold a particular piece of information in each record it releases, and it would not have to justify the redaction unless challenged."
UPDATE, June 10: The New Era is asking the state Supreme Court for discretionary review of the case.New Era Publisher Taylor Hayes said he and Fleischaker are discussing whether to appeal. Editor Eli Pace said, “Quite simply, this ruling prevents not just the media but anyone from
holding law enforcement officials accountable for how they handle
witnesses and victims. I’ve never seen a public
agency anywhere else even try to withhold information as basic as what
we were seeking. The court’s ruling is very disheartening.” (Read more)
The case began when the New Era asked city police for records "related to allegations of stalking, harassment and terroristic threatening," Brown reports. The city refused to give the paper "reports in open cases and all reports involving juveniles. (Juvenile court proceedings are closed and the names of juvenile defendants are not released. However, state law does not require police to withhold the names of juvenile who witness or are victims of crimes.) Of the records released in the city’s initial response, the city redacted a wide range of identifying factors, including a person’s race, gender, date of birth, ethnicity, address and telephone number."
The newspaper appealed to Attorney General Jack Conway, who ruled in its favor. The city appealed to Christian Circuit Court, and after losing initially, got a ruling that it could "routinely redact addresses, telephone numbers, driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers," Brown writes. "The newspaper did not dispute the practice of withholding Social Security numbers." Soon afterward, police adopted a policy of "redacting addresses and telephone numbers on the reports it makes available every day to media outlets." The Christian County sheriff has no such policy.
Privacy trumps public interest: A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals upheld the policy, citing the exemption in the Kentucky Open Records Act for "records containing information of a personal nature where the public disclosure thereof would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" and the court's 1994 decision that allowed redaction of employees' names, addresses, phone numbers, birthdate and Social Security number from state workers' compensation injury reports.
That court "reasoned that disclosure of such information would infringe upon the employees’ right to privacy in the home," Judge Laurence VanMeter wrote. "Such a right, which this court described as 'the right to be left alone,' is one of 'our most time-honored rights' and 'has long been steadfastly recognized by our laws and customs.'"
The law requires courts to balance the privacy right with the public's interest in disclosure, and the New Era argued that lack of the contact information would make it more difficult to report on the activities of the police department. But the court said the information itself would reveal "nothing about the Hopkinsville Police Department’s execution of its statutory functions."
The newspaper's attorney, Jon Fleischaker of Louisville, said the court failed to understand the role of journalists to investigate citizen reports that the police did not handle their cases properly. “It is often the case that we are investigating inaction as opposed to action,” he said. “The way you investigate inaction is to go to people who wanted action and didn’t get it.”
The paper was investigating police handling of such cases after a 2009 apartment fire started by a Molotov cocktail. "A man suspected of throwing the Molotov cocktail also doused a resident with gasoline, according to police. Neighbors told the New Era the suspect had threatened the couple living in the apartment, and according to court records, he had previously threatened a woman living in the apartment. He was later charged with arson."
Impact is limited, but implications may be great: Because the court said on its opinion that it was "not to be published," the decision has no precedental authority outside Christian County, but Fleischaker said it has statewide implications because another part of it defies everything he knows about the state Open Records Act, which he helped write and rewrite.
"On the question of redacting information from police reports, the appeals court shifted the burden from a public agency to those making open records requests," Brown reports. "This means that a public agency could withhold a particular piece of information in each record it releases, and it would not have to justify the redaction unless challenged."
UPDATE, June 10: The New Era is asking the state Supreme Court for discretionary review of the case.
Saturday, April 7, 2012
Paul objects to FCC proposal to make stations put political advertising information online
Many elements of the Tea Party have been outspoken in favor of government transparency, but for the U.S. senators most identified with the movement, that does not extend to making political television expenses more accessible to the public.
Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky (right), Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Mike Lee of Utah "have asked the Federal Communications Commission to reconsider its proposal to have TV stations put their political files online," reports John Eggerton of Multichannel News. They were joined by Roy Blunt of Missouri and John Boozman of Arkansas.
The political files, which show who buys the time, how much and when, must be made available for public inspection at a station or cable-company office during regular business hours. The FCC is expected to approve April 27 on a regulation that would require stations in major markets to put the information in an online database. "Broadcasters argue . . . that to maintain an online, real-time system would cost staff time and money better spent on local news and other public service," Eggerton writes.
OPINION: That money could also be spent on executive salaries, shareholder profits or some other thing besides public service. In their letter, the senators said the proposal would carry "heavy compliance costs," but as someone who has inspected many of these files at stations, and is familiar with how the same information is already maintained electronically, it's hard for me to imagine that the compliance costs would be very high. And putting them online would make them much more accessible to rural journalists. –Al Cross, director, Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues
UPDATE, April 9: Because of complaints from stations, "The proposal will give smaller stations two more years to start uploading new additions to their files about political ad spending. At the outset, only the affiliates of ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox in the top 50 TV markets will be required to do so," reports Brian Stelter of The New York Times. "The FCC says the initial uploading will cost less than $1,000 for a typical station, and will save the stations money over time by avoiding printing and storage costs. The uploaded files will be searchable — but only inside one file at a time." (Read more)
Corie Wright, senior policy counsel for Free Press, which supports online posting, told Eggerton, "It's baffling that these senators would want to hide public information in dusty filing cabinets when it could be made available to their constituents via the Internet. The public wants and needs to know who's trying to influence them over the public airwaves -- and the FCC appears to be doing the right thing by bringing this antiquated system into the 21st Century."
Eggerton notes, "Putting the political files online is part of a larger FCC effort to move station public files online and into a database managed by the FCC that is more easily searchable by the public." (Read more)
The political files, which show who buys the time, how much and when, must be made available for public inspection at a station or cable-company office during regular business hours. The FCC is expected to approve April 27 on a regulation that would require stations in major markets to put the information in an online database. "Broadcasters argue . . . that to maintain an online, real-time system would cost staff time and money better spent on local news and other public service," Eggerton writes.
OPINION: That money could also be spent on executive salaries, shareholder profits or some other thing besides public service. In their letter, the senators said the proposal would carry "heavy compliance costs," but as someone who has inspected many of these files at stations, and is familiar with how the same information is already maintained electronically, it's hard for me to imagine that the compliance costs would be very high. And putting them online would make them much more accessible to rural journalists. –Al Cross, director, Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues
UPDATE, April 9: Because of complaints from stations, "The proposal will give smaller stations two more years to start uploading new additions to their files about political ad spending. At the outset, only the affiliates of ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox in the top 50 TV markets will be required to do so," reports Brian Stelter of The New York Times. "The FCC says the initial uploading will cost less than $1,000 for a typical station, and will save the stations money over time by avoiding printing and storage costs. The uploaded files will be searchable — but only inside one file at a time." (Read more)
Corie Wright, senior policy counsel for Free Press, which supports online posting, told Eggerton, "It's baffling that these senators would want to hide public information in dusty filing cabinets when it could be made available to their constituents via the Internet. The public wants and needs to know who's trying to influence them over the public airwaves -- and the FCC appears to be doing the right thing by bringing this antiquated system into the 21st Century."
Eggerton notes, "Putting the political files online is part of a larger FCC effort to move station public files online and into a database managed by the FCC that is more easily searchable by the public." (Read more)
Friday, April 6, 2012
Harrodsburg police officer stingy with information about fatal traffic accident
Five days after a traffic accident killed a prominent Mercer County farmer who was driving his tractor, a Harrodsburg police officer refused to release most details about it, citing moral grounds and a promise to the family of the 21-year-old driver of the other vehicle that "he would keep their son’s name out of the media until after his investigation was complete," Todd Kleffman of the Advocate-Messenger in Danville reported Wednesday.
Only under orders from Police Chief Billy Whitenack did Officer Jeff Pearce identify the 21-year-old as William Phillips of Boyle County. Pearce still refused to release the name of a passenger in Phillips' vehicle or say what type of vehicle it was. "On Saturday, Mercer County Deputy Coroner Chuck Bugg said the driver of the second vehicle was airlifted from the scene but was unsure of the person’s identity or extent of the injuries," Kleffman reported. Bugg also identified John "Van" Landrum as the decedent "after Harrodsburg police released a statement saying only that one person died as the result of a two-vehicle collision on US 127."
State police are not involved in the investigation. "Pearce said he would not release any more information on the crash until after his investigation is complete, which he said could take between 10 days and a month," Kleffman reported. "Pearce told a reporter releasing information about the crash went against his morals. He also said he promised Phillips’ family he would keep their son’s name out of the media until after his investigation was complete." (Read more)
Only under orders from Police Chief Billy Whitenack did Officer Jeff Pearce identify the 21-year-old as William Phillips of Boyle County. Pearce still refused to release the name of a passenger in Phillips' vehicle or say what type of vehicle it was. "On Saturday, Mercer County Deputy Coroner Chuck Bugg said the driver of the second vehicle was airlifted from the scene but was unsure of the person’s identity or extent of the injuries," Kleffman reported. Bugg also identified John "Van" Landrum as the decedent "after Harrodsburg police released a statement saying only that one person died as the result of a two-vehicle collision on US 127."
State police are not involved in the investigation. "Pearce said he would not release any more information on the crash until after his investigation is complete, which he said could take between 10 days and a month," Kleffman reported. "Pearce told a reporter releasing information about the crash went against his morals. He also said he promised Phillips’ family he would keep their son’s name out of the media until after his investigation was complete." (Read more)
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Bill that would limit release of child-abuse information appears to be dead with one day left
A bill that could increase secrecy of child-abuse records at the Cabinet for Health and Family Services failed to win passage on the next-to-last day of the legislative session and appears to be dead. "Senate Majority Leader Robert Stivers, a Manchester Republican, said some senators had questions about the bill and it appears unlikely to pass," Deborah Yetter of The Courier-Journal reports.
Senate Bill 126, originally a social-work licensing bill, includes in its Section 10 provisions of House Bill 200 to "create an outside panel of experts to review child deaths and serious injuries, with the goal of better detecting those that result from abuse or neglect. It also would create an outside office to review continuing operations of the state’s child welfare system," Yetter writes. "And it would clarify the definition of child abuse to spell out that any adult living in the home or a sibling older than 16 could be considered a perpetrator of abuse.
The bill would also limit what the cabinet must disclose about child-abuse deaths and serious injuries as a result of child abuse, so the Kentucky Press Association lobbied against it. One portion of the bill would prohibit the cabinet from releasing "the name or any identifying information of a child who has suffered a near fatality, or any information on a sibling or children living in the home of the child who suffered a fatality or near fatality," which is defined as an injury that places a child in serious or critical condition.
KPA counsel Jon Fleischaker, chief author of the state Open Records Act, testified before a Senate committee that if the measure had been law when Amy Dye, a 9-year-old Todd County girl, was killed by her adoptive brother, the public may have never known about her death, or that the brother confessed to killing her.
Westrom told Yetter the cabinet insisted on the language. The cabinet has been embroiled in legal action for more than a year over its refusal to turn over records relating to the death of children under its care. Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd has ordered the cabinet to disclose its records in those cases while withholding minimal information, and the cabinet has appealed. For Yetter's story, click here.
Senate Bill 126, originally a social-work licensing bill, includes in its Section 10 provisions of House Bill 200 to "create an outside panel of experts to review child deaths and serious injuries, with the goal of better detecting those that result from abuse or neglect. It also would create an outside office to review continuing operations of the state’s child welfare system," Yetter writes. "And it would clarify the definition of child abuse to spell out that any adult living in the home or a sibling older than 16 could be considered a perpetrator of abuse.
The bill would also limit what the cabinet must disclose about child-abuse deaths and serious injuries as a result of child abuse, so the Kentucky Press Association lobbied against it. One portion of the bill would prohibit the cabinet from releasing "the name or any identifying information of a child who has suffered a near fatality, or any information on a sibling or children living in the home of the child who suffered a fatality or near fatality," which is defined as an injury that places a child in serious or critical condition.
KPA counsel Jon Fleischaker, chief author of the state Open Records Act, testified before a Senate committee that if the measure had been law when Amy Dye, a 9-year-old Todd County girl, was killed by her adoptive brother, the public may have never known about her death, or that the brother confessed to killing her.
Westrom told Yetter the cabinet insisted on the language. The cabinet has been embroiled in legal action for more than a year over its refusal to turn over records relating to the death of children under its care. Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd has ordered the cabinet to disclose its records in those cases while withholding minimal information, and the cabinet has appealed. For Yetter's story, click here.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Legislature OKs bill to let county clerks to charge 50 cents a copy, ban scanners, cameras and such
The Kentucky General Assembly has passed and sent to Gov. Steve Beshear a bill that would allow county clerks to charge 50 cents for a copy of any record they have and to ban devices that could be used to make electronic copies in their offices.
The bill would overturn current law, based on the Open Records Act and an attorney general's decision, that limits the cost of copies to the direct cost of producing them, generally no more than 10 cents per page. It would also allow clerks to ban "scanners, cameras, computers, personal copiers, or other devices that may be used by an individual seeking a copy of a document maintained by the clerk."
Those measures were included in a bill that otherwise dealt with delinquent taxes. It was titled "An act relating to governmental revenue functions and declaring an emergency." The emergency clause means the bill would become law when Beshear signs it. If he vetoes it, his veto would appear likely to be overridden when the legislature returns April 12; the Senate passed the bill 37-0 and the House agreed with a minor change and repassed the bill 83-6.
Those voting against the bill were Reps. C.B. Embry, Mike Harmon, Jim Wayne (the only Democrat), David Floyd, Stan Lee and Addia Wuchner. The Kentucky Press Association lobbied against the bill.
The bill would overturn current law, based on the Open Records Act and an attorney general's decision, that limits the cost of copies to the direct cost of producing them, generally no more than 10 cents per page. It would also allow clerks to ban "scanners, cameras, computers, personal copiers, or other devices that may be used by an individual seeking a copy of a document maintained by the clerk."
Those measures were included in a bill that otherwise dealt with delinquent taxes. It was titled "An act relating to governmental revenue functions and declaring an emergency." The emergency clause means the bill would become law when Beshear signs it. If he vetoes it, his veto would appear likely to be overridden when the legislature returns April 12; the Senate passed the bill 37-0 and the House agreed with a minor change and repassed the bill 83-6.
Those voting against the bill were Reps. C.B. Embry, Mike Harmon, Jim Wayne (the only Democrat), David Floyd, Stan Lee and Addia Wuchner. The Kentucky Press Association lobbied against the bill.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Conway says AD district board violated meetings law in dispute between Lewis County officials
Attorney General Jack Conway has ruled the Buffalo Trace Area Development District board violated the state Open Meetings Act in using anonymous paper ballots to elect a citizen member to the board form Lewis County on Feb. 21, Marla Toncray reports for the Ledger Independent of Maysville.
The issue was raised by Lewis County Judge-Executive Thomas Massie, who is running for the Republican nomination for Congress in the 4th District.
Massie filed a complaint with board Chairman Bill Boggs Feb. 28, alleging that Vanceburg Mayor Todd Ruckel and other board members "conducted private conversations with board members in advance of the Feb. 21 meeting to secure the election of the mayor's nominee and defeat the election of the judge's nominee," Toncray reports. Conway did not reach a conclusion on that point, citing "the conflicting evidentiary record."
Massie wrote, "No notice of appointment of a board member was placed on the agenda for the Feb. 21 meeting, yet some members carried proxy votes for absentee members to the meeting." He also "alleged that the board improperly conducted the election by paper ballot rather than by roll call vote, that the paper ballots were reviewed by only three members of the board, and that the vote count was not announced," the decision says.
Boggs said the vote was conducted by paper ballot after a motion for a roll call vote failed for lack of a second. He said the district's bylaws "do not prescribe the means of conducting the election." But Conway's decision noted that the open-meetings law and past decisions require "a public vote of the members in attendance and a record of how each member voted."
Toncray reports, "Massie said Thursday BTADD board members were trying to avoid transparency and then followed the statement by asking how much public business is being conducted in secret at BTADD meetings." Massie told her, "Back room dealings were going on. Our citizens deserve full transparency and protection from these kinds of acts. That's why I filed the complaint." (Read more)
The issue was raised by Lewis County Judge-Executive Thomas Massie, who is running for the Republican nomination for Congress in the 4th District.
Massie filed a complaint with board Chairman Bill Boggs Feb. 28, alleging that Vanceburg Mayor Todd Ruckel and other board members "conducted private conversations with board members in advance of the Feb. 21 meeting to secure the election of the mayor's nominee and defeat the election of the judge's nominee," Toncray reports. Conway did not reach a conclusion on that point, citing "the conflicting evidentiary record."
Massie wrote, "No notice of appointment of a board member was placed on the agenda for the Feb. 21 meeting, yet some members carried proxy votes for absentee members to the meeting." He also "alleged that the board improperly conducted the election by paper ballot rather than by roll call vote, that the paper ballots were reviewed by only three members of the board, and that the vote count was not announced," the decision says.
Boggs said the vote was conducted by paper ballot after a motion for a roll call vote failed for lack of a second. He said the district's bylaws "do not prescribe the means of conducting the election." But Conway's decision noted that the open-meetings law and past decisions require "a public vote of the members in attendance and a record of how each member voted."
Toncray reports, "Massie said Thursday BTADD board members were trying to avoid transparency and then followed the statement by asking how much public business is being conducted in secret at BTADD meetings." Massie told her, "Back room dealings were going on. Our citizens deserve full transparency and protection from these kinds of acts. That's why I filed the complaint." (Read more)
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Senate kills, House revives moments later a bill that would curtail child services transparency
A bill opposed by the Kentucky Press Association that could increase secrecy at the Cabinet for Health and Family Services died in a Senate committee on Tuesday then was revived minutes later in the House of Representatives.
House Bill 200, legislation sponsored by Rep. Susan Westrom, D-Lexington, was defeated in the Senate Health and Welfare Committee. Moments later, in what Courier-Journal reporter Deborah Yetter reported was a pre-arranged move, she walked to the bill to the House State Government Committee, where it was added to a different bill and passed unanimously.
Critics of the measure, who say it would sharply curtail public access to details of child-abuse deaths and serious injuries, were outraged, saying the bill gives the cabinet more power to withhold information.
“It’s a secrecy bill,” David Thompson, executive director of the Kentucky Press Association, told the Courier-Journal. “They have played right into the hands of the cabinet.”
Media attorney Jon Fleischaker testified the Senate committee about concerns over the lack of transparency the bill has for cabinet oversight, even though supporters were pushing it as a transparency bill. Portions of the bill would allow the cabinet not to release the county where a death or near-death occurred, nor the name of the hospital where the child was taken.
Fleischaker, an author of the state's open government legislation, testified that if this bill had been in force when Amy Dye, a 9-year-old Todd County girl, was killed, the public may have never known about her death, or that a 17-year-old sibling was charged with, and then confessed to, killing Amy. He's now serving a 50-year sentence.
The cabinet has been embroiled in legal action for more than a year over its refusal to turn over records relating to the death of children under its care. Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd has ordered the cabinet to disclose its records in those cases while withholding minimal information.
For more on this story, see Deborah Yetter's story here.
House Bill 200, legislation sponsored by Rep. Susan Westrom, D-Lexington, was defeated in the Senate Health and Welfare Committee. Moments later, in what Courier-Journal reporter Deborah Yetter reported was a pre-arranged move, she walked to the bill to the House State Government Committee, where it was added to a different bill and passed unanimously.
Critics of the measure, who say it would sharply curtail public access to details of child-abuse deaths and serious injuries, were outraged, saying the bill gives the cabinet more power to withhold information.
“It’s a secrecy bill,” David Thompson, executive director of the Kentucky Press Association, told the Courier-Journal. “They have played right into the hands of the cabinet.”
Media attorney Jon Fleischaker testified the Senate committee about concerns over the lack of transparency the bill has for cabinet oversight, even though supporters were pushing it as a transparency bill. Portions of the bill would allow the cabinet not to release the county where a death or near-death occurred, nor the name of the hospital where the child was taken.
Fleischaker, an author of the state's open government legislation, testified that if this bill had been in force when Amy Dye, a 9-year-old Todd County girl, was killed, the public may have never known about her death, or that a 17-year-old sibling was charged with, and then confessed to, killing Amy. He's now serving a 50-year sentence.
The cabinet has been embroiled in legal action for more than a year over its refusal to turn over records relating to the death of children under its care. Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd has ordered the cabinet to disclose its records in those cases while withholding minimal information.
For more on this story, see Deborah Yetter's story here.
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Cabinet appeals judge's order that it pay civil penalties and newspaper's legal fees
The state Cabinet for Health and Family Services has appealed a judge's order telling it to pay more than $6,000
in civil penalties and nearly $10,000 in attorney fees for acting in bad faith in resisting release of files related to Amy Dye, the 9-year-old Todd County girl who was murdered by her foster brother last year.
Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd ruled that the Todd County Standard was entitled to the fees and fines because the agency violated the state Open Records Act. "That ruling and others like it for the Louisville Courier-Journal and Lexington Herald-Leader are thought to be the first time a state agency had been fined for violating the open record laws since they were adopted in the 1970s," the Standard reports.
"The agency at first denied even having any records on Dye then said it did not have to give the records to the Standard because Dye was killed by a sibling and not a parent," the paper notes.
Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd ruled that the Todd County Standard was entitled to the fees and fines because the agency violated the state Open Records Act. "That ruling and others like it for the Louisville Courier-Journal and Lexington Herald-Leader are thought to be the first time a state agency had been fined for violating the open record laws since they were adopted in the 1970s," the Standard reports.
"The agency at first denied even having any records on Dye then said it did not have to give the records to the Standard because Dye was killed by a sibling and not a parent," the paper notes.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Perry judge-executive acknowledges fiscal court sometimes ignores Open Meetings Act
The Perry County Fiscal Court has acknowledged violating the Kentucky Open Meetings Act by conducting unannounced meetings because, in the words of Judge-Executive Danny Ray Noble, it is for the good of the county.
“Sometimes we do break the Sunshine Law because we have to,” said Noble at the fiscal court meeting in Hazard Wednesday, according to a story in the Hazard Herald.
The Herald story reported Noble said during the meeting Wednesday that the court would meet with an engineer later in the day outside the official meeting, with a quorum present, to discuss water issues in the county. He noted that the engineer was unable to make the meeting Wednesday morning.
Noble said the court sometimes holds unannounced meetings so magistrates can discuss issues and agree on action before a vote is taken during a regular meeting. He said that he believes this makes them more efficient in public meetings.
The open meetings law, enacted in 1974 and amended in 1992, requires that the "the formation of public policy is public business and shall not be conducted in secret."
The law requires that regular meetings must be scheduled at specified times and places which are convenient to the public, and that notice must be given of regularly scheduled meetings and of special meetings not on the regular schedule, which must be adopted and published.
The law forbids elected officials from meeting secretly unless the legislative body first meets publicly, votes to go into closed session by defining the nature of the discussion, and cites a specific exception in the law that allows a closed session. Typically, the most cited exceptions involve specified personnel issues, a threatened or actual lawsuit or the purchase or sale of property. No votes can be taken in a closed session.
Meeting privately to come to predetermined decisions deprives the public of the debate on important policy matters, an abridgment of citizens' role in a democracy. The Kentucky Supreme Court in 1997 ruled that “The express purpose of the Open Meetings Act is to maximize notice of public meetings and actions.”
Citizens who believe a public agency has violated the open meetings law may file a complaint with the presiding officer outlining the perceived violation and suggesting a corrective course. If the agency denies the complaint, citizens can file the complaint with the Kentucky attorney general, whose ruling has the force of law until appealed to circuit court.
Read the Herald story here. In an editorial, the weekly newspaper called for a halt to the practice, saying the fiscal court was "doing the residents of Perry County a great disservice."
“Sometimes we do break the Sunshine Law because we have to,” said Noble at the fiscal court meeting in Hazard Wednesday, according to a story in the Hazard Herald.
The Herald story reported Noble said during the meeting Wednesday that the court would meet with an engineer later in the day outside the official meeting, with a quorum present, to discuss water issues in the county. He noted that the engineer was unable to make the meeting Wednesday morning.
Noble said the court sometimes holds unannounced meetings so magistrates can discuss issues and agree on action before a vote is taken during a regular meeting. He said that he believes this makes them more efficient in public meetings.
The open meetings law, enacted in 1974 and amended in 1992, requires that the "the formation of public policy is public business and shall not be conducted in secret."
The law requires that regular meetings must be scheduled at specified times and places which are convenient to the public, and that notice must be given of regularly scheduled meetings and of special meetings not on the regular schedule, which must be adopted and published.
The law forbids elected officials from meeting secretly unless the legislative body first meets publicly, votes to go into closed session by defining the nature of the discussion, and cites a specific exception in the law that allows a closed session. Typically, the most cited exceptions involve specified personnel issues, a threatened or actual lawsuit or the purchase or sale of property. No votes can be taken in a closed session.
Meeting privately to come to predetermined decisions deprives the public of the debate on important policy matters, an abridgment of citizens' role in a democracy. The Kentucky Supreme Court in 1997 ruled that “The express purpose of the Open Meetings Act is to maximize notice of public meetings and actions.”
Citizens who believe a public agency has violated the open meetings law may file a complaint with the presiding officer outlining the perceived violation and suggesting a corrective course. If the agency denies the complaint, citizens can file the complaint with the Kentucky attorney general, whose ruling has the force of law until appealed to circuit court.
Read the Herald story here. In an editorial, the weekly newspaper called for a halt to the practice, saying the fiscal court was "doing the residents of Perry County a great disservice."
Monday, March 19, 2012
House passes bill allowing county clerks to charge up to 50 cents a page for copies of any record
The state House has passed and sent to the Senate a bill that would allow county clerks to charge up to 50 cents per page for paper copies of any record and let them ban scanners, cameras and other devices that could be used to make electronic copies. An attorney general's opinion limits the charge to 10 cents per page unless the actual cost of producing the copy is greater.
The Kentucky Press Association supported a floor amendment Friday to remove the relatively short provision from the bill, a lengthy measure that otherwise deals with delinquent taxes. The floor amendment lost 73-15 and the bill passed 77-13, indicating that members of the Kentucky County Clerks Association had lobbied it well. For roll-call votes, click here.
KPA Executive Director David Thompson said the group is working with the clerks' association on an amendment "that would make the language specific to certain recorded documents and not generally all public records. Our plan is to amend it in the Senate. We do not want to kill the bill because for 99 percent of the legislation, it's changes in the property tax/delinquent taxes that county clerks need. We have no problem with that part. So we continue seeking changes only in one section that will make it acceptable to the public and the press and then we'll leave them alone."
The importance of the bill to the clerks could be indicated by its title, "An act relating to governmental revenue functions and declaring an emergency." Such a broad title could make it a vehicle for other types of amendments.
Ironically, the bill passed during Sunshine Week and on the 251st birthday of James Madison. For a copy of it, click here.
The Kentucky Press Association supported a floor amendment Friday to remove the relatively short provision from the bill, a lengthy measure that otherwise deals with delinquent taxes. The floor amendment lost 73-15 and the bill passed 77-13, indicating that members of the Kentucky County Clerks Association had lobbied it well. For roll-call votes, click here.
KPA Executive Director David Thompson said the group is working with the clerks' association on an amendment "that would make the language specific to certain recorded documents and not generally all public records. Our plan is to amend it in the Senate. We do not want to kill the bill because for 99 percent of the legislation, it's changes in the property tax/delinquent taxes that county clerks need. We have no problem with that part. So we continue seeking changes only in one section that will make it acceptable to the public and the press and then we'll leave them alone."
The importance of the bill to the clerks could be indicated by its title, "An act relating to governmental revenue functions and declaring an emergency." Such a broad title could make it a vehicle for other types of amendments.
Ironically, the bill passed during Sunshine Week and on the 251st birthday of James Madison. For a copy of it, click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)