Survey: Officials at nearly 60% of Minnesota jails deny access to records
The Associated Press
04.17.00
(Editor's note: James Walsh and Nancy Conner wrote this article on behalf of the Minnesota Society of Professional Journalists which recently sponsored a freedom-of-information survey.)
| |
| St. Paul, Minn., city clerk Fred Owusu, lower right, oversees citizen-services department that has a sophisticated Web site with access to city council agendas and minutes, put together by Webmasters Roger Grupp, upper left, and Pete Nelson, upper right; photographed on April 7. |
Officials at nearly 60% of Minnesota's jails have broken the law in the past few weeks. They refused to let the public look at the names of the people they lock behind bars.
They weren't alone.
A recent survey — coordinated by the Minnesota Society of Professional Journalists — found dozens of school districts that flat-out refused to say how much money their superintendents make and a few City Hall officials who wouldn't let the public view city council meeting minutes.
There were bright spots: 98% of the requests for city council meeting minutes were granted. Many cities not only provide a ready supply of photocopies, but many post minutes on their Web sites. Benson city administrative assistant Marge Scheffler was entering minutes on the city's Web site when the surveyor walked in. Scheffler handed over the folder of minutes for this year and asked no questions. She even offered to show the surveyor how to navigate the Web site. Jail officials in Crow Wing County quickly showed the names of the people they had behind bars.
But in many counties — especially regarding jail logs and superintendent salaries — the going was considerably tougher. Fifty-eight percent of surveyors' requests at local jails — and nearly 30% of requests for superintendents' salaries — were denied, despite laws requiring government officials to provide that information.
Even in cases where they provided the information, officials often barraged surveyors with questions such as: "What's your name?" and "Why do you want this?" State law does not require that people identify themselves when requesting public information.
'Rule of thumb'
In Sherburne County, Sheriff Bruce Anderson said a surveyor was denied access to the jail log because she wouldn't give her name. The Fairmont Area Schools assistant superintendent wanted a meeting with the surveyor to explain salary and benefits before releasing the information. In Isanti County, the acting jail administrator said authorities don't release information on the people they lock up until they are charged in court. It's been their "rule of thumb" since 1984, he said.
The fact is, according to Minnesota Attorney General Mike Hatch, officials who said they couldn't — or wouldn't —show jail logs, council meeting minutes and superintendent salaries broke the law. And, he says, they are probably breaking the law every day.
"It's illegal. It's not right. They shouldn't do it," Hatch said when told of the survey results. "But the problem is enforcement."
News reporters fight for public information every day, says Mark Anfinson, an attorney who represents the Minnesota Newspaper Association. But the public isn't used to such fights. Being denied public information kills the public's ability to keep tabs on government, he says.
"Pity the poor citizen, because they're not going to understand this need for persistence," Anfinson said. "They'll assume the public officials are telling them the law. They'll walk away and it's all over and they don't get it."
Law enforcement secrecy
Forrest Landon, president of the National Freedom of Information Coalition and retired editor of the Roanoke Times in Virginia, said, "It's very important for everyone to understand (that) the open-records laws are for citizens."
All 50 states and the federal government have enacted freedom-of-information laws to provide a check on government power and enable people to get critical information, Landon says.
But surveys like Minnesota's, conducted in at least a dozen other states since 1998, have shown that public information laws don't guarantee public access — particularly regarding law enforcement agencies.
"Historically, the law enforcement agencies have been very reluctant to share information except by news release, and that's in part the mindset and traditions in that branch of government," Landon said. "They have to do a lot in secrecy."
Government employees who don't understand the laws often deny a request to avoid trouble, he says. "It requires really good training efforts on a continuing basis. I think that's probably the greatest benefit of records audits."
While other states' audits have resulted in new handbooks and training sessions for public officials and new state offices where citizens can get impartial answers about rights of access to public data, Hatch says the key to stopping the flouting of state freedom-of-information laws is not more education. Minnesota needs a better way to enforce its Data Practices Act, he says, and the public needs a way to compel wayward officials.
"Most public officials know the law," Hatch said. "It's just that many of them don't want to give out the information."
Surveyors with the Society of Professional Journalists' audit, conducted from March 22-April 7 in all 87 Minnesota counties, attempted to inspect public information in each county's largest city, largest school district and sheriff's office.
The cities' scorecard was the best by far. The St. Paul city clerk's office posts council minutes and offers an array of information — meeting agendas, codes and ordinances, even a place to click and report potholes, downed trees and graffiti.
"It definitely keeps people connected," said St. Paul City Clerk Fred Owusu. "But we have to be aware of the digital divide, that not everybody is connected yet."
Statewide, only a handful of city employees asked for surveyors' names or workplaces. Some were cordial beyond expectations. The Woodbury city secretary handed over the council minutes without question and offered that the first 10 pages of copies are free. But a Duluth city employee would not hand over minutes from the first January meeting or even the previous December meeting because the council had not approved them, the surveyor reported.
Protecting their 'fiefdoms'
Experts in the area of freedom of information say Minnesota's survey results are not surprising. And there is a clear connection between the types of information requested and the ease with which officials release it.
Take city council meeting minutes. Anfinson says that few officials feel a personal stake in the actions of their city councils, which hold public meetings. Superintendents and county sheriffs, however, may feel there is greater risk in the information they hold. Erecting obstacles to keep their information private — requiring written requests, demanding people's names, blaming their technology for an inability to retrieve the requested information — are ways to protect their "fiefdoms," Anfinson says.
"This survey shows three reasons public employees fail to comply with the requirements," he said. "They don't want you to have it. They are too busy or distracted to give it to you. Or they are confused about what the law is. The resistance you encounter is directly proportional to how much an official sees the data as his agency's property."
In Rochester, a school district employee told the surveyor on two consecutive days to come back for the requested information. On the third day, the employee told the surveyor that she would have to meet with the employee's supervisor because they do not give it out to "just anybody."
In Minneapolis, school officials say they often get requests for information about the superintendent's salary and benefits package and they provide the information quickly and easily. Officials were cordial and mailed the information to the surveyor within two days of her request —but it still wasn't immediately accessible.
"There was absolutely no reluctance on our part to declare what that information was," said Dan Loewenson, assistant to Superintendent Carol Johnson. He added that it's the school district's practice to send requestors a copy, without charge, because salary and benefits packages are complex. "It's not a foreign question to us. And we do have a pretty good understanding of where the boundaries are in the Data Practices Act."
'Who's asking?'
In Benton County, when the surveyor asked Russ Hackett, an assistant jail administrator, to see a roster of who was locked in jail the day before, Hackett said, "This is our property. I'm not going to let you see it."
Chief Deputy Doug Brinkman later explained: "We release it when it's requested. We don't post it. I don't know if anyone posts information out there."
Itasca County Sheriff Pat Medure says his office provides daily briefings to the local press and has a good relationship with the public. But he offers no apology for demanding to know who is asking for jail information. Inmates may be victims of crimes, he says, or the people requesting the information may have sinister motives. Knowing who is asking the questions is the responsible thing to do, he says.
"Those are issues that might not be important to somebody who's just asking for information," Medure said. "But we have to make sure we're doing the right thing at the right time."
Itasca County also doesn't keep a handy roster of who is in the jail. Requestors must ask for a computer printout for each inmate — at $5 a copy. If there are 15 people in jail and you want to know all their names and charges, that'll be $65. State law allows public officials to charge only the actual cost of copying information. Viewing such information should be free.
When asked about the Itasca County charges, Anfinson said: "That's absurd. It's just absurd. It borders on parody. You don't know whether to laugh or cry at the end."
In some cases, however, officials acknowledged their mistakes. Isanti County Sheriff Chief Deputy Mike Lewis said his jail administrator was wrong to not release information on who they arrest and lock up. He blamed a lack of understanding of the Data Practices Act and said officials had sent a memo to all jail employees to ensure they know what is public and what isn't.
Why is this issue so important? Releasing information about people held in jail not only protects accused criminals but also society at large, says Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Arlington, Va., and a former Minnesota journalist and lawyer.
"It's one of the first indications you are in a police state when they won't tell you who is in custody," she said.
James Walsh is a legal affairs reporter for the Star Tribune of Minneapolis. Nancy Conner is reader representative for the Saint Paul Pioneer Press.