|
THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO RECORDS |
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Monday, 13 March 2006 |
|
THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO RECORDS All but one area agency comply More than 40 newspapers, including the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, spent a week testing how local governments across the state respond to citizen requests for public information.
Among the more than 200 agencies tested were a dozen in Charlotte, Manatee and Sarasota counties. All but one of those agencies, the Manatee County Sheriff's Office, provided the records properly.
A spokesman for the Sheriff's Office now says the requested records -- a log showing calls dispatched by 911 over a two-day period -- could have been provided.
But an audit volunteer walked out of the office without a copy largely because providing the records is relatively difficult.
Unlike many police agencies, the Manatee Sheriff's Office does not print out a list of dispatched calls each day. The 911 calls are kept only on a computer.
"If someone comes in and asks for specifically the last 24 hours of calls, I would have to do a computer run and give it to them," said Sheriff's spokesman Dave Bristow. "I can get that, but we don't have that readily available."
The audit volunteer asked deputies for permission to inspect the records on a computer screen, but was denied.
Bristow said the deputies acted correctly in refusing that request because the computer might contain information, such as a victim's address, that is not public.
But Barbara Petersen, executive director of Florida's First Amendment Foundation, said that is no excuse for not providing the public portion of the records.
"It's not just a bad excuse, it's illegal under the law," she said. "You have to redact what is exempt and provide access."
Bristow said the Sheriff's Office fields public records requests regularly and does a good job. In 2004, the last year that newspapers audited the office and others around the state, the office passed.
In this year's audit and in a similar audit done in 2004, media outlets around the state requested basic public records from four agencies in each county -- sheriff's offices, county governments, city halls and school districts.
Last modified: March 12. 2006 8:17AM
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060312/NEWS/603120651/1417/RSS02 Results of the audit in Southwest Florida Here’s how local agencies performed:
CHARLOTTE COUNTY
 Administrator
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- required an auditor to give his name and sign a written request.
Schools
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- required a name, then called sheriff's deputies when the auditor asked to remain anonymous and not explain why he wanted the superintendent's e-mails.
Sheriff
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- no violations.
Punta Gorda city
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- no violations.
MANATEE COUNTY
Adminis trator
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- erroneously said no e-mails existed but later acknowledged they did.
Schools
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- no violations.
Sheriff
2006 -- told auditor that records could not be provided.
2004 -- no violations.
Bradenton city
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- no violations.
SARASOTA COUNTY
Adminis tration
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- required request in writing.
Schools
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- no violations.
Sheriff
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- no violations.
Sarasota city
2006 -- no violations.
2004 -- required a name and written request. |
Florida News