Right to Inspect Public Records
The Law:
Every person has a right to inspect public records of this state except:
Commentary
This section sets forth the fundamental rule that a person may inspect any public records of the state except those that are specifically protected. Most records kept by a public entity should be available for inspection. Unless the records custodian is positive that a recognized exception applies, all legitimate and appropriate requests must be honored.
Example 1:
A city program provides funds to low income families for winterizing homes. To qualify for program funds, applicants must provide certain family and financial information. Because the administrator of the program would like to protect the applicants’ privacy, but has no specific legal basis for keeping the applications confidential, the administrator requires only such personal information as is necessary to operate the program.
Example 2:
A homebuyer receives what she considers to be deficient service from her real estate broker. In response, she writes a letter to the municipality that issued a business license to the broker and alleges that the broker broke the law. The pertinent municipal department evaluates the complaint and decides that the allegations are not worth pursuing. A newspaper investigating real estate fraud learns about the complaint and requests a copy. No statute protects complaints filed against brokers. The municipality provides the reporter with a copy of the complaint, with a cover letter that explains the municipality’s decision not to pursue any investigation, and disclaims any position about the truth or falsity of the allegations in the complaint.
Commentary
Because of the presumption in favor of the right to inspect, public bodies acquiring information should keep in mind that the records they keep generally are subject to public inspection. Merely declaring certain documents to be confidential by regulation or agreement will not exclude them from inspection. Similarly, an agency cannot deny access to a record simply because the agency obtained it under a promise of confidentiality. To exclude a record from inspection, the custodian must be prepared to show that a specific law, court rule or constitutional privilege supports confidentiality. Because of the presumption in favor of inspection and to effectively protect personal privacy, the public body should be sure that the information it gathers is actually needed.
Example 3:
A government watchdog group requests the names and salaries of employees who work for a county’s road department. The director of the county personnel office refuses to provide the information because he promised the employees that he would not reveal the information and because he feels revelation would invade the employees’ privacy. The director’s policy is open to challenge because the names and salaries of public employees are generally considered public information. Without a specific law, court rule or constitutional privilege to support it, the mere promise of confidentiality is not adequate to deny access to the requested information.
Example 4:
A town resident sues the town government. Before the court issues its decision, the parties agree to settle the case. They enter into a settlement agreement in which the town agrees to pay the plaintiff a specified amount in damages. The settlement agreement includes a provision making the settlement terms confidential. The court enters an order dismissing the case. The order does not incorporate the settlement agreement. Soon afterwards, the mayor signs a voucher for the amount of the settlement payable to the plaintiff in the lawsuit. An interested citizen makes a request for copies of certain vouchers, including the voucher for the settlement amount. The town provides copies of all vouchers requested, except the one issued in connection with the settlement. Access to that voucher is denied on the basis that the settlement amount is confidential under the terms of the settlement agreement. The town cannot properly withhold the voucher because, unless protected by law, information relating to a public body’s expenditures is public. The town cannot deny access to otherwise public records merely by entering into a voluntary settlement agreement that declares certain information confidential.