It is unbelievable what some officials will do to erect barricades between the information government collects in the name of "we the people" and the very people themselves.
We can remember one sheriff years ago who provided access, as required by law, to reams of information but said there was simply no way he had the equipment available to make the copies a reporter wanted. That's the kind of passive-aggressive response people sometimes get from public officials who want to do the minimum required when it comes to accountability. To get copies, the reporter and her editor literally had to rent a portable copy machine, haul it into the sheriff's office and start making copies.
What’s the point?
The Arkansas Court of Appeals was right when it ruled Arkansans should be allowed to use their smartphones to take images of public records.
It's almost surprising the sheriff didn't deny access to the electrical outlet.
Now comes this: The Arkansas Court of Appeals ruled a few days ago that Arkansans who ask to see public documents -- ones their tax dollars help to create -- through the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act have the right to photograph those documents using their cellphones.
It's astonishing someone had to sue to get such a common sense ruling.
But the city of Little Rock's attorney doesn't see the common sense at all. He's hoping the city's Board of Directors will let him appeal the case to the Arkansas Supreme Court.
A man who said he was a victim of a hit-and-run accident sought the accident report from the Little Rock Police Department. The agency said he could review the report and offered to make a copy for $10, but would not allow him to take a picture of the report using his smartphone.
The Arkansas Freedom of Information Act declares public records "shall be open to inspection and copying any citizen" of Arkansas.
A year after its passage in 1967, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled the FOIA was passed wholly in the public interest and "is therefore to be liberally interpreted to the end that its purposes may be accomplished."
Does taking a photograph of a record fit within the meaning of making a "copy?" How about using a smartphone with a scanning app not unlike that used in digital copiers?
What is the public interest in Little Rock's stance? Are they that concerned about the public accessing documents? Or is it that $10-a-copy source of revenue the city isn't willing to give up?
Taxpayers have already paid for all the governmental processes that produce the reports, i.e., police officers salaries and clerks' time. They're also paying for the city attorney who is fighting against the public's interests. If an Arkansans wants a photo of a public document, what business is it of government to put a stop to that?
It is unfortunate when government officials let something other than the public interest influence their thinking. The Court of Appeals got it right. If Little Rock appeals, it's our hope the Supreme Court will make that clear.
Commentary on 05/26/2020