Oklahoma Gubernatorial Candidates Support Applying Open Records Act to Legislature

The Oklahoman reports all six candidates to succeed Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry have said they support making the state's Open Records Act applicable to the Legislature.

Oklahoma is one of only nine other states that have wholly exempted legislative records from open records laws. In some states, records maintained by individual lawmakers are considered confidential, but the records maintained by the legislative bodies and committees are open.

Read more here.

Oklahoma Considers Withholding Information in Autopsy Reports

The Oklahoma House passed a bill that would amend the state's Open Records Act to allow the Office of Chief Medical Examiner to withhold certain information in an autopsy report when the manner of death is homicide, unknown or pending. Under the proposed measure, only when the information is available in court proceedings would the information become public.

The Oklahoma Press Association favors a measure that would balance law enforcement's need for time to investigate matters with the access to information for accurate reports in the media.

Click here for more.

Proposed Laws Would Add Exemptions to Oklahoma's Sunshine Laws

Oklahomans might have less access to information if several bills pending in the legislature are passed. The Durant Daily Democrat reports there are at least six bills pending that would add exemptions to the state's sunshine laws, preventing access to autopsy reports, birth dates of public employees, municipal court information and records from the Oklahoma Film and Music Office.

Read more about the proposed exemptions here.

Oklahoma Senator Rethinks Support for Bill to Keep Birth Dates Private

Oklahoma Senate Pro Tempore Glenn Coffee (R-Oklahoma City) signaled that he has reconsidered his position on a bill to keep public employees' birth dates confidential. He, along with the rest of the Oklahoma Senate, voted in favor of Senate Bill 1753 without debate or questions.

The Oklahoman quotes Coffee as saying, "Upon further review, I think I would have changed my vote. I think you have to have access to that information and the First Amendment matters, like all of the Constitution. We need to preciously guard that. Are there abuses? Sure. Does that mean you don't protect the First Amendment and what it stands for? No, I don't think so."

For more on the status of Senate Bill 1753, read here.

Bill to Make Public Employees' Birth Dates Private Passes Oklahoma Senate

The Oklahoma Senate passed a bill that would keep the birth dates of public employees confidential. Proponents say the measure would protect an employee's privacy, but open records advocates point out that birth dates are often the only way to identify an individual correctly from a database. For example, The Oklahoman compared state sex offender registry with the state's January payroll data and found that 778 state employees share first and last names with registered sex offenders. The overlap includes child care workers, law enforcement investigators, and a state Supreme Court justice.

Read more here.

Oklahoma Bill Would Exempt Government Employees' Birth Dates from Public Disclosure

An Oklahoma state legislator has filed a bill that would exempt government employees' birth dates from the state Open Records Act, which critics say would make it virtually impossible to identify state employees and determine if they have committed crimes, avoided taxes, filed for bankruptcy or made political contributions.

The Oklahoman has reported that more than 250 Oklahoma City and Oklahoma County employees match those of registered sex offenders, though the paper isn't able to confirm identities because city and county officials have refused to disclose their employees' birth dates.

The state attorney general recently opined that birth dates are presumed open and may only be withheld on a case-by-case basis upon a showing that the disclosure would amount to an unwarranted invasion of privacy.

Read more about the proposed legislation here.

Oklahoma Attorney General Opinion Leaves Agencies with Discretion to Release Employees' Birth Dates

Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson has released an opinion that leaves it to government agencies to decide whether to release public employees' birth dates. The opinion states government agencies have the discretion to determine whether the release of an employee's birth date falls within the exemption to the state's Open Records Act that allows records to be kept confidential if releasing them would be an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."

The opinion came in response to Oklahoma City's refusal to release the birth date of the city's Weed and Seed program director, Ed Martin, who was placed on administrative leave after city officials found federal grant funds had been mismanaged. The Oklahoman, arguing it is impossible to match common names without a birth date, sought Martin's birth date in order to conduct background research after he was identified as part of the investigation.

For more information, click here.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Decision Troubles Open Records Advocates

A ruling by the Oklahoma Supreme Court effectively carves out an exception to the state's Open Records Act by forbidding the release of all the state's electronic case information under the state Open Records Act.  The ruling also affirms public access to electronic court records on a case-by-case basis.  

The Court rejected the bulk data request of INAD Data Services LLC for electronic copies of all district court and workers' compensation court case information.  

Controversy started brewing when it came to light that another company, KellPro Inc. has a $1 million contract with the state Supreme Court to get electronic court records from 64 counties ready for a unified system of public access on the Web. 

State Rep. Mike Reynolds (R-Oklahoma City) criticized the Court for contracting with one private company to provide data while simultaneously cutting off access to other companies.  

Get more details here. 

An Oklahoma D.A. Charges 8 Officials with Open Meetings Act Violations

Larry Moore, the Muskogee County district attorney, is throwing the book at eight county officials, including the Sheriff, Police Chief, County Commissioner, and members of the Criminal Trust Authority.  Between them, they're charged with 38 misdemeanor counts of violating Oklahoma's Open Meetings Act.   

A violation of the open-meeting law could result in a fine of up to $500 and up to one year in jail.

Way to go, Larry!  Get more details here. 

Visiting Dignitaries Cost Floridians

The Miami Herald reports that Floridians picked up a $300,000 tab for security and protection costs of visiting dignitaries for the fiscal year ending June 30. Part of a reciprocal agreement with other states to guarantee the protection of high-profile leaders, Florida Department of Law Enforcement officials say the state's costs are so high because it's a popular destination spot.

Floridians paid $10,664 for Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry to attend a family friend's wedding last summer and the BCS Championship football game in January. They also paid $6,300 for South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's four visits to the Sunshine State.

More here.

Oklahoma City Refuses to Release Employee Birth Dates, Citing Identity Theft Concerns

In what one open government expert calls "absurd" and a misinterpretation of a law designed to prevent the state Public Safety Department from releasing their driver's license records, Oklahoma City officials denied the request of The Oklahoman for a city employee's date of birth. In denying the request, the city cited two exceptions to the Oklahoma Open Records Act, which prevent the disclosure of "personal information within driver records" and records that "constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."

Open records advocates criticize the city's refusal, saying there is no statistical or anecdotal evidence showing public records are a source for identity thieves. Experts also note that the information sought is not private because it can be located in other public records.

For the complete story, click here.

NFOIC Summit: Oklahoma FOI roundup

State-by-state updates at the 2009 NFOIC Summit: Joey Senat with Oklahoma State University School of Journalism and Broadcasting provided a summary of his state's FOI news.

• The attorney general issued a binding decision regarding private technologies. The public access to it depends on the nature of the document not the technology. If it has to do with public business, it's public. The Oklahoma Department of Libraries helped make that request. The state also has a statute related to records retention, which is what the library was interested in. There's still an need to talk to state agencies on what to do with the records they are now keeping.
• Enforcement of open-government laws falls to local district attorneys, which is a problem. The Court of Civil Appeals says said if you violate the open meetings law based on advice from your attorney, it's still a violation. You're supposed to know what the law is.
  

Okla. judge releases 911 tape

The recording of a 911 call from a Pryor, Okla., woman who drowned after her car was swept into the floodwaters was released, Tulsa World reported. An attorney representing the victim's family argued that the release served no public purpose and would cause the family "severe and irreparable injury and harm" in the form of "emotional trauma."

A Mayes County judge on Monday approved the release of a 911 recording from a Pryor woman who died this month after her car was swept away in floodwaters.

In issuing his order, District Judge Terry McBride blocked a permanent injunction sought by William Kendrick against 911 service operator Mayes Emergency Services Trust, which contacted the Kendrick family after receiving media requests for the recording. William Kendrick's daughter, Kimberlyn Rae Kendrick, pleaded for help in a 911 call to the emergency service before she drowned May 2.

On Monday, McBride told the court that Kimberlyn's "final words seem private. However, there is no exception in the Oklahoma (Open) Records Act that I could find to deny access to those public records."

More here.

Great news for open government in Oklahoma

From Dr. Joey Senat, Associate Professor at OSU School of Journalism and Broadcasting:

Records of government business belong to the public even if they are created, received or stored on an official's private smart phone or laptop, according to an Oklahoma AG opinion released Thursday.

"To conclude otherwise would allow public officials and employees to circumvent the open records laws simply by using privately owned personal electronic communication devices to conduct public business," the opinion said.

The opinion also prohibits public officials and employees from altering or destroying public records on their private communication devices unlessallowed to do under the state Records Management Act.

"E-mails, text messages and other electronic communications made or received in connection with the transaction of public business, the expenditure of public funds or the administration of public property are subject to the Oklahoma Open Records Act, [its exemptions] and the Records Management Act regardless of whether they are created, received, transmitted or maintained by government officials on publicly or privately owned equipment and communications devices," the opinion concluded.

Unlike in many other states, attorney general opinions in Oklahoma are binding unless overturned by a court.

Opinion 09-12 noted that government officials and employees increasingly use privately owned "computers, laptops, cell phones, PDAs, smart phones, and other personal electronic communication devices in conjunction with their work."

Public access to such electronic communications became an issue in April 2008. OSU student Jenny Redden, for an independent study with me, reported in The Daily O'Collegian that OSU President Burns Hargis and several hundred other university employees conduct the public's business on their smart phones or cell phones.

OSU administrators claimed the related text-messages, e-mails and numbers dialed were secret. They contended that the ownership of the cellular device, not the substance of its related records, should decide whether those records are public.

That policy earned OSU officials the annual Black Hole Award from FOI Oklahoma Inc. in March.

The notion put forth by OSU poses a serious threat to open government because it contains no limiting principle. If a record is secret because it's on the mayor¹s iPhone, then so are documents on the mayor's own laptop even if he's conducting the public's business on it while seated at his office desk.

Courts and attorneys general in other states have rejected the reasoning used by OSU officials, holding that it is the nature of the record created that determines if it is open to the public.

Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondon's office followed suit, saying that nowhere in the Open Records Act "is ownership of equipment mentioned as a factor in determining what is or is not a record."

"We conclude that who owns an electronic communications device has no bearing on whether an electronic communication created or received on that device is a record," the opinion said. "Thus, a communication that meets the definition of a record under the ORA is subject to disclosure regardless of whether it is created or received on a publicly or privately owned personal electronic communication device, unless some provision of law allows it to be kept confidential.

"Nor does the location of the electronic communications equipment matter, whether it is used in a governmental office, in a public official's or employee's home, or somewhere in transit between them," the opinion said.

The opinion also reasoned: "Like the ORA, the RMA makes no distinction between records that exist on publicly owned electronic communication equipment and those on privately owned equipment. Therefore, public officials may not partially or wholly mutilate, destroy, transfer, remove, alter, or otherwise damage or dispose of records on their personal electronic communications devices, except as provided by law."

Read the AG's opinion here.

Jenny's series on open government at OSU can be found at:
http://ocolly.com/2008/04/17/employee-phone-policy-violates-open-records-law
-experts-say/

http://ocolly.com/2008/04/17/osu-could-cut-costs-by-changing-cell-policy/

http://ocolly.com/2008/04/30/regents%E2%80%99-voting-record-under-investigation/


Thank you to Drew Edmondson and Assistant Attorney General Debra Schwartz for this written opinion. It will go a long way toward protecting open government in Oklahoma.

Thank you, also, to Susan McVey, director of the Oklahoma Department of Libraries, and Bill Young, the department's public information administrator, for requesting the opinion.

Paper warns that Okla. bill may mean innocent citizens are sent to prison

Citizens beware! That's the message the Ada (Okla.) Evening News conveyed in its editorial on a bill that "would allow the chief medical examiner to withhold the public release of autopsy reports." Without access to records, Oklahoma is opening itself up to possible corruption.

Oklahoma House of Representatives Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee Feb. 4 postponed consideration of a bill that would allow the chief medical examiner to withhold the public release of autopsy reports.

The bill was requested by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation following the release of autopsy reports on the unsolved murder of two girls near Weleetka in 2008.

On the surface the bill sounds like a good move, however the committee should throw the bill out and not even consider closing these records to the public. When the government starts closing records to the public it opens the door for corruption. One closed record will soon be followed by another until the public no longer has the right to know the truth.

More here.

OKlahoma Judicial Access Update

Thanks to a reader for this update:

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has withdrawn its order restricting public access to court records.

The decision Tuesday came after complaints from lawyers, free-speech advocates, law enforcement, court clerks, journalists and companies that perform background checks that the restrictions, intended to prevent identity theft, were too far reaching.

The new rules, which were to take effect June 10, would have required removal of personal information such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and other data from court filings. The rules also would have prohibited the posting of court pleadings on the Internet.

The Supreme Court, in a brief statement from the office of Chief Justice James R. Winchester, said it was withdrawing the order to allow time for further study and consideration of the issue.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Opinion A Blow To Access...

I'm needing to get a copy of this opinion, which sounds pretty grim...

Oklahomans' access to court records on the Internet will be limited by rules adopted Tuesday by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

The court said individual pleadings and other recorded documents filed in state court actions shall not be publicly displayed on the Internet. People wanting to see this information can go to the courthouse and view it.

The court said it issued the rules in order to balance the rights of privacy of individuals who use Oklahoma's court system and public access to court documents. The rules affect operations of the state's district courts.

These rules regarding privacy and public access to court documents will be effective June 10.

The rules also say people filing cases should omit personal identifiers such as Social Security numbers, taxpayer identification numbers, names of minor children, dates of birth, financial account numbers and home addresses.

Omitting these things from documents was called "outrageous overreaching” by Joey Senat, past president of FOI Oklahoma and an Oklahoma State University journalism professor specializing in freedom of information.

More here.

More here, including a great debunking of the identitfy theft FOI issue...

Oklahoma Court Plan Greatly Curtails Online Access

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has adopted rules cutting off public access to court records now available on the Internet.

When the rules go into effect on June 10, online access to court documents in the Supreme Court and district courts would be limited to court dockets only.

"The individual pleadings and other recorded documents filed of record in state court actions shall not be publicly displayed on the Internet," according to an order signed by Chief Justice James R. Winchester and four other justices.

The order, released on Tuesday, described the new rules as an effort to balance the rights of privacy of individuals and public access.

Besides eliminating Internet access, the order puts new restrictions on what information the public can access from legal documents filed with court clerks.

More here.