State laws can become mired in Byzantine syntax and stuffy legalese, but not so the North Carolina statute regarding public records. Basically, it says government documents “are the property of the people” and that, when requested, copies of those documents should be provided “as promptly as possible” at “free or at minimal cost.”
Governor McCrory’s administration apparently needs a quick review of the law’s terminology and its intent — which is to ensure citizens have unfettered access to government information. The governor’s staff believes the “minimal cost” provision gives it authority to assess a special charge on records requests that take more than 30 minutes to fulfill. The rate some state agencies have imposed can range from $21.73 to $54.47 an hour. With fees that steep, you have to wonder — is the governor’s office just miffed at reporters digging into stories it would prefer not exposed, or does it see this as a way to raise revenue?
Either way, it’s a blatant perversion of public records law. Taxpayers are already paying the salaries of the employees handling these requests — and the employees are required by law to comply. While it may be reasonable to require a nominal fee to cover the costs of copy paper or disks containing digital records, adding this kind of hourly rate is double-billing. It creates an obstacle for those seeking copies of public documents and hence is opposed by the N.C. Press Association and other advocates of government transparency.
Don’t think it concerns only “the media” and state government. If state officials can set this precedent, there’s nothing to stop local officials from imposing something similar to deter engaged citizens making pesky records requests. Mike Tadych, a Raleigh lawyer who specializes in First Amendment cases, told the Associated Press this kind of fee can have “enormous impact on accessibility of public information and is inconsistent with the notion that these records belong to the people.”
As we’ve seen with local controversies about building a school administration building and the county’s proposed purchase of the Salisbury Mall, citizens want information about government procedures, whether at the federal, state or local level. Having access to government records and documents is essential if citizens are to contribute to the decision-making process as well as assess the rationale behind the decisions ultimately made.
Rather than make public documents harder to access, officials should encourage citizen involvement — and media scrutiny — by making public records requests as convenient and cost-free as possible. Citizens are already paying for government. They shouldn’t be billed a second time for seeking information about its procedures.