First Alert 4 Investigates: The price of government information
Imagine being told you owe City Hall half a million dollars! But it’s not for taxes; it’s for simple government information. St. Louis City leaders are accused of hiding public documents through a lawsuit filed by attorney David Roland. Roland's request for government documents was prompted by a Sunshine Request, which allows for the cost of information. The city responded by saying he would need to remit $658,000. Roland argues that this demand is beyond the pale and that the city is refusing to comply with this request unless at least a half million dollars has been put up front. He also accuses the city of attempting to make the process more complicated and burdensome. The Sunshine Law allows officials to charge money for information but it's supposed to be "reasonable." However, Alderwoman Cara Spencer argues these costs seem out of line.
Published : 2 months ago by Lauren Trager in Politics
ST. LOUIS, Mo. (First Alert 4) - Imagine being told you owe City Hall half a million dollars! But it’s not for taxes; it’s for simple government information.
In a new lawsuit, St. Louis City leaders are now accused of hiding public documents. Attorney David Roland said he couldn’t even get a simple contract.
Roland’s representing people with questions about how hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent to makeover St. Louis’ Convention Center.
“It has been extremely expensive already. And people haven’t really seen much being done with this project,” he said.
Way back in January, Roland submitted what’s known as a Sunshine Request, asking for government documents like contracts and correspondence. The city responded by saying he would need to remit $658,000.
“$650,000 is beyond the pale. I’ve never seen a demand that large. And now the city is refusing to do anything related to our Sunshine Law request, unless and until at least a half million dollars has been put up front,” he said.
Sunshine is the word used to mean Freedom of Information in Missouri. It’s why public records have long been a vital part of our democracy—a right of citizens to know what their officials are up to. Missouri’s Sunshine Law allows officials to charge money for information but it’s supposed to be “reasonable,” and Roland told First Alert 4 that amount is anything but.
“They’re trying to make the process as complicated and burdensome as they think they legally can. And that is directly contrary to the whole idea of the Sunshine Law to the whole idea of transparency and accountability,” Roland said.
Roland isn’t alone. Another attorney filed suit last week after a city firefighter was told he’d have to pay more than $130,000 for public records. In documents, the attorney says the city is “playing games...to prevent the disclosure of public records because the city has something to hide.”
“What it shows me is that they clearly want to be as opaque as possible. This is the opposite of transparency,” said Roland.
“Everyone should be concerned about it. Citizens should be concerned about it because the way the city is currently functioning is preventing them from having necessary information about how their government is functioning. And that prevents them from making wise choices about who’s going to fill those roles in the future,” Roland said.
“The mayor should be concerned about it because the mayor campaigned on the idea of being a transparent mayor. But under her administration, that is the opposite of what the city has been doing,” Roland said.
“I don’t know which Sunshines you are referring to,” said Mayor Tishaura Jones when we asked her about the issue recently.
“Sometimes the sunshine requests are enormous amounts of emails and enormous amounts of texts, and they take staff time. But without having particulars, I cannot speak to that,” she said.
After providing her office with specifics, they then declined to comment.
But Alderwoman Cara Spencer told First Alert 4 Investigates those costs seem out of line.
“It absolutely does seem that way to me. I mean, you know, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect anybody or any entity to come forward with that amount of money,” she said.
While charging small amounts for public information, she said, is often necessary: “This is seeming obstruction to sharing basic information about how our government is serving the people that are paying for it, and that’s a problem.”
“It’s a legal right to review records and that’s what I am here to do,” Roland said.
At City Hall, Roland tried invoking a lesser-known law about inspecting records in person.
But even though he was close enough to see a file cabinet labeled “contracts,” no one ever came to help him.
“How do I make an appointment if they won’t talk to me?” said Roland.
Despite posted office hours saying they were open until 5, instead of shining a light, at 4 p.m., the office just went dark.
“They wouldn’t even talk to me. It’s very frustrating and concerning,” said Roland.
That law about inspecting records carries a punishment if a public official refuses to show you records: a criminal misdemeanor or removal from office.
But even Roland acknowledges it’s not been really put to the test, and other attorneys disagree with his interpretation of it.
What do you know? After door-knocking at City Hall, within a few days, the city electronically sent some of the documents, with no cost at all. Still, Roland said it shouldn’t be so hard for citizens and could result in more lawsuits.