Seal Beach Records Are a Mystery to Many : Government: Officials say that time and city's interests keep documents out of residents' hands.

By SHANNON SANDS

July 5, 1991 12 AM PT

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

SEAL BEACH — Reviewing police brutality claims in Seal Beach is difficult because the city’s policy is to keep those and other records secret.

For example, when Kelly Stofas asked for money from Seal Beach and Los Alamitos last year, claiming off-duty police officers from both cities had beaten him, the rejected claim document was available in Los Alamitos. But just a few miles away in Seal Beach, it was off limits.

Some Seal Beach residents say it’s not much easier to look at a variety of other city records that are routinely available in other cities under the state’s Public Records Act.

Mayor Frank Laszlo said the only complaints he has received about the city’s public records policy concern requests for information about claims against the city. Laszlo said he supports the policy of keeping claims information from the public but said other documents “should be available.”

“I’m sure the staff will take care of requests,” Councilwoman Edna Wilson added. “I don’t understand why there would be any problem.”

But in the past, city officials have:

* Refused resident Reva Olson’s request to see a list of checks the city issued to pay its bills. After involving a lawyer, a local newspaper and the City Council, Olson was able to see the list.

* Required a written request from The Times before providing a copy of the city’s 1990-91 budget, a document that the state Public Records Act says should be available for inspection during business hours. The city’s policy is that all requests for information must be submitted in writing.

* Refused a request from residents Marie and Charles Antos for financial information when the city spent more than $1 million more than budgeted for a new pier. The Antoses said they never received a reason for the refusal. City Clerk Joanne M. Yeo said she can’t recall the request and can’t imagine any reason it would be refused.

“A lot of people are afraid because they’ll be quizzed about why they want the information,” said Marie Antos. “You have to have a friend of a friend of a friend to get the information for you. That’s the way it’s always been. But it’s just not right. They don’t treat all individuals the same.”

Resident Barbara Antoci said she finds it easier to go through council members when she wants financial information.

“I have my own ways of getting information, but that shouldn’t be necessary,” Antoci said. “These things should be public information.”

Seal Beach officials cite various reasons for not providing documents. In some cases, they say, they do not have the time to retrieve the documents immediately and promise to do so at a later date. In other instances, they say, releasing the information could hurt the city’s ability to defend itself legally.

In any case, requests to see documents must be in writing, and the city has 10 days in which to respond, City Manager Jerry L. Bankston said.

Most cities do not require a written request to examine such documents, but Bankston and other city staffers say they are acting within the law. The Public Records Act gives agencies 10 days to provide copies of requested documents but states that the documents must be available for inspection during business hours “without delay.”

Bankston, who became city manager June 5, said he may review the city’s policy concerning the release of some documents. For example, after refusing a request by The Times to see a list of checks the city issued to pay its bills, Bankston later said officials would compile the records. They are now available to the public.

Yeo said that sometimes--especially in the period before the June 4 election--she was too busy to provide documents immediately. She said she tries to get the information to people who request it as quickly as possible.

However, some information, such as that about claims of damage or injury filed against the city and lawsuit settlements, has been private for at least 20 years.

The city’s liability attorney, Ivan Stevenson, says claims are off limits to the public because they are “pertaining to litigation,” one of the exemptions included in the Public Records Act. Releasing claims would also violate the privacy of those who file them, he said. “You have to watch what you release. . . . You can cause very serious community backlash.”

Councilman Gwen Forsythe agreed. “It’s in the city’s best interests not to release information about a settlement or a claim. That’s common sense,” she said. “I don’t think you can be forced to do something that can hurt you.”

While claims are off limits in Seal Beach, Tustin and many other cities include them in packages of information that accompany meeting agendas. In some cities, they are also available in the city clerk’s office for inspection. “I think the law does require that claims be made public,” said James G. Rourke, the city attorney for Tustin.

Court rulings have also held that claims are public records.

A state appellate court ruled in a case against the Orange County Board of Supervisors that the “the public interest in finding out how decisions to spend public funds are formulated and in ensuring governmental processes remain open and subject to public scrutiny” outweighed any public interest served by settling claims secretly. An appellate court also rejected the privacy argument in ruling against Orange County when it refused to release medical records attached to a claim.

The state attorney general’s office in 1988 also issued an opinion that said claims should be public. The argument that they are “pertaining to litigation” is invalid because the claim precedes the litigation, wrote Deputy Dist. Atty. Ronald M. Weiskopf.