State Public Records Often Kept Private, Informal Test Finds

SACRAMENTO —  State government knows, but it won’t tell you.

Want to see the computerized accident records showing how many people died on a particular stretch of California freeway? Forget it, says the Transportation Department. Caltrans attorney Scott Burns said even asking for the agency’s records was unreasonable.

But another agency--the California Highway Patrol--agreed to disclose the identical information, along with all the other information about accidents contained in a broader database known as the Statewide Integrated Traffic Report System, for about $125 in processing costs.

How about the information amassed by the Water Resources Control Board on pits or ponds where toxic materials have been discharged? Not available, at least not from a single source.

Meanwhile, a form letter for requesting the information--worded exactly as suggested by the California Newspaper Publishers Assn.--was criticized by a water resources board attorney as “one of the rudest requests I’ve seen.”

One outfit in California’s secretive government is so secret it won’t even identify its clients, let alone what it does for them: The Teale Data Center, the state’s largest computer facility, was asked for records showing who has given it data to process.

Director Chong Ha replied only with a list of the 352 state units that are authorized to use the center--essentially, all of state government. The center refused to specify which, if any, of the authorized users had asked it to process data, or describe the numbers it had crunched.

For one reason or another, many of the records amassed at taxpayer expense aren’t available to the public, an Associated Press survey found. Moreover, few of the available records are in an electronic form compatible with the age of computers and the Internet.

“I’m hardly shocked,” said Assemblywoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey). “I think it’s just not a priority in many agencies. Sometimes it’s staffing problems. Sometimes it’s other things.

“Overall for the state, access to public records and particularly electronic records has not been a priority,” she said.

In all, the AP asked 29 agencies for electronic copies of 69 sets of records described in “Paper Trails,” a 1996 guide to California public records by investigative reporters Stephen Levine and Barbara Newcombe.

The requests were made under the California Public Records Act, which is intended to ensure public access to government documents.

In writing their book, Levine and Newcombe asked the agencies themselves to describe the databases they maintained, so that--ideally--the people seeking the records and the agency officials handling the requests would be starting from common ground.

It doesn’t always work that way, however. The Corrections Department, asked to supply prison and parole records the agency told “Paper Trails” it maintains, told the AP that it did not keep such records.

The first follow-up phone message with further details to department spokesman Tip Kindel went unreturned. Kindel later acknowledged the existence of the records, but said some aren’t computerized and others can’t be disclosed because the department won’t remove the few items that would violate inmates’ privacy.

*

If you’re interested in details about fatal accidents on the job, don’t look to state government. Industrial Relations Department Director Dorothy Vuksich says federal privacy rules prevent her from releasing details on the deaths of California workers.

Nor can the public see the database that shows who’s providing what kind of farm labor housing. Allowing access to the data could open the door for someone to counterfeit employee housing permits, according to the Department of Housing and Community Development. The record storage format would provide the basics for forged permits, officials said.

Of the 29 agencies, only seven--about a fourth--said they could supply every requested record, either in electronic form or on paper.

“Access to records is critical because it gives the public an eye into what’s happening with their government,” Bowen said. “It’s the way we ensure the proper working of government in a democracy.”

But the administration of Republican Gov. Pete Wilson sees the issue as “a pesky little detail that nobody’s very interested in working on,” Bowen said.

Wilson spokesman Ron Low said, however, that the administration takes the Public Records Act very seriously.

“The Public Records Act is important and we lead by example by giving requests all due attention,” Low said.

“We cannot oversee and moderate all the requests that come into the state agencies and departments, but we demand and insist that they follow the letter and the spirit of the Public Records Act law,” he said.

About half the surveyed agencies met the 10-day deadline under the records act for some kind of response. But many of the responses simply said their agencies needed more time to consider the requests or said that the request had been too vague.

Complaints of vagueness were countered by explaining to agencies that the AP had used the agencies’ own descriptions of the records they maintain, as reported in “Paper Trails.”

Some agencies then set about investigating “Paper Trails” rather than focusing on the records request. Molly Arnold, an attorney for the Department of Housing and Community Development, said her agency had determined the full title of the guide and identified its authors and publishers.

She said the investigation included identifying all references in the book to her “department’s functions, the functions of some of the department’s programs and some of the department’s reports.”

Levine, who is also a writer at the Center for Investigative Reporting in San Francisco, said the departments’ reactions point to a bigger problem.

“People working in government agencies do not often understand the public records law or have a clear sense that the information they work with is public,” he said.

Some databases that sounded interesting have been abandoned by the state, due to problems such as a lack of funds and technical difficulties.

One of the defunct databases, for example, was to contain applications from distinguished minorities and women who were candidates for corporations looking to integrate their governing boards. A lack of funds to properly administer the database led to its downfall.

Among the agencies ready to disclose records, there emerged a few champions of open government. Foremost was the Office of Emergency Services. Nobody performed more quickly or more publicly.

Four days after it was asked for a computer database on hazardous-material spills, the office complied in an unexpected manner: It put the information on its Web site for everyone to access through the Internet. (The address is https://www.oes.ca.gov:8001.)

In the quest for databases, even if they were available, there was sometimes another hitch. The cost of some--especially electronic databases--was outside the reach of the average taxpayer.

The typical cost of available databases was in the hundreds of dollars. The cost is supposed to be only the direct expense of duplication, but that can include pricey mainframe computer-run time.

The most expensive was the $4,000 price tag for the secretary of state’s Uniform Commercial Code files, containing information such as tax liens against businesses.

The second most expensive--at $2,500, plus $1,500 a year for updates--was the Fish and Game Department’s Wildlife Habitat Relationships Databank, which predicts the wildlife likely to occur in a given area.

On the other hand, six computer disks arrived free of charge, though they contained limited details. They came from the Department of Food and Agriculture, Franchise Tax Board, Public Employees’ Retirement System, Department of Fish and Game, Department of Aging and Department of Pesticide Regulation.

The disks contained vastly simplified summaries of data rather than the raw information itself. In some cases, the departments did not specify the software program needed to access the disks.

Availability and price are major factors in acquiring a database. Working out the format, including software type, and the storage vehicle--such as tape, cartridge, diskette or compact disc--can also be tricky. There is no standard format for the state.

Nobody knows the percentage of state records available in electronic format, Bowen said. She has a bill pending in the Legislature that would require government agencies to provide public records in an electronic format if they are already computerized.

Perhaps the best method of providing access is putting the records on the Internet, which Bowen said is a growing trend in state government. But legislation she has drafted that would require Internet posting has been defeated the last two years due to government objections about possible costs.

Yet another challenge in obtaining government records lies in working around the parts of the files that are secret because of personal privacy concerns.

For instance, the Public Employees’ Retirement System said it could supply records on monthly payments to 300,000 pensioners. But the agency said privacy restrictions would force it to delete everything but the numerical listing of monthly check amounts.

Levine says government’s hostility toward public records requests usually stems from the agency’s poor understanding of its own records.

Caltrans attorney Scott Burns’ response to a records request was among the most disapproving.

“The courts look with disfavor upon burdensome, unfocused and unspecific demands for voluminous information,” Burns wrote in response to the request for accident information--the same information the Highway Patrol said it could easily supply. “They also have respected the right of state agencies to avoid ‘entering the printing business’ by imposing reasonable guidelines and restricting requests to copies of specific information or documents.

“Unfortunately, your request was neither reasonable nor specific.”

Then there was the reply from Darryl East of the Fair Political Practices Commission, in denying a request for electronic copies of audits of campaign spending reports:

“Your letter and our response are public records which may be disclosed to the public upon receipt of a proper request for disclosures.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Public Records Request Letter

A form letter for public records requests, suggested by the California Newspaper Publishers Assn:

Date

Chief executive

Agency

Dear . . . :

This letter is to request access to records in the possession of (agency, department, division, etc.) for the purpose of inspection and copying pursuant to the California Public Records Act.

The information that I ask to inspect is as follows: (Describe the record as specifically as possible, including, if known, the form in which it is recorded--writings, maps, computer storage, photographs, audio or video tapes, etc.--and, if known, the designation of the file or register where it is to be found. You need not state any reason for your request.)

This request reasonably describes (an) identifiable record(s) or information produced therefrom, and I believe that there exists no express provision of law exempting the record(s) from disclosure. Pursuant to Government Code Section 6257, I ask that you make the record(s) “promptly available,” for inspection and copying, based on my payment of “fees covering direct costs of duplication, or statutory fee, if applicable.”

If a portion of the information I have requested is exempt from disclosure by express provision of law, Government Code Section 6257 additionally requires segregation and deletion of that material in order that the remainder of the information may be released.

If you determine that an express provision of law exists to exempt from disclosure all or a portion of the material I have requested, Government Code Section 6256 requires notification to me of the reasons for the determination not later than 10 days from your receipt of this request.

Government Code Section 6256.2 prohibits the use of the 10-day period, or any provisions of the Public Records Act “to delay access for purposes of inspecting public records.”

Thank you for your timely attention to my request.

Sincerely,

(Signature)