After months of confusion, The Spanish Fork News will receive the two police initial contact reports it sought.

The State Records Committee ruled unanimously in favor of reporter Hilarie Orman and directed the Utah County Sheriff's Office to provide the reports it has been denying her for months.

Confusion replaced drama at today's hearing. A representative from the Utah County Attorney's Office actually agreed with Orman that the documents she sought were public. The attorney said her office did not understand what Orman was seeking. The office, and apparently the county commission, too, thought Orman wanted other related documents and not an initial contact report.

Initial contact reports are public under state law. I listened to this morning's hearing and the back and forth discussions over how the two sides got confused, but I still don't understand what the problem was.

Maybe Orman could have been more clear. Also, maybe Utah County could have been more open with its documentation in order to let Orman take what she wanted.

It's also still apparent to me Utah County was placing the burden on Orman to show why the record should be released. That is not how the law works. The burden is on government to show why the record should not be disclosed.

— NC

Labels: Crime, State Records Committee, Utah County

For the full meeting notice, go here.

STATE RECORDS COMMITTEE MEETING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

The State Records Committee will hold a meeting on 9:30 a.m. Thursday, February 12 in the Courtyard Meeting Room, State Archives Building, 346 South Rio Grande Street (450 West), Salt Lake City. This is a public meeting. Committee business and three hearings are scheduled.

*First Hearing – Tina Wollenberger vs. Summit County. Ms. Wollenberger is appealing the denial of copies of a video taped interview of her minor son by the Summit County Sheriff’s Office.

*Second Hearing – Hilarie Orman, Spanish Fork News vs. Utah County. Ms. Orman is appealing the denial of incident reports from the Utah County Sheriff’s Office.


*Approval of the January 8, 2009, meeting minutes of the State Records Committee

*Introduction of Scott Daniels, Citizen Representative

*Approval of Retention Schedule Items

*Discussion of Administrative Rules changes

*Annual Report for 2008

*Other Business

*Adjournment – Next meeting scheduled – Thursday, March 12, 2009

Individuals wishing to comment during the meeting should notify Susan Mumford, Executive Secretary of the State Records Committee, and should be in attendance at the public meeting. The executive secretary will also accept written comments before the meeting but no later than February 9, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. Please mail or deliver those comments to:

State Records Committee
Utah State Archives
346 S. Rio Grande
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101

Labels: Crime, State Records Committee, Utah County

Even though it doesn't have to, Utah County will allow Hilarie Orman to appeal to the State Records Committee.

Orman, of the Spanish Fork News, has been trying to obtain two police reports from the Utah County Sheriff's Office. The sheriff's office denied her request and then the Utah County Commission denied her appeal.

Orman thought she would be allowed to appeal both denials to the State Records Committee. But the secretary for the committee told Orman that Utah County had "opted out" of the state process — an option available to counties and municipalities in Utah if they formulate their own records process.

Then Utah County talked to the secretary and said, no, its procedures are to allow appeals to the state. It turns out the county just hadn't updated its ordinances.

If you're head is spinning, so was Orman's. But the bottom line is: She has another shot at the two police reports.

No agenda has been set yet, but the committee's next meeting is Feb. 12.

— NC

Labels: State Records Committee, Utah County

In another reminder of how public access laws are considered important to international human rights, the prime minister of Grenada says he will introduce freedom of information laws to that country.

Meanwhile, the fight for public access continues here in the homeland. The Utah County Commission has denied an appeal filed by Hilarie Orman of the Spanish Fork News.



Orman is seeking two benign police reports from the Utah County Sheriff's Office. But the sheriff's office, and now the county commission, says the reports are protected records.

Orman is considering an appeal to the State Records Committee.

Labels: Crime, Utah County

Upgrading streets, fiber-optic networks and baseball diamonds might fix the economy in Utah and elsewhere, according to the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

The Conference released a survey earlier this month of municipal infrastructure projects that are "ready to go" and can create jobs. A PDF of the report can be found here. A handful of Utah cities submitted projects.

Most of the requests from Utah are for street, sewer or water improvements. Salem, population 5,900, also wants $20 million for a recreation complex it says will create 200 jobs. Salt Lake City wants about $1.5 million to improve bleachers and concession stands at baseball diamonds.

Here's a list by city.

My favorite request: the Provo Police Department wants $663,000 for an "indoor gun range with noise attenuation." I'm sure the Obama stimulus package will hear you loud and clear, guys.

CNN viewed the list and found some peculiar requests. Nothing from Utah received mention.

— NC

That photo is not of Provo police officers, though it may very well be an accurate representation of their current firing range.

Labels: Bailouts, Utah County

If you work in the public sector — or know someone who does — you've probably had fun with UtahsRight.com.

Who doesn't like learning how much money someone earns? Eric Watson, who works here in The Tribune newsroom, compiles the list through record requests sent to agencies.

Usually, the agency supplies the information in an electronic spreadsheet. But there's one town that does not give Watson digital data.

Provo prints the names and salaries of its employees and mails it to Watson. Yes, prints it on paper. Yes, through the U.S. Postal Service.

Watson explains:

They’re worried I could screw with their data. You hear of people not trusting the government all the time, but it’s rare when the government doesn’t trust the people, eh?

Watson said he has tried, without success, persuading Provo's human resources department to supply electronic data. Utah law does not mandate supplying documents in electronic format. So Watson scans the hard copies into a digital file.

Watson said that actually increases the potential for errors. Sometimes the computer misreads what the scanner produced. Zeros can become opened and closed parenthesis. A "2" can become a "Z."

Watson said he works to eliminate errors, but the increased likelihood of mistakes exists.

— NC

Labels: Utah County

Let's see if I have this correct.

A couple stood up at a public meeting and advocated for something. Then the couple asked the local newspaper not to name them because they did not want to draw attention to the issue?

Then the newspaper complied with the request and granted anonymity to the couple who just influenced public policy?

So much for newspapers being spotlights on public business.

This strange turn of events occurred at a meeting of the Alpine City Council, which considered whether to amend the town's off-road vehicle ordinance. A local couple asked the ordinance be amended to allow their Japanese mini-truck on city streets.

The couple then asked the Provo Daily Herald not to name them, according to the newspaper's article on the meeting.

The city of Alpine, however, had the good sense to keep the public business public. The city's Website has documents online suggesting the couple is Roy and Linda Pehrson. The documents, in the Dec. 16 meeting packet, include the Pehrsons' rationale for seeking the ordinance be amended.

— NC

Labels: Open and Public Meetings Act, Utah County

Two months after her original record request was denied, Hilarie Orman has an appeal hearing Tuesday in front of the Utah County Commission.

Orman, of the Spanish Fork News, has had a few bumps on her way to what should be a routine matter.

As I wrote in October, Orman requested reports on a trespassing case and a motorcycle crash. The Utah County Sheriff's Office denied her request, claiming the reports are protected under the law and therefore not public.

Orman appealed the decision to the Utah County Commission. It should take no more than a couple weeks to schedule an appeal hearing. Here's what happened, according to an e-mail from Orman.

I filed my appeal with the Utah County Commission in mid-October and have called about it weekly since. The county commission forwarded it to Utah County Attorney a few weeks after receiving my fax.

The county attorney's office assigned it to someone on vacation. Then Diane Orcutt, the head of the civil division... told me that she was reviewing the records and that I would hear from her soon, within a few days.

The next week her secretary said that a hearing was being scheduled and that I would hear from her "shortly". The next week I called the county commission asking if the hearing had been scheduled, and they told me it had.

I asked why I hadn't been told and what day and time were involved. They said to call Diane Orcutt. Her secretary said it was for December 9, and that I would hear this from Diane "shortly". I said that I had a business meeting in Boston that day and asked to have it postponed to December 16. They said OK, and took the message. I still have not received any formal notice of a hearing, but I plan to call them next week when I return from Boston.

After Orman's hearing, the commission can order the records released or uphold the sheriff's decision. If Orman is unsatisfied with the commission's ruling, she can appeal to the State Records Committee.

— NC

Labels: GRAMA, Police, Utah County