Franklin Co. tests state open records law: 2 failures out of 5 info requests
By ANDREA RICH
(Chambersburg) Public Opinion City Editor
Public Opinion participated in the 2009 Audit of Public Access to Government Records, requesting five items from five different departments with two failures among them: Shippensburg Police Department and Franklin County 911.
A person unrecognizable to the officials within a department was given a specific time frame to ask for specific items that are public information under the state's Right-to-Know law. Of them, Shippensburg's Police Department would not only not provide a police log, it wouldn't provide the assistance to access it. Franklin County Control, which operates 911, said the information was not stored in a way that was openly accessible, and that specific items had to be requested and then gathered.
In filling out the audit form, the reporter who went to SPD on Oct. 6 at 11 a.m. to request the police log for the 24 hour period of Oct. 3 was dealt with by a woman who wore no identification.
"She was taken aback at the request and asked my name and why I wanted the information. She then said no, I could not have it," according to the audit form.
Shippensburg's borough Web site did not contain a right-to-know form, neither did it provide information on filing right-to-know requests.
In preparation for publishing the local audit results, Shippensburg Mayor Bruce Hockersmith said, "I'm not sure whether we keep that information locally in the station or at the county level."
He asked for time to confer with Police Chief Fred Scott and then got back to Public Opinion on what could have happened during the audit.
The county dispatch center actually logs the calls and records what Shippensburg officer is responding, the mayor said. As for why the person at the desk did not tell the Public Opinion representative that, "she may not have been aware of what you wanted," Hockersmith said.
He also said the reason staff do not have to identify themselves to the public is a matter of security.
"It is certainly not our intention to be secretive about anything," Hockersmith said. "I expect our police department to be responsive to the public."
In Franklin County, the auditor went to the county control office and was told to get the records in the basement. There, a representative wanted to know who the auditor was, and was told they couldn't see the log without providing that information.
"I asked if the information was necessary to see the log and he said yes because they only give out that information for federal reasons," the auditor reported back. "When I told him I was with Public Opinion (which is a last resort for auditors to use, according to the state audit format) he eased up and said they don't have printouts of the log and they had hundreds of calls."
According to the county control representative, public record of a specific incident can be requested but not a time period worth of calls.
Other agencies that were included in the local audit:
(Chambersburg) Public Opinion City Editor
Public Opinion participated in the 2009 Audit of Public Access to Government Records, requesting five items from five different departments with two failures among them: Shippensburg Police Department and Franklin County 911.
A person unrecognizable to the officials within a department was given a specific time frame to ask for specific items that are public information under the state's Right-to-Know law. Of them, Shippensburg's Police Department would not only not provide a police log, it wouldn't provide the assistance to access it. Franklin County Control, which operates 911, said the information was not stored in a way that was openly accessible, and that specific items had to be requested and then gathered.
In filling out the audit form, the reporter who went to SPD on Oct. 6 at 11 a.m. to request the police log for the 24 hour period of Oct. 3 was dealt with by a woman who wore no identification.
"She was taken aback at the request and asked my name and why I wanted the information. She then said no, I could not have it," according to the audit form.
Shippensburg's borough Web site did not contain a right-to-know form, neither did it provide information on filing right-to-know requests.
In preparation for publishing the local audit results, Shippensburg Mayor Bruce Hockersmith said, "I'm not sure whether we keep that information locally in the station or at the county level."
He asked for time to confer with Police Chief Fred Scott and then got back to Public Opinion on what could have happened during the audit.
The county dispatch center actually logs the calls and records what Shippensburg officer is responding, the mayor said. As for why the person at the desk did not tell the Public Opinion representative that, "she may not have been aware of what you wanted," Hockersmith said.
He also said the reason staff do not have to identify themselves to the public is a matter of security.
"It is certainly not our intention to be secretive about anything," Hockersmith said. "I expect our police department to be responsive to the public."
In Franklin County, the auditor went to the county control office and was told to get the records in the basement. There, a representative wanted to know who the auditor was, and was told they couldn't see the log without providing that information.
"I asked if the information was necessary to see the log and he said yes because they only give out that information for federal reasons," the auditor reported back. "When I told him I was with Public Opinion (which is a last resort for auditors to use, according to the state audit format) he eased up and said they don't have printouts of the log and they had hundreds of calls."
According to the county control representative, public record of a specific incident can be requested but not a time period worth of calls.
Other agencies that were included in the local audit:
- Fannett-Metal School District for a copy of the superintendent's contract. The newspaper's representative went in person, was told to use the Right-to-Know form on the district's Web site and did so. The contract was received in the mail just a few days later.
- Borough of Chambersburg Police Department for a resume. Public Opinion chose to request Police Chief David Arnold's resume. The department representative asked the auditor to fill out a request form, and also did ask who was asking and why it was needed (though the auditor, as stated in the guidelines did not answer - nor did they have to). A few days later the auditor was called and told the resume was available to either look at in-office or pay for copies. In the meantime, the chief of police called Public Opinion to see if anyone there had come in asking for his resume, and wanted to know what the paper needed it for. The auditor went to the police station and looked at the resume to conclude the process.
- Greene Township for the most recent three grant applications. The township representative presented a right-to-know form to the auditor, and the auditor was told the township would call within five days. The call followed, with the auditor given the opportunity to either look at the grant applications at the office or pay for copies. The auditor went and looked at the applications in person, to conclude the process.
