Commonwealth Court: County must give locations with 911 call logs
York, PA -
The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has ruled that the public is entitled to information identifying the location of 911 calls as part of open records requests.
The court released the ruling Wednesday, overturning a decision in 2009 by York County Judge Richard K. Renn to the effect that the county was entitled to withhold that information.
The decision originated with York Daily Record reporter Ted Czech's 2009 request for county 911 time response logs, including addresses.
Attorney Niles Benn, who represented the York Daily Record/Sunday News in the case, said county officials have 30 days to petition the Pennsylvania Supreme Court if they wish to appeal the decision. Even if the county does appeal, it's up to the state Supreme Court whether to hear the case.
The county denied the locations after Czech's initial request, citing privacy and the industry standard for logs. The newspaper appealed to the state Office of Open Records, maintaining that a meaningful analysis of response times isn't possible without a list of destinations.
The Office of Open Records granted the Daily Record's appeal. The county then appealed to Common Pleas Court, which led to Renn's decision. The Daily Record, in turn, appealed to Commonwealth Court.
York County solicitor Mike Flannelly said county officials still have to decide whether to appeal again. He said they will likely seek input from other organizations that have sided with the county on the issue, including the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence -- which has argued that public disclosure of street addresses would pose a danger to domestic violence victims.
Flannelly said county officials are disappointed. But they see an upside in the fact that the ruling doesn't specify the county has to turn over specific addresses. The decision says the requester would be satisfied with the location of nearby cross streets, making it possible to determine the general location of emergency response calls.
"The absolute, primary concern dealt with the privacy rights of victims of crime and individuals with serious health concerns," Flannelly said.
Benn said he made it clear to the county prior to arguments before Renn that the Daily Record would be satisfied with locations of nearby cross streets rather than specific addresses. But he said the county still declined, so the case proceeded.
Benn considers it to be a "case of first impression," meaning one that will have a bearing on any future legal cases about the issue in Pennsylvania.
Melissa Melewsky, media law attorney for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, said Wednesday's decision could have significant implications for Right-to-Know requests in the state.
"I certainly think it clears up an ambiguous issue," Melewsky said. "It could have been very bad for public accountability if it went the other way."
Terry Mutchler, executive director of the state Office of Open Records, is also pleased with the ruling. The Office of Open Records had sided with the Daily Record on the issue.
She was particular pleased with a portion reaffirming that the Right-to-Know law puts the burden on government to show why records are not public, rather than on members of the public to show why they are.
"That is one of the premiere points of this law," Mutchler said.
Definition
According to the Commonwealth Court decision issued Wednesday, Pennsylvania's Right to Know law defines "record" as:
"Information, regardless of physical form or characteristics, that documents a transaction or activity of an agency and that is created, received or retained pursuant to law or in connection with a transaction, business or activity of the agency. The term includes a document, paper, letter, map, book, tape, photograph, film or sound recording, information stored or maintained electronically and a data-processed or image-processed document."
No comments:
Post a Comment