Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Greater Access For Public
 |
| Dave Bordewyk, general manager of the South Dakota Newspaper Association, explains how a new state law will affect the printing of a budget and other legal proceedings in newspapers. During Thursday’s regional meeting in Yankton, Bordewyk and SDNA members also talked about other new state laws and a pending court case that will affect open records and open meetings in South Dakota. (photo by Randy Dockendorf/P&D) |
New Law Eases Restrictions On Viewing Of Public Records
BY RANDY DOCKENDORF
randy.dockendorf@yankton.net
South Dakotans can now ask for public records without needing to justify their request, which puts them on par with the rest of the nation, a state newspaper leader said Thursday.
Newspaper staffs, including the Press & Dakotan, and educators learned more about the new law from Dave Bordewyk, general manager of the South Dakota Newspaper Association (SDNA). The Yankton session was one of a series of SDNA regional meetings around the state.
“I don’t think people will rush down to the courthouse or city hall because we have the new law,” he said. “But if they do go to the courthouse or city hall and look for a public record, the law is more on their side.”
The landmark law assumes government documents and records in South Dakota are open to the public, unless there is a good reason to keep them secret. The new law took effect July 1.
The law was approved unanimously by the state Legislature and signed by Gov. Mike Rounds earlier this year. The new law gives citizens the right to access and view public records.
The new South Dakota legislation, based on Nebraska law, represents a major shift in thinking, Bordewyk said.
“Before, the burden was on you (as a citizen) to show why you should see a public record,” he said. “Now, the burden is on the public official to show why it should be kept confidential.”
Those who fought to keep records secret were portraying the new law as pushed by reporters, Bordewyk said.
“The open records law is a huge step forward for all South Dakotans, not just the media,” he said.
In fact, Bordewyk said he has received calls from citizens frustrated in their attempts to access public documents.
“Joe Citizen has gone to the courthouse and has found that he couldn’t get information,” he said. “That’s what was encouraging this whole process, what the laws about open records and open meetings are all about.”
Bordewyk noted that many citizens are unfamiliar with requesting public records because they don’t do it very often. Many residents don’t even know they can request court records and other documents.
Bordewyk expects the process will grow as citizens become more informed and more accustomed to seeking public records.
“Public records are part of a fundamental right of the public to know what government is up to,” he said. “(Citizens) should be comfortable and shouldn’t be challenged when they ask to view public records.”
Residents of other states have routinely viewed public documents for years, Bordewyk said.
“The presumption across the nation is that you have the right to see a public record,” he said. “In fact, South Dakota is the last state to have open access.”
The new South Dakota law includes categories of information that can be maintained confidentially by state and local government. The exceptions include certain law enforcement records; the correspondence, appointment and phone call logs of government officials; and medical records kept by government.
The battle to maintain the public’s right to know is not limited to records, Bordewyk said. The SDNA has fought for open meetings, whereas the current law is often used by government bodies to go into executive, or closed, session.
The SDNA is carefully watching the Mitchell Daily Republic’s open-meetings lawsuit against the City of Mitchell, Bordewyk said.
In meeting with its attorney, the City of Mitchell believes the attorney-client relationship was sufficient enough reason to meet in closed session, Bordewyk said.
On Wednesday, Judge Sean O’Brien struck down four of the city’s arguments in the lawsuit. However, the judge also ruled that the newspaper is not seeking the right kind of remedy.
The Daily Republic’s attorney has said the lawsuit will continue.
Bordewyk believes the City of Mitchell’s interpretation goes beyond state law. A closed session should be used for proposed or pending litigation, not when the possibility of a lawsuit exists in the attorney’s mind as occurred in Mitchell, he said.
The outcome of the Mitchell ruling will be felt throughout the state, said Tim Waltner, publisher of the Freeman Courier and the Hutchinson Herald of Menno.
“This is a critical ruling,” said Waltner, a member of the SDNA First Amendment Committee.
Thursday’s SDNA meeting in Yankton also looked at a new law requiring that certain public notices list the charge for running the notice in the newspaper.
The cost of printing a public notice amounts to a fraction of a cent per reader, according to a newspaper staff member in attendance. The cost would be much higher if the government body hired an employee to process and mail out the notices, then paid the postage on top of it, she said.
Bordewyk agreed. “On average, less than one-half of 1 percent of an entity’s budget is spent on public notices,” he said.
Some legislative proposals have called for allowing government bodies to put minutes and other legal proceedings online, Bordewyk said. However, those proceedings could be altered at a later date or pulled altogether, he said.
“Some bills would have gutted public notices,” he said. “We promote the value of public notices to the reader.”
The SDNA runs all published public notices in South Dakota online at www.sdpublicnotices.com, he said.
South Dakotans will continue to turn to newspapers for legal proceedings, Bordewyk said.
“South Dakota has more newspapers per capita than any other state in the nation,” he said. “We have legislators who understand the importance of public notices, and we have publishers who have good relationships with legislators.”
Press & Dakotan publisher Gary Wood commended the effort to preserve transparency in government.
“Dave (Bordewyk) and the First Amendment Committee have worked hard to create open government and open records,” he said.
While much has been accomplished with the new laws, much work remains, Bordewyk said.
“This (open-records law) has been a dramatic change,” he said. “The climate in South Dakota needs to change, and the new law will help do that.”
Newspaper staffs, including the Press & Dakotan, and educators learned more about the new law from Dave Bordewyk, general manager of the South Dakota Newspaper Association (SDNA). The Yankton session was one of a series of SDNA regional meetings around the state.
“I don’t think people will rush down to the courthouse or city hall because we have the new law,” he said. “But if they do go to the courthouse or city hall and look for a public record, the law is more on their side.”
The landmark law assumes government documents and records in South Dakota are open to the public, unless there is a good reason to keep them secret. The new law took effect July 1.
The law was approved unanimously by the state Legislature and signed by Gov. Mike Rounds earlier this year. The new law gives citizens the right to access and view public records.
The new South Dakota legislation, based on Nebraska law, represents a major shift in thinking, Bordewyk said.
“Before, the burden was on you (as a citizen) to show why you should see a public record,” he said. “Now, the burden is on the public official to show why it should be kept confidential.”
Those who fought to keep records secret were portraying the new law as pushed by reporters, Bordewyk said.
“The open records law is a huge step forward for all South Dakotans, not just the media,” he said.
In fact, Bordewyk said he has received calls from citizens frustrated in their attempts to access public documents.
“Joe Citizen has gone to the courthouse and has found that he couldn’t get information,” he said. “That’s what was encouraging this whole process, what the laws about open records and open meetings are all about.”
Bordewyk noted that many citizens are unfamiliar with requesting public records because they don’t do it very often. Many residents don’t even know they can request court records and other documents.
Bordewyk expects the process will grow as citizens become more informed and more accustomed to seeking public records.
“Public records are part of a fundamental right of the public to know what government is up to,” he said. “(Citizens) should be comfortable and shouldn’t be challenged when they ask to view public records.”
Residents of other states have routinely viewed public documents for years, Bordewyk said.
“The presumption across the nation is that you have the right to see a public record,” he said. “In fact, South Dakota is the last state to have open access.”
The new South Dakota law includes categories of information that can be maintained confidentially by state and local government. The exceptions include certain law enforcement records; the correspondence, appointment and phone call logs of government officials; and medical records kept by government.
The battle to maintain the public’s right to know is not limited to records, Bordewyk said. The SDNA has fought for open meetings, whereas the current law is often used by government bodies to go into executive, or closed, session.
The SDNA is carefully watching the Mitchell Daily Republic’s open-meetings lawsuit against the City of Mitchell, Bordewyk said.
In meeting with its attorney, the City of Mitchell believes the attorney-client relationship was sufficient enough reason to meet in closed session, Bordewyk said.
On Wednesday, Judge Sean O’Brien struck down four of the city’s arguments in the lawsuit. However, the judge also ruled that the newspaper is not seeking the right kind of remedy.
The Daily Republic’s attorney has said the lawsuit will continue.
Bordewyk believes the City of Mitchell’s interpretation goes beyond state law. A closed session should be used for proposed or pending litigation, not when the possibility of a lawsuit exists in the attorney’s mind as occurred in Mitchell, he said.
The outcome of the Mitchell ruling will be felt throughout the state, said Tim Waltner, publisher of the Freeman Courier and the Hutchinson Herald of Menno.
“This is a critical ruling,” said Waltner, a member of the SDNA First Amendment Committee.
Thursday’s SDNA meeting in Yankton also looked at a new law requiring that certain public notices list the charge for running the notice in the newspaper.
The cost of printing a public notice amounts to a fraction of a cent per reader, according to a newspaper staff member in attendance. The cost would be much higher if the government body hired an employee to process and mail out the notices, then paid the postage on top of it, she said.
Bordewyk agreed. “On average, less than one-half of 1 percent of an entity’s budget is spent on public notices,” he said.
Some legislative proposals have called for allowing government bodies to put minutes and other legal proceedings online, Bordewyk said. However, those proceedings could be altered at a later date or pulled altogether, he said.
“Some bills would have gutted public notices,” he said. “We promote the value of public notices to the reader.”
The SDNA runs all published public notices in South Dakota online at www.sdpublicnotices.com, he said.
South Dakotans will continue to turn to newspapers for legal proceedings, Bordewyk said.
“South Dakota has more newspapers per capita than any other state in the nation,” he said. “We have legislators who understand the importance of public notices, and we have publishers who have good relationships with legislators.”
Press & Dakotan publisher Gary Wood commended the effort to preserve transparency in government.
“Dave (Bordewyk) and the First Amendment Committee have worked hard to create open government and open records,” he said.
While much has been accomplished with the new laws, much work remains, Bordewyk said.
“This (open-records law) has been a dramatic change,” he said. “The climate in South Dakota needs to change, and the new law will help do that.”
 |
 |
|
| Area Gets Ready For Big Holiday Weekend | Highway 18 Chip-Seal Project Under Way |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
Submit a Comment
We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
Not registered yet?
