On January 24, 2014, I filed a Right To Know asking for
"All communication to and/or from Commissioners concerning artificial turf from November 1, 2013 to January 24, 2014."
I chose November 1, thinking there would be some history leading up to the November 25, 2013 meeting when I posted It's been fun, but I am done. Little did I know just how much history was out there! Here is the response that I received from Manager Steve Feller.
I would LOVE to narrow my request, because I don't have $750 or so for this Right To Know! What do I eliminate? Kristen Linfante lied about how the Environmental Sustainability Board is behind artificial turf. John Bendel's Mt. Lebanon Field Enhancement Proposal was never publicized.
The commissioners wouldn't honor Kelly Fraasch's request to add the word Eco-Friendly to the proposal. Dave Brumfield wasn't comfortable with all public Boards and Authority meetings being recorded as mentioned during the January 27, 2014 Discussion Session. Commissioners designated unassigned funds to turf Middle and Wildcat Fields and will designate more this year to turf our best field in the Municipality, claiming it is all about curb appeal. Sports Advisory Board members suddenly went silent here on Lebo Citizens. No mention of the EPA's findings concerning artificial turf. "Whoa," says the EPA. Creating an über Sports Advisory Board Task Force. For all these reasons,
I decided to go for the whole enchilada.
Is this a new tactic in transparency? All they have to say is, "There are 1500 emails. Do you want to pay a gazillion dollars?" This is all within their rights. It is all legal. I do understand that there is quite a bit of work involved.
In the four years that I have had lebocitizens.com and starting my fourth year for this blog, I have spent hundreds of dollars demanding transparency from our local governments through maintaining my website and for filing Right To Knows. I am asking for your help to pay for this Right To Know request. Please make a contribution this one time. Contact information is located in the sidebar. Don't let them scare us off. Expose the commission for what they really are. I would greatly appreciate it.
25¢ from 3,000 people (>10% of Lebo population) is all it would take to satisfy the bill on Elaine's RTK request.
ReplyDeleteSomeone that works tirelessly to keep residents informed - for no money, no accolades and for a helluva a lot of crap from the 'move on' folks.
Will she uncover something, I don't know, but its worth a quarter a page to find out in my opinion.
Elaine, next time we meet I'm in for a buck on your quest for transparency. I mean dollar, anything deer-related is unwelcome in the bubble.
Just a thought.
ReplyDeleteWould a commissioner that wanted to review all the information and correspondence on say artificial turf so that they might make an informed vote be subject to the same RTK fees?
If not, perhaps one of these commissioners that so proudly declare, "I'm all for transparency in government!" might make the request. After all, don't they need all the info available to perform the duties of tbeir office?
Good question, 11:53 AM. I have asked that same question. Yes, they are subject to RTK fees. So if there is a commissioner who is against an issue, they are kept out of the email exchanges. I am sure that it is the same way with the school district.
ReplyDeleteElaine
So apparently a quorum of commissioners could meet behind closed doors and arrange a quid pro quo vote lets say and keep the other 1 or two commissioners in the dark about what is really in the works!
ReplyDeleteI am good for at a minimum of $30 for this RTK, Elaine. I will try to drop it off sooner rather than later.
ReplyDeleteOr say a municpal employee is working with a private firm to oh I don't know lets randomly pick a topic - say turf, commissioners have no way of knowing the items discussed between the two unless they spend their own money to do it?
ReplyDeleteAlso, handy for only three votes needed for bonds. Eliminating a super vote, as suggested by the Home Rule Charter committee is a very bad idea.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Thank you, Damion.
ReplyDeleteElaine
If the commissioners aren't privy to all emails, howdoes anyone know if they are indeed getting all eligible RTK correspondence?
ReplyDeleteThe only way to check would be if someone comes forward and says, hey my email isn't in there!
You are welcome. I think $30 is the least I can do to repay you for the knowledge and information you shared with me in the short time I've been reading this blog.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone should contribute to see what really is going on in our government. Also, once all this information comes out, we all know there will be another rabbit to chase down a hole.
You have to pay for them to send you copies. You don't have to pay to go and review them. They cannot charge you a fee to review the documents, even if they have to spend time and money redacting and copying them. Just make an appointment and go review them!
ReplyDelete12:44 PM, that is exactly what I believe is happening.
ReplyDeleteElaine
If 1:02 is correct lets get a group together and good in and review all the correspondence.
ReplyDeleteThen if something is uncovered hard copies of the specific items can be requested.
I am not sure if that is true, but I will certainly look into that, 1:02 PM. But I will need help carrying over six reams of paper out of the municipal building, for sure!
ReplyDeleteElaine
According to the PA Office of Open Records:
ReplyDeleteFEES
The fee for a standard 8 1/2 x 11 black and white document is up to to 25 cents per page.
Postage fees may not exceed the actual cost of mailing.
If an Agency offers enhanced electronic access it can establish user fees that must be approved by the Office of Open Records.
An Agency cannot charge for the time it takes to redact a document or the legal review needed to determine if a document is a public record.
An Agency may require pre-payment if the fees are expected to exceed $100.
An Agency may withhold public records if you have not paid for previous requested records.
Elaine
Elaine, I tried emailing you about an RTK-fund contribution, but the email bounced. Please email me and let me know how you would prefer me to contact you. --Tom
ReplyDeleteHi Tom,
ReplyDeleteTry it again. I was having trouble sending emails today. It seems to be working now. They call it AOhelL for a reason.
Elaine
Perhaps Tom or another attorney more familiar can chime in but I thought unless information had to be redacted from specific records, there is no requirement records actually be printed if they exist electronically? In other words, if they can give you some of it on a CD without any redaction, you would simply have to pay for the CD, not each counted page of records. This may end up reducing your cost considerably provided they don't have that much to hide.
ReplyDeleteAlso, if they deny or exempt some of the records, it would be helpful for you to post or make available those individual items.
Every personal email address would need to be redacted, 3:31 PM.
ReplyDeleteI am confused by your second paragraph. I would not be able to post something that is denied or exempt.
Elaine
Sorry, that was confusing. I meant, if they exempt certain records from your request, they have to explain why. I think it would be helpful, though maybe too time consuming, to share those exemptions. Many times, the exemption creates more questions than the initial request.
ReplyDeleteThat will be the easy part, 4:49 PM. In the response, Steve Feller will say that the RTK was denied because of...in his cover letter. That will definitely be posted here.
ReplyDeleteElaine
12:59 PM, through publication of RTKs, commissioners and anyone else will know what they missed or what was left out.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Thanks to all who have offered to help me. I don't know what the final amount will be, so it will be a couple of weeks before I know where it all stands.
ReplyDeleteAgain, thanks to all!
Elaine