BC-SC--FOIA-Saying No, Adv13,630
For release Sunday, Nov. 13
Fear, suspicion, ignorance block open records from public view
With BC-FOIA-Audit, BC-FOIA-Audit-Quotes, BC-FOIA-Saying No-Glance, BC-FOIA-Methodology
By JIM DAVENPORT
Associated Press Writer
ABBEVILLE, S.C. (AP) _ Ask many city or county officials in South Carolina about open meetings and open records, and you're likely to be met with fear or suspicion; and in some places officials, are seemingly ignorant of the requirements of the law.
In Abbeville County, a lawyer warned county council members about replying to a statewide survey of public officials' handling of closed-door sessions.
In Richland County, a school board member said a lawyer advised him not to answer the same questions.
At the St. Matthews Police Department, a person asking for a crime incident report was told he couldn't have a copy because suspects and victims have rights.
The reactions came as The Associated Press, South Carolina Press Association and newspapers around the state approached public bodies with a 13-question survey about executive sessions and sought police reports that law enforcement agencies must make available to the public.
In Abbeville, one county council member took the survey, but a clerk later called a Greenwood Index-Journal reporter handling the information and told her to discard it. A couple of weeks later, a second reporter spoke with the county's lawyer, Lee Roper, and provided him a copy of the survey and explained the project's goals.
Later that night, just before the panel went behind closed doors for an executive session, Roper openly discussed the questionnaire.
"I would like council to be aware that they're certainly not obligated ... to participate in the survey and answer these questions," Roper said. "And I would also like council, if they do answer these questions as part of the survey, to pay particular attention to the questions and make sure they read these questions very carefully and are sure of their interpretation of the questions because it may be that some of the questions are worded where there would be more of an interpretation as to how they should be answered."
Afterward, all the council members declined to respond to the questions, which included: Have you ever been asked to vote informally in executive session? Would you object to signing an affidavit after an executive session affirming that only the specified subject was discussed? Do believe your council has ever violated the Freedom of Information Act regarding executive sessions?
"These are straightforward questions," said Larry Walker, a former Abbeville County Council chairman attending the meeting.
In Richland District 1, school board member Jasper Salmond asked board lawyer Susan Williams about answering the same questions.
"I've been advised not to fill it out," he said.
"They are not required to respond to that survey," Williams told The (Columbia) State newspaper.
Ultimately, two of the school board members filled out the survey.
Police and sheriff's departments around the state turned out to be the biggest source for denial. More than a dozen law enforcement agencies, about one-fourth of those visited, refused to provide copies of incident reports that residents should be able to review without delay.
In many of those instances, clerks did not know the law and weren't sure what the public is entitled to see.
At the Bamberg Police Department and the Greenwood County Sheriff's Department, for instance, a reporter was told that only victims can get copies of crime reports. At the Orangeburg County Sheriff's Department, a visitor was told that he would have to be a victim and show identification.
Saying "no" to those requests isn't the right answer, state Attorney General Henry McMaster says.
"The law is very clear. It must be provided," he said.
BC-SC--FOIA-Audit-Quotes, Adv13,310
For release Sunday, Nov. 13
FOI audit responses in their own words
Eds: For the first day of a three-day FOIA series
With BC-FOIA-Methodology, BC-FOIA-Audit
AP Photo SCORA101
By The Associated Press
School board and county council members, police personnel and others had different perspectives on what the state's Freedom of Information Act requires them to do.
On whether school board or county council members stray from subjects they agreed to before entering executive session:
"The school board has a tendency to start talking about issues and items not listed on the agenda. The board doesn't get time to discuss such issues during a regular meeting, and they come up during executive sessions." _ Sandra Engelman, 2 years, Charleston County School Board.
"We tried that once or twice in my term, but the lawyers always say you can't discuss that. When you think about council being a part-time job, it's easy to forget the rules and regulations, but we get called on it when we do." _ Richard Rosebrock, 13 years, Dorchester County Council.
"That's not legal." _ David Summers, 27 years, Calhoun County Council.
"Sometimes it is human nature to get off the subject, but we get back on it." _ Jerry Oakley, 2 1/2 years, Georgetown County Council.
On whether board or council members objected to recording executive sessions so a judge might later be able deal with legal questions that arise:
"Greatest thing I have ever heard." _ Clyde Livingston, 10 years, Orangeburg County Council.
"It's in executive session, so there's no use having executive session if you're recording it." _ Larry Greer, 7 years, Anderson County Council.
"It inhibits candor." Jerry Oakley, 2 1/2 years, Georgetown County Council.
"People have a tendency not to express themselves as openly or candidly when they know they're being taped, even if you tell them only a judge will hear it." _ Cheryl Mushrush, 3 years, Dorchester School District 4 board.
BC-SC--FOIA-Saying No-Glance, Adv13,220
For release Sunday, Nov. 13
Some boards, police agencies fail to respond
Eds: For the first day of a three-day FOIA series
With BC-FOIA-Audit, BC-FOIA-Audit-Quotes, BC-FOIA-Saying No, BC-FOIA-Methodology
By The Associated Press
Some South Carolina county councils and school boards refused to respond to questions on a survey intended to gauge public officials' views on the state Freedom of Information Act regarding closed-door meetings. Here are the county councils that would not participate:
Abbeville County Council
Dillon County Council
In another part of the project, some police agencies would not provide immediate access to crime incident reports that are supposed to be available under the FOI law. Here's a list of the law enforcement agencies that would not provide immediate access to incident reports:
Allendale County Sheriff's Office
Bamberg County Sheriff's Office
Bamberg Police Department
Barnwell County Sheriff's Office
Bishopville Police Department
Charleston Police Department
Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office
Clarendon County Sheriff's Office
Darlington County Sheriff's Office
Greenwood County Sheriff's Office
Kershaw County Sheriff's Office
Marion County Sheriff's Office
Marlboro County Sheriff's Office
McCormick County Sheriff's Office
Orangeburg County Sheriff's Office
Orangeburg Department of Public Safety
St. Matthews Police Department
BC-SC--FOIA-Methodology, Adv13,220
For release Sunday, Nov. 13
How information was gathered for the FOIA series
Eds: For the first day of a three-day FOIA series
With BC-FOIA-Audit
By The Associated Press
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) _ The Associated Press, South Carolina Press Association and newspapers across the state worked together on a project that gauged how school boards, county councils and law enforcement agencies handled different aspects of the state's Freedom of Information Act.
Reporters and editors asked county council and school board members about the state's laws on executive sessions, the closed-door meetings the law allows in extremely limited circumstances. Members of each of the state's 46 county councils were asked to participate, as were school board members in every county.
The responses are not a scientific poll that could predict how all county council or school board members would respond. They do reflect the positions of about 30 percent of the state's county council members and 15 percent of school board members on the 13-question survey.
To determine how police agencies handle requests from citizens seeking routine crime information, journalists visited 62 sheriff's offices and police departments to request crime incident reports. The journalists did not identify themselves as reporters or editors unless asked. They noted whether they were given access to the documents, how much they cost and whether they were asked for identification.