Transparency: Wyoming Open Records/Meetings Laws Up For Debate

During the 2011 Legislative session several bills were introduced to improve Wyoming’s public records and public meeting laws. After much testimony and debate none of these bills passed into law, but a working group convened during the interim to discuss and propose compromise legislation. On October 13th the Joint Judiciary Committee met in Laramie to hear testimony on the working group’s compromise bills.

There was written testimony presented along with both associations and individuals providing verbal testimony. The Wyoming Press Association (WPA) stated all matters of public welfare, safety and financial matters must be open to public scrutiny to allow complete, honest and open discussion of these matters. It is the WPA’s belief that the public is always best served when its governing agencies are transparent. Jim Angell of the WPA stated “We are vehemently opposed to the deliberative process exemption. It keeps too much information out of the hands of people….”

The concern of most speakers was the deliberative privilege and quorum exemption inserted into the public records draft bill that would allow officials to exclude many documents from public access. The Legislative Service Office (LSO) produced a memo explaining that deliberative privilege applies to the executive branch, and denies access to: (1) a specific agency decision; (2) prepared to assist an agency official to make the agency decision, which records (3) precede in temporal sequence, the decision to which it relates.

The key question in determining whether a document is covered is whether its disclosure would expose an agency’s decision making process in such a way to discourage candid discussion with the agency and thereby undermine the agency’s ability to perform its functions. The privilege is narrowly construed. The Wyoming Association of Municipalities (WAM) was in favor of the both the deliberative privilege and the quorum exemption which would include e-mails etc. sent to public officials, if they were not sent to the entire body.

The Wyoming County Commissioners Association (WCCA) spoke strongly against any time frame for production of documents other than “reasonable” and for including the deliberative process exemption into the statutes. (The current statute is silent on this issue which would leave interpretation to the Wyoming Supreme Court).

The Powder River Basin Resource Council discussed effects of the draft bills on environmental records and objected to any inclusion of the deliberative process or quorum exemption.

Co-Chairman Brown said that Colorado law exempts candid and personal information, and Mr. Angell (WPA) responded that public officials should not be spared embarrassment by the law.

The University of Wyoming representatives supported the LSO comments and the working group’s draft bill. Dan Neal, Director of the Equality State Policy Center (ESPC), opposed the deliberative process and quorum exemption and supported the seven day time limit for initial response to a records request.

Fred Moline from the Farm Bureau Federation suggested that volunteer board members might be discouraged from sitting on boards by this statute.

Mark Harris (WAM) asked the committee to clarify the deliberative process law in order to allow access but law must balance interests of all. WAM supports the compromise draft bill. Rep. Barbuto questioned if WAM’s support of bill was contingent on making changes and Mr. Harris replied “absolutely not.”

Mr. Bob Bonner, publisher of the Newcastle newspaper, said that serving on boards and as public officials is tough and individuals must have the courage to make decisions in public. He also stated that any correspondence meant to influence officials should be public.

While several small amendments were made to both bills the most difficult discussion was removing the deliberative process and quorum exemption provisions. The committee voted to remove both. The working group was split on the exemption but the press was strongly opposed to the exemptions inclusion.

Read more on this important topic from the Wyoming Tribune Eagle and Wyoming Public Radio.

Protester Alert: Know Your Rights

In response to planned demonstrations around the country including Wyoming, as part of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, the ACLU of Wyoming is making sure all protesters know their rights. Here is some basic information about the rights of protesters, although it should not substitute for specific legal advice. In addition, the ACLU of Wyoming has also produced a Bust Card with more information about what to do if you’re stopped by police.

First, it is important to differentiate between protesting with protected free speech and using civil disobedience. With civil disobedience you are choosing to break the law, and perhaps be arrested to make a point. You need to be prepared for what happens when you are arrested.

Even though protesters are clearly protected by the Constitution, the definition of “peaceful protest” may differ from person to person. Here are some valuable tips on what to do if you are confronted by a police officer or another public official during a protest.

Your Rights as a Protester:

• What you say to the police is always important. What you say can be used against you, and it can give the police an excuse to arrest you – especially if you “bad mouth” an officer.
• You are required to provide your name, address, or date of birth to a law enforcement officer upon request.
• You can be arrested for refusing to identity yourself to an officer.
• You do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your car.
• You may photograph or videotape police officers performing their job in public, but do not interfere with police action.

Limitations on Speech:

• The government can limit speech by imposing “time, place, and manner” restrictions. This is most commonly done by requiring permits for meetings, rallies, and demonstrations.
• The First Amendment does not protect speech that incites violence, is obscene, or is threatening.
• It is a federal crime to threaten to harm the President, the Vice President, or a major candidate for either office.

Limitations on Action:

• If you endanger others through the manner in which you choose to protest, you can be arrested. A protest that blocks traffic is illegal without a permit.
• You do have the right to distribute literature, chant, and engage passersby in debate, but you do not have the right to block a building entrance or physically harass people.
• Protesting on private property is not protected by the law.
• Do not interfere with, touch or verbally antagonize the police.
• Avoid carrying any drugs or weapons. If you happen to be arrested you could face additional charges for their possession.

If You Are Arrested:

• Do not run or resist. It may result in additional charges.
• The whole process, from arrest to release on bail, should take about 24-36 hours.
• The police will ask you for basic biographical information and will take your fingerprints and photograph, unless you have been charged with a very minor crime.
• You will then be interviewed by a court agency so that bail can be assessed. You do not have to answer their questions, but providing accurate information will greatly speed up the process.
• You can hire an attorney to represent you at the arraignment and present arguments regarding bail.
• The judicial officer will set bail according to several factors (local connections, seriousness of the crime, how many other protestors have been arrested, etc.).

If you feel your rights have been violated, write down everything you can remember, including officers’ badge and patrol car numbers, which agency the officers were from, and any other details. Get contact information from any witnesses.

Wyoming residents who believe their rights have been violated are encouraged to report these concerns to the Wyoming ACLU.

Redistricting in Northeastern Wyoming

The corporations committee meeting held in the state fair cafeteria in Douglas on September 19th was well-attended with a majority of the audience county clerks, local officials and a few interested voters. The meeting began, as usual, with an explanation of the redistricting process and the use of the Wyoming legislative redistricting web site.

A local county clerk testified that it is difficult

keep Glen Rock and Converse whole as a result of a huge land mass and sparse population. Lucille Taylor of Platte and Goshen County is trying to keep from losing the lone representative in those counties.

A revised county clerks plan was presented for eastern Wyoming.

Representative Hunt explained his plan for the region. Representative Hunt added that he believes local people are the most qualified to put together specifics in the counties as they know the areas and communities of interest best.

Chairman Illoway voiced his concern that some of the plans emasculate Laramie County by dividing the county. Taking a “little bit” of land or population can make a huge difference in a county.

Representative Jaggi advised Representative Hunt that his plan is not viable without specific numbers to show the committee the plan will work.

Debbi Lathrop stated that seven of the eastern Wyoming County Clerks worked together to map a revised plan for eastern Wyoming. The Goshen County Clerk was not present at the meeting. This plan was not sponsored by any legislator or the clerks association.

Tracy Hunt, Representatiave Hunt’s father and former Crook County Commissioner talked at length about the Hunt plan. He suggested that the legislators are making the process difficult to protect peoples seats and that the process is simple and if Hunt’s plan is followed every County can have a district. The Constitution says the county boundaries should be respected and that the seats should be divided among counties by population. Mr. Hunt testified that all the committee has to do is follow Hunt’s plan and they can be done today. He suggested that Laramie County must realize that it has to contribute population to the plan to be fair. Representative Byrd says the Hunt plan does not provide for equal representation for all voters. He also took exception to the statement that this is a simple task.

Representative Patton pointed out that precincts are set by county clerks and not by legislature.

Senator Hines presented an alternative proposal for consideration.

Debbi Lathrop explains that 10 years ago the clerks worked with census bureau to establish census blocks. Precinct lines are the very last lines to be drawn and will come last after legislator has done redistricting.

There is an emphasis on respecting counties boundaries and all counties continue to want to remain whole. Given the population shifts in state, that is an extremely difficult problem.

Senator Driscoll says northeastern corner is a community of interest in terms of rural interests and they don’t want to be moved into bigger counties as they don’t have the same interests. He endorses county clerk’s plan that leaves counties intact. It is extremely important that poor rural counties are left intact so they have representation. He encourages the committee to leave the north area as is.

A County Commissioner from Weston County says Newcastle has little in common with Gillette as they are a very poor county and have little in common with such a rich county. Their needs would be ignored.

The tone of the meeting was somewhat more antagonistic than past meetings but the themes continue to be that all counties want to remain whole, they don’t want to lose representation and they don’t want change.