passopenrecords.org

• Thomas Jefferson once said that if he had to choose between a nation with government and no newspapers, or one with newspapers and no government, he’d always choose the latter.

Jefferson was no fan of intrusive Revolutionary War era media. He was a constant target of scurrilous coverage. But Jefferson also cherished the role of a free press and its checks on government authority and secrecy.

It’s in that spirit that Sunshine Week exists.

• A citizen’s right to know and journalists’ rights to report are threatened every day, say the organizers of Sunshine Week, who planned the weeklong program to highlight freedom of information issues and emphasize the importance of open government. The Student Press Law Center is celebrating Sunshine Week with a series of reports on access issues — including how student journalists can encourage open government and use open records to expand their journalistic horizons and let the sunshine in.

Campus safety has become an important concern in the wake of high-profile school shootings, abductions and murders of young collegians across the nation. Access to records from your university police department or campus safety office often may be critical for accurate reporting on campus security issues.

The Student Press Law Center conducted an open records test with 21 different colleges and universities, both public and private, requesting two types of crime-related records. We followed the same procedures the SPLC recommends to all student journalists making an open records request: first calling to make a verbal request and then, if necessary, making a formal written request.

In each request we asked for two different records: a copy of the university’s crime log and incident reports for either types of crimes or specific incidents that occurred on campus. The crime log is list of police activities (which can include responding to crimes) at or near a college campus, while an incident report is a more detailed narrative of an event requiring police assistance or response.

Every state has a different law governing the type of information that must be disclosed and to whom it applies. Most of these laws will apply only to public colleges and universities; security offices at many private colleges will not be required to release more information than the [Jeanne] Clery Act mandates. This was the situation the SPLC found itself in many times in our open records test. For example, Santa Clara University and Chapman University in California, Mercyhurst College in Pennsylvania and Simmons College in Massachusetts all denied our request for incident reports.

The one notable exception was LaGrange College, a private college in Georgia, which sent us the records we requested, including incident reports; Georgia has some of the nation’s best open records laws, pertaining to campus police records, according to Frank LoMonte, executive director of the SPLC. Student journalists in Georgia and Virginia are in a unique position compared to those in other states because there are specific state laws that address access to private college police records.

• Government at all levels always leans toward conducting business behind closed doors. The reasons range from the ease of working out compromises to avoiding hurt feelings and political repercussions to making the process work faster.

The only problems - apart from its occasionally being illegal to conduct public business in private - are that it’s also undemocratic and unfair to the citizenry.

I’ve little doubt that the nation’s founders preferred a knowledgeable, informed and engaged public. They had plenty of firsthand experience with the alternatives - Star Chambers and Privy Councils that secretly conducted trials, advised royalty and set policy out of public view. (See HBO’s current mini-series, “John Adams.”)

What leads government officials high and low, then and now, to desire to operate behind closed doors and in private chats, out of sight and out of oversight? The answer is simple: Democracy is a messy, conflicting, argumentative, occasionally inefficient, and certainly challenging form of government. But civility, expediency and ease of operation are gravy, not goals, for our system of government.

Still, across the country, local government units like city councils and school boards have attempted to tidy up the process - but in the process, shutting down comment, disclosure and involvement. In recent years, for example:

• A West Virginia school board tried to prevent critics from mentioning district employees by name or job title when speaking at a board meeting. In Oklahoma, it took a federal court ruling to overturn a similar law.

• The New Jersey Supreme Court upheld the right of local residents to videotape government meetings over official objections.

• Mississippi officials ordered a local public-broadcasting cameraman out of a contentious water-association meeting.

• The Los Angeles City Council adopted “rules of decorum” that, along with banning profanity, limit public speakers to one minute and require that comments be directed at the entire council, not just one official.

There can seem a certain reasonableness to limiting public debate to avoid filibusters; to restricting personal comments to avoid flaring tempers; to requiring speakers to register in advance for scheduling ease. But all too often the effect, intended or not, is to preclude serious counter-arguments, to blunt frank criticism of elected or appointed officials, or to discourage public discourse.

When public records are involved - particularly those in the courts and criminal justice system - we must remember they aren’t open merely to satisfy the curious.

In repressive regimes, access to government information is among the first limitations imposed. It may be more than uncomfortable to have arrest records and “mug shots” available for public disclosure - but the alternative is a system where you or I may simply “disappear” into a draconian, closed system, leaving relatives and colleagues uncertain and afraid.

But the vast majority of what our government does is not a national or personal security matter. What it does on our behalf needs to be, and to remain, public - even if it stings, even if it means long nights listening to one side or another, or casting votes at risk of one’s reelection chances to try to keep public records true to their name.

Gene Policinski is vice president and executive director of the First Amendment Center, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001.