Studying Time: 3 minutes
Final March, the Wisconsin Examiner requested the Black River Falls Police Division to seek for emails relating to the demise of a lacking Indigenous man. The division mentioned it might course of the request however the information outlet must pay $4,400. That’s the quantity the town’s IT vendor, Tech Execs, quoted to carry out the search.
It was a dramatic illustration of a rising downside. Increasingly authorities companies are utilizing outdoors distributors to retailer their digital information and counting on these distributors to do the looking when any person makes a request for emails, bodycam movies, or different information. Such outsourcing is touted as a cost-saving measure, however it could actually make acquiring information prohibitively costly, because the Examiner discovered.
Authorities companies usually pay distributors a set price for storage, however there usually is a separate cost for search and retrieval of archived recordsdata. Can a authorities authority in Wisconsin cross these vendor charges on to file requesters?
The Black River Falls Police Division thinks that it could actually. In response, the regulation agency I run, the Wisconsin Transparency Mission, filed a lawsuit towards the division on the Examiner’s behalf.
I don’t intend to dive into the weeds of the authorized arguments of that case. Somewhat, the case highlights a few of my severe issues with the apply of hiring outdoors events after which passing on these prices to information requesters.
Wisconsin’s open information regulation permits authorities custodians to cost solely their “precise, vital, and direct prices” to satisfy file requests. In different phrases, they don’t seem to be allowed to revenue from information requests. I’d argue that this additionally means they can not fob off their record-keeping obligations to any person who does.
The regulation itself says this rule stays in place for information “produced or collected by an individual who is just not an authority pursuant to a contract entered into by that particular person with an authority.” That raises a number of points.
First, the charges quoted by an out of doors vendor aren’t a “direct” price. They’re a value being imposed (and even calculated or arbitrarily determined) by the seller, not the federal government.
Second, is it actually “vital” to make use of such an costly vendor? Can a authorities company deliberately develop an association that shifts further and outrageous prices onto file requesters?
Lastly, is that this an “precise” price? It could be what the seller is charging the federal government, however the vendor’s precise prices are possible far decrease as a result of the seller is making a revenue. The seller is incentivized to cost an exorbitant quantity, understanding its true buyer (the federal government) received’t must pay it.
One other downside with the usage of outdoors distributors is compliance with file retention legal guidelines. Authorities companies are required to maintain their information for a sure period of time earlier than disposing of them. Completely different companies and classes of information are topic to completely different retention intervals, however most information should be stored no less than seven years.
I’ve twice just lately run into conditions the place outdoors distributors weren’t following these legal guidelines. Within the first occasion, emails produced by a vendor had been lacking all their photographs. These photographs had been changed by a placeholder query mark. Within the second occasion, the seller was utterly unable to supply emails that had been despatched by the federal government company greater than a yr prior.
When distributors mess up like this, any legal responsibility falls on the federal government company for failing to maintain information correctly. That’s a giant danger to take. Authorities officers ought to ensure that their distributors are conscious of retention legal guidelines and ideally comply with indemnify the federal government for any legal responsibility attributable to their errors.
Using outdoors distributors to retailer authorities information raises a bunch of potential issues. The higher apply can be to maintain information “in home,” or on the very least use a service that allows the federal government unfettered entry and looking with out the necessity to pay the seller further cash.
Your Proper to Know is a month-to-month column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Info Council (wisfoic.org), a bunch devoted to open authorities. Tom Kamenick, a council member, is the president and founding father of the Wisconsin Transparency Mission.
Republish our articles without spending a dime, on-line or in print, below a Artistic Commons license.
