Edior's Notes: Sheriff’s policy effectively hides public records

The Pima County Sheriff’s Department responds to heinous incidents every day, making the job stressful and disgusting at times and vitally important to the community.

With the volume of crime, I imagine deputies cringe when television reporters stalk them like paparazzi chasing elusive celebrities. The electronic media pursue every murder, traffic death and bank robbery, it seems, hoping for spectacular video to boost ratings. If it bleeds, it leads at 6 p.m.

The constant barrage of crime news, unfortunately, masks what I consider a little secret at the Sheriff’s Department.

Contrary to the nonstop images and snippets on local TV, the public at large has limited access to information. The consequence makes it hard for taxpayers to monitor the effectiveness of the sheriff and his deputies.

Here’s what the Arizona Public Records Law says: “Public records and other matters in the custody of any officer shall be open to inspection by any person at all times during office hours.”

Try telling that to workers in the Pima County Sheriff’s records department — unless you apply studio makeup, have your hair styled at Gadabout or bleach your teeth every three months.

I tried picking up Sheriff’s Department reports on a Green Valley case last week and was astounded to learn about the reluctance to serve the public. You have to go through a maze of suspicion before getting what you need.

Sheriff’s deputies will pull you over for going 5 mph over the speed limit because you’re breaking the law. They’ll write you a ticket faster than you can say Sheriff Clarence Dupnik.

But when it comes to public records, the Sheriff’s Department asks for your name, photo identification and why you want the incident report before considering whether to cough it up. All the steps are unnecessary and bureaucratic, in my opinion, and need to be changed.

No one seems to call the sheriff on this charade, especially not honchos at the TV stations. They’re are afraid they’ll lose access to breaking crime scenes if they shine light on the delay tactics. How would they fill air time at 6 p.m., not to mention 4 p.m., 5 p.m. and 10 p.m. without chasing emergency vehicles?

Fortunately for the media, a public information officer is paid to handle requests and look up information. TV stations find a spokesperson at nearly every crime scene if there’s a hint of cameras and lights. No one is looking out for the average taxpayer’s interests.

The Sheriff’s Department says it’s trying to protect victims or crime and witnesses by withholding reports on request. At a time when we worry about personal safety, privacy, terrorism, identity theft and scam artists, the Sheriff’s Department thinks it’s providing a public service.

In reality, it is providing a public disservice. It’s not the Sheriff’s Department’s job to redact information in reports. It’s not a deputy’s call to release some reports and not others.

Typically, those asking for reports have been involved in incidents. They want to know what deputies wrote about the situation in order to prepare for trial or settle insurance claims. But it doesn’t matter why the records are requested. It can be from simple curiosity.

The Sheriff’s Department, which this year is operating more than $1 million over budget, seems unconcerned about open records. When I told the clerk I thought she was violating the Public Records Law by denying me information, she said she was following policy.

To me, the Sheriff’s Department knows the public will not challenge its policy other than a complaint or two. The bluster goes something like this: “If you don’t like the policy, sue us. We know you won’t.”

What right-minded taxpayer would take the Sheriff’s Department to court? It would cost thousands of dollars, and there’s no guarantee a judge would order the sheriff to pay court costs.

I called Arizona’s ombudman-citizens’ aide, Patrick Shannahan, about the sheriff’s policy on releasing information. He told me any member of the public has a right to information. But he and his office have no power to order anyone to do anything.

The state open records law has no teeth, no fines for a violation. In other words, those who enforce the laws can bend them to suit their needs in this case.

I filed a complain with Shannahan on Thursday, urging him in an e-mail to review the Sheriff’s Department’s policy and recommend if changes would better serve the public. I look forward to hearing details of the discussion.

“Any public office has permission (under case law) to have a person fill out a form requesting information. That can be a letter or a form,” Shannahan said. “They also are allowed to ask if you intend to use the information for a commercial interest.

“But someone should not need to explain why they want it. Generally, the person should not have to provide his name to receive public information.”

No one should be asking that the sheriff release information that would jeopardize ongoing investigations. No one should be asking the sheriff to identify confidential informants.

Beyond that, the public should be able to monitor the department’s activities on a regular basis. Taxpayers should not be discouraged by their interaction with deputies and record keepers.

There’s more to every crime story than what we see on the 6 p.m. news. We should be guaranteed access to it.

James Bennett is editor of the Green Valley News. Contact him at 547-9770 or jbennett@gvnews.com. Respond to this column at www.gvnews.com. Comment online at www.gvnews.com.