A few weeks ago we wrote that we had asked York County for 911 time-response logs, and that the county had decided that logs were simply a list of times, without addresses or geographical locations of where units were headed -- thus making the information useless.
We appealed to the state's new Office of Open Records. Reporter Ted Czech, in his appeal, made the point that the legislature's intent in making time-response logs public was to allow people to assess first-responders' performance. Without addresses or at least a cross-street, Czech wrote, it's impossible to do that.
The open records office agreed (read the decision here under "Reading Room"), and made a couple of key points: One, that if a record is not specifically defined in the new open records law, the open records office has the authority to define it; and two, that the "legislative intent to expressly include time response logs as public information is to allow the public the ability to assess the efficiency of the emergency responders. ... The county has offered no support in the Act that permits them to withhold an address within a time response log, which they admit that they possess."
We appealed to the state's new Office of Open Records. Reporter Ted Czech, in his appeal, made the point that the legislature's intent in making time-response logs public was to allow people to assess first-responders' performance. Without addresses or at least a cross-street, Czech wrote, it's impossible to do that.
The open records office agreed (read the decision here under "Reading Room"), and made a couple of key points: One, that if a record is not specifically defined in the new open records law, the open records office has the authority to define it; and two, that the "legislative intent to expressly include time response logs as public information is to allow the public the ability to assess the efficiency of the emergency responders. ... The county has offered no support in the Act that permits them to withhold an address within a time response log, which they admit that they possess."
The county, in response to our appeal, cited a transcript from the
House Legislative Journal between two people it identifies only as "Mr.
Fairchild" and "Mr. King," who presumably are state representatives, in
which Fairchild asks King whether the legislature intended a
time-response log to be "a log of when a call comes into a 911 center,
when action is taken and when it is complete." King says that's fair.
Fairchild says, just to make sure, "it is not the incident log itself, which has all the detailed information of a caller -- the address, the telephone number, the date of birth, all that stuff?" King says that's right.
The Daily Record/Sunday News is not asking for a 911 time-response log with phone numbers, dates of birth and other personal information. It does seem to be common sense that the legislature would not make time-response logs public while allowing for addresses or geographical locations to be withheld.
The county has 30 days to provide us with addresses or cross-streets, or to appeal. The county's lawyer says it might appeal. Stay tuned.
Fairchild says, just to make sure, "it is not the incident log itself, which has all the detailed information of a caller -- the address, the telephone number, the date of birth, all that stuff?" King says that's right.
The Daily Record/Sunday News is not asking for a 911 time-response log with phone numbers, dates of birth and other personal information. It does seem to be common sense that the legislature would not make time-response logs public while allowing for addresses or geographical locations to be withheld.
The county has 30 days to provide us with addresses or cross-streets, or to appeal. The county's lawyer says it might appeal. Stay tuned.
Leave a comment