North Carolina public records bill advances
From Sunshine Review
July 10, 2009 A bill moving forward in the state House would require judges to impose a payment of attorneys fees on municipalities and government agencies if they lose lawsuits filed over public records access.[1]
[edit] Public records bill
Under current state law, judges can require a losing party to pay the winner's attorneys fees, but judges rarely do this in public records cases. The idea is to discourage governments from withholding public records, the bill's supporters say the bill's supporters say.
"The public records are the people's records," said Rep. Deborah Ross, a Raleigh Democrat and co-sponsor of the bill. "They're not our records. They're not the politicians' records."
The Attorney General's Office would have a new division under the bill that would advise about 1,500 governmental units on public records issues. The unit could prevent disputes from going to court by mediating them, hopefully cutting the number of lawsuits while making government more open.[1]
[edit] Exception
If the case did not have a clear winner or loser, judges could decide not to award attorneys fees. Governments also get some cover from the bill if they deny records because of a judge's order, court opinion or attorney general's opinion.
Opponents dislike this because it means they would have to check with the Attorney General's Office to see if they should release the records instead of looking to staff or contract lawyers to decide.
Former mayor, Rep. Lucy Allen, a Louisburg Democrat, offered an amendment that would allow a government or agency to avoid paying legal fees if its staff or contract attorneys wrote down their opinion as to why the office should deny releasing the records. This was defeated.[1]
[edit] External links
[edit] References
| |||||||
