January 27, 2011 in News, City

Spokane County public records case goes to high court

• Print
• Email
• Share

OLYMPIA – When a neighborhood group in 2006 demanded records about alleged nepotism in Spokane County, county officials said they checked employees’ current computers. But they didn’t check the hard drives of computers that had recently been switched out.

They said a document didn’t exist when it did, on an old hard drive.

So did they violate the state Public Records Act? And, if so, how much of a penalty should they pay?

Those are some of the questions the state Supreme Court is wrestling with after arguments Thursday from attorneys for the county and the Neighborhood Alliance, which was seeking evidence that former County Commissioner Phil Harris’ son was being hired for a job before other applicants could apply.

Breean Beggs of the alliance said it’s a clear violation because the county employee filling the public records request knew the record existed and knew her computer had been replaced a few months earlier.

“She could have picked up the phone and asked them to check her hard drive,” Beggs said.

By the time the hard drive was located and searched, it had been wiped clean and put back into use in a different department.

But Patrick Riskin, a private attorney handling the case for the county, said workers searched the computers they had but not hard drives that had been picked up by computer services. “You have to wonder if searching in the land of recycled hard drives is reasonable … we would submit it is not.”

The justices seemed to struggle with what is reasonable in the world of records being kept on computers, and computers being constantly upgraded or replaced.

“It’s reasonable to search any system where the information may be available,” Justice Debra Stephens said. “The question is whether the (old hard drive) was part of the system.”

And if the county is liable for penalties, should they keep piling up at as much as $100 a day until the case is settled? No, Riskin argued, the clock should stop running on any penalties in August 2006, when the hard drive was wiped clean. Otherwise it penalizes the county for appealing the case.

But that could be up to a trial judge, Justice Jim Johnson said. “Couldn’t you go back and argue that the penalties are de minimus, and don’t meet the high standard” for the maximum fine?

Six comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  mrfreds on January 27 at 8:41 p.m.

  The problem is that the county did not admit to the loss in a timely manner. And just pay the fine.

  I or anyone of us would also be in jail for not keeping a record, removing it, then interfering with the law.

• 

  PlanB on January 27 at 8:48 p.m.

  Records retention is not new, or made any more difficult by the advent of computers. In fact it’s a lot easier. These people are idiots, liars, or both.

• 

  lewis8457 on January 27 at 10:46 p.m.

  any old computer taken out of use is going to have information in it that has to be transferred to the new computer. if it is for the same operator which it seem to be true this time. this is just laziness right and never knows what the left hand is doing. Our taxes at work!

• 

  Truthhurts on January 27 at 11:45 p.m.

  The only way to get any bureaucracy, public or private, to behave is to smash it in the mouth, and then smash it again, and then ask it to obey the law (especially when they want to behave illegally and silence anyone who points out otherwise), and then smash it again.

  (We should have a rapid death penalty — DSHS being disbanded and distributed to other agencies, or, in this case, the county being taken over by the state for a decade — or else you just cannot get the obedient attention of a rogue bureaucracy.)

  The County needs to be hammered with a huge public records penalty, or they will just play these games again.

• 

  Ron_the_Cop on January 28 at 1:13 a.m.

  Truthhurts ,

  LOL you think the County has issues - the City is much worse:

  http://tinyurl.com/2d94rks

• 

  mistykira on January 28 at 11:57 p.m.

  The county is guilty as sin. Harris’ son was on a seating chart before the job was even posted. The originator of the chart, Pam Knudsen knew where the file was and that is why her computer was taken and she was given a new one. She knew where the file was and who the “Steve” was that was on the chart she created. She chose not to “find” the requested file and the county helped her. No mystery here–just a good old fashioned cover up. Government must be held accountable. May justice prevail!