Reporting students tested The University's compliance with the law during the first week of April and got mixed results from offices holding public records.
On Monday, April 4, U of M students went to various offices and departments seeking information for a public records audit on The University of Memphis campus. Sixteen students sought University documents that are open records under the Tennessee Open Records law. They ranged from an administrator's salary to the number of students served by counseling services.
Responses and cooperation from different offices varied widely, from total, timely cooperation to intense questioning and failure to produce requested information at all. Forty-three percent of records requested were obtained over a seven business-day period.
The Tennessee Open Records Law (T.C.A. § 10-7-503), states: "All state, county and municipal records ... shall at all times, during business hours, be open for public inspection by any citizen of Tennessee, and those in charge of such records shall not refuse such right of inspection to any citizen, unless provided by state law."Under Tennessee law, citizens are not required to answer questions about why they want public records.
"In almost every state, they have to give no reason for why they want the information," said Mark Goodman, executive director of the Student Press Law Center in Washington, D.C.
As a public higher education institution that receives state funding as a member of the Tennessee Board of Regents, The University of Memphis is required by law to provide Tennessee citizens with all records that are not exempt under other sections of the Tennessee code.
The University of Memphis policy Web site states: "The Office of Legal Counsel and the Office of Communications Services should always be notified when records are requested to be inspected. These offices may be required to assist in answering questions, coordinating release of any additional information, and ensuring correct understanding of the record."
Sheri Lipman, University counsel, said there are individual offices which don't deal with records requests, and they may forward the request to the office of legal counsel or the communications office.
"We're not required to compile what someone is looking for," Lipman said. "It's your responsibility to articulate what record you want."
"We very much comply with the open records law," Lipman said.
The records requested by U of M students, all of whom are residents of Tennessee, were non-controversial and not intended to expose U of M officials or departments.
Auditors' experiences, however, revealed that some University employees are unfamiliar with or unwilling to comply with the Tennessee Open Records Law.
Auditors were instructed to take their assignments to offices or administrators thought to be in possession of various records. Each student documented his experience, and they were instructed to leave a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request letter when they were denied access to public records. The letters stated that the requested information be provided within seven business days.
Hide and seek
Attempts to obtain some University records were headed off with redirection to The U of M communications department and responses that some information was not kept on file or was unavailable to students.
Student auditors attempted to obtain documents from The U of M Physical Plant with mixed success.
One auditor was met with resistance and confusion when requesting records detailing the building costs of the fountain in the student activities plaza. The auditor was also asked if he "worked for the Helmsman" and the Physical Plant staff member told him, "I'm fairly sure that we don't release those documents."
On Wednesday, April 6, the student returned to the Physical Plant and dropped off an FOI letter. Curt Guenther, U of M communications manager, later received the letter from the Physical Plant. The records were not provided by the Physical Plant in the timeframe designated on the FOI request.
Copies of utility payments made from the U of M Physical Plant to Memphis Light Gas and Water were provided to one student auditor. A staff member initially told the student the computer holding the records was not working. The auditor was told to see a supervisor who was waiting to hear from both legal counsel and Curt Guenther. The supervisor asked why the student needed the records because she had received another FOI letter from a student that week. Copies of the MLGW records were provided free of charge to the student within the time period requested on the FOI letter.
A U of M student requested information from the Cecil C. Humphreys Law School on the number of minority applicants to the law program. A law school staff member told the student they did not keep track of those numbers.
The business and finance office gave a student permission to copy and access to The University's contract with Barnes and Noble. However, they charged the student $1 per page to make copies of the document.
Although it may have been a misunderstanding, the actual request was for total revenues The University received from Barnes and Noble in 2003-04, not a copy of the contract which explains the formula for annual payments from Barnes and Noble to The U of M. When the student returned to request records detailing revenues from the contract for the year, he was told that the numbers would never exceed those detailed in the contract and no additional information was made available to the student.
Who, what, why?
The Tennessee Open Records Law does not mandate that any Tennessee citizen give an explanation or reason for wanting to view and or copy open records. Many U of M offices asked students numerous questions about who they were, why they wanted the records and what they intended to use them for.
A student requesting information about parking ticket revenues during 2003-04 met resistance from Parking Services in the form of multiple questions and a demand that the request be faxed to the office, not delivered in person. The student, who was asked if "she was a journalist," left an FOI letter with the office and also spoke with Parking Services director Sandra Barksdale who asked, "Who are you and what do you want the information for?" When the auditor responded that the figures were for a class project, Barksdale said, "You have to tell me what it's for. We can't just give that information out."
Parking Services did not provide any of the requested information in the time period designated by the Freedom of Information letter.
An auditor's inquiry about the number of students dropped from class rosters for failure to pay fees during 2003-04 prompted a number of questions from The U of M Registrar's office.
"I went to the Registrar's office during normal business hours, walked up and requested the document I was looking for," said Charity Mulder. "I was met with several confused looks. Three or four ladies tried to ask me what this was for, why I needed the document and whether or not I was a student at The University."
Mulder said that she was a student and gave them in writing a copy of the requested documents.
After the request was passed around to several staff members, one told Mulder that she would have to go to the Bursar's office. Another member of the Registrar staff asked the student, "What class is this for? We have to have more information before we can give you this."
Mulder said, "By law, any citizen could walk in here off the street and request this record, and they don't have to tell you what it's for."
After being presented with an FOI, the staff member said, "We have 48 hours to adhere to this. You can come pick up the document after two days."
On April 7, two days later, the auditor returned to the office and was told to come back when the person handling the request was in the office. Mulder returned to the office two more times before she was told someone wanted to meet with her before she could view the document.
In a meeting with Noel Schwartz, U of M registrar, Mulder was told her approach to requesting information about students dropped from rosters by submitting an FOI on her first request was "rude." After Schwartz learned that Mulder had first requested the documents verbally and in writing, she told Mulder that if this was a class project, she should tell her instructor this is not a good approach.
Schwartz then gave the student auditor the requested records and reviewed them with her. She also apologized for the run-around and agreed that the student did not have to give a reason for why she wanted the information.
A U of M student asked for information about the cost of Segways purchased for Physical Plant workers. A purchasing department employee asked the student for his driver's license and tried to tell him the price of each Segway. After requesting a copy of the purchasing records on paper, a Physical Plant supervisor told the student that copies of the records would cost $1 per page. The student left an FOI letter and returned two days later on Thursday, April 7, when a female staff member asked for identification and had the student fill out a request form. She said that she was waiting for approval from the legal department to release the information.
"Are you doing this for a class?" she asked. "Do you work with the Helmsman?"
The staff member said she had the information in an envelope, but would not let the student touch the purchasing records.
Playing favorites
A student auditor went to the Center for Counseling, Learning and Testing requesting documents showing the number, not the names, of students who received services there during 2003-04. After initial resistance from a secretary and other staff members, Clay Thompson left an FOI with the office. That afternoon, director of the counseling center Carl Gilleylen sent an e-mail to Thompson offering to set up a meeting to help him with his request. In the e-mail Gilleylen said, "The Tennessee statutes you mentioned in your letter do not apply to our Center because we are a health service provider agency. However, I may be able to help you."
Elinor Grusin, the journalism department's media law expert, was consulted about the matter.
Thompson responded to the e-mail: "The counseling center is an agency of the state and, thus, is covered by open records laws. I am not asking for health records, just numbers, which are covered by the state open records law and do not violate health records confidentiality."
Gilleylen replied: "Your expert is not entirely correct. What you are asking for is not the problem. It's the way you are asking. If you come by I can probably help you." Following the e-mail, there was no more correspondence with the center and the requested information was not provided.
However, Gilleylen provided the same information requested by Thompson to another U of M student who used it in a story published in a Daily Helmsman special section on April 19.
Learning to share
A number of documents were requested and provided to students without incident from offices at The University of Memphis. The McWherter Library, Police Services and various offices in the administration building all provided requested records in a timely manner without being evasive or stalling students with numerous questions or redirecting them to The U of M communications department.
Police Services provided records detailing the total number of auto thefts on campus during 2003-04. They also included additional information about crime statistics for the year and reviewed them with the student.
McWherter Library staff and administrators gave students records ranging from total revenues of library fines during 2003-04 to the salary of Ric Hovda, dean of the college of education.
Staff in the sports information office in the Athletic Department promptly provided numbers on attendance for all home Tiger football games during the 2004 season.The office of the vice president for student affairs quickly provided records detailing the distribution of Student Activities Funds for 2003-04, and travel expenses for the Student Government Association were provided to auditors by the accounting office without incident.
The office of Judicial and Ethical Programs mailed an auditor records on the number of individual student cases referred to the judicial affairs office in 2003-04. Once again, as was the case in the request for records from the counseling center, the student only requested numbers, not names or information about specific students.
Following the letter of the law
Of the 16 open records requested by U of M students, seven were provided in total compliance with the Tennessee Open Records Law. Three students obtained records after intense questioning and evasive actions by certain offices. Six of the documents were not provided to student auditors within the timeframe indicated on Freedom of Information Act request letters.
"I think there is a lot of ignorance when it comes to the law," said student auditor Angela Fullerton. "People don't know what constitutes an open record."
Another student, who obtained her documents after multiple visits, a couple of days and lots of questions, said she went through more difficulties than she should have."They gave me much more trouble than they had to," Charity Mulder said. "The documents I was asking for weren't even controversial. I took up a lot of their time and they took up a lot of my time. It was so unnecessary."
Yann Ranaivo was trying to get a copy of Segway purchasing records, but he never got to touch or copy the document.
"I don't think releasing Segway costs is going to burn down The University," Ranaivo said. "I was dumfounded by the whole situation."
Student auditor Trey Heath agreed that people try to stall you when asking for records.
"Their first reaction is to delay your request and stall you so they can talk to their superiors," Heath said. "They want to think about the information you're asking for and talk to University lawyers."
Do ignorance or evasiveness drive the problem on university campuses?
"I think it is a combination of both," attorney Goodman said. "Many university and college officials are uninformed about Freedom of Information laws, and they don't realize their legal obligations."
Goodman said many people are aware of the laws, but avoid complying with them because they think they can get away with it.
"Others think that revealing the information will reflect negatively on them or the university," he said.
Press releases and updates from the Student Press Law Center show a flurry of action on the Freedom of Information front for student journalists. Results from the open records audit at The University of Memphis indicate significant room for improvement in the area of open records access. Just over 43 percent of the 16 requested records were provided to students in a manner that was fully compliant with the Tennessee Open Records Law.
"Every time someone makes a request and pushes it, making an issue out of non-compliance, it forces schools to be more forthcoming," Goodman said. "I think there are more students asking to view open records than ever before."
