The high cost to the public of public records
Sometimes I just don’t understand why public records cost so much when the public wants to get a copy of them.
We recently asked for a copy of a Kirkwood police arrest report. There was a conviction so there’s no question that the record is public and we had the report number, yet Kirkwood wants $36 before it will provide a copy. That’s a lot of money ($6 for copying and $30 for research, location, retrieval and review).
Not only that, but the official form for records seeks the reason for the request. Not to be impolite, but … it’s none of their beeswax.
I understand that some records requests take a lot of time and research to fulfill, but it doesn’t seem like police reports should be that difficult and costly to provide.
Sometimes it feels like governments set the price of public records as a way to reduce public access.
Jean is projects editor at the Post-Dispatch. She is a member of Bridges Across Racial Polarization, a group devoted to creating friendships and fostering communication among racial and cultural groups in the community. After growing up in a small town in Kansas, she lived in Kansas City and Wilmington, Del., before moving to St. Louis in 2004. She and her husband, Dan Wiggs, live in University City. 
“Actually when you say “zero public interest” you are taking for everyone.”–Suzyjaxx
Actually I was making an observation. It has been a running conversation on multiple threads. My bad, didn’t mean to “talk for everyone”. That is for liberals.
The incident report is public record, regardless if an arrest has been made. A police department has 72 hours to make the report available if someone wants to see it. Whether the request needs to be made in writing or just verbally depends on the individual department’s policy; that is my understanding. I know several people who’ve claimed that a particular police department has told them that an incident report wasn’t a public record because the case was still being investigated. This is wrong, and runs counter to the state’s Sunshine Law dealing with open records. This same police department, via its records clerk, claimed that I wouldn’t be able to view a particular incident report because it involved a juvenile. Because of this, she claimed, it wasn’t a public record. I had to inform her — someone who should have already known this — that the report was in fact a public record; the juvenile’s identity, on the other hand, wasn’t public information. I explained to her the identity could be blocked out with black marker.
I really believe the P-D should look into this. There seems to be a lot of ignorance with police departments regarding the state’s Sunshine Law as it pertains to records. Either that, or police just relish the power of being able to blow smoke up people’s butts.
There is another aspect of the issue involved here. What about when insurance companies want a copy of an accident report? What are they charged? Are police departments treating insurance companies as a cash cow in this regard? If so, surely this cost is passed on to insurance policy holders in the form of higher premiums.
The editorial hacks at the PD are whining about the cost of public records? Give me a break. Complaining about $36 being a lot of money yet endorse trillions in tax increases on the backs of working Americans. What hypocrites. If you don’t want to tell them why you want it, don’t order it. If Obama mandated that records cost $1000 per page you would be shouting from the mountaintop that every taxpayer should be forced to order needless copy after needless copy.