From the Wilmington Star-News (6/12/09): An anonymous caller left a message on my voicemail this week asking why the StarNews is asking to see what he described as the "private" e-mails of people who work for local government agencies.
“Haven’t you ever had personal stuff on your work e-mail?” he asked. “You should just mind your own business.” Click.
The caller, who I must assume is a government employee, was unhappy with our efforts to get access to e-mail sent and received by elected and appointed officials in Brunswick County. We already have similar arrangements for e-mail access for officials in New Hanover and Wilmington.
The question at hand isn’t whether government employees’ e-mails are a public record. Everyone involved agrees that e-mail sent and received by government officials doing public business should be open for inspection.
At issue is whether those using a government agency’s e-mail system should be allowed to filter out messages that they deem to be “personal” or “confidential.”
The N.C. School of Government has been advising local governments that this practice is appropriate. The N.C. Press Association, which represents newspapers like the StarNews, disagrees.
Yeah, yeah, you may say. Just another case of journalists and government officials getting into a spitting match, right?
Wrong.
The issue here really isn’t about the “government.” It’s about the people who make up the government. After all, it’s not the “government” that determines whether an e-mail that happens to detail a backroom deal or a botched project should be classified “personal.”
If I am the one who botched the job, it might seem pretty “personal” to me, but to the citizens whose lives were affected by the decision – not so much.
The N.C. School of Government would have us simply use the honor system and trust that everyone will use the system appropriately.
There are clear definitions in the state’s public records law about when a record is exempt from inspection. Personnel files, criminal investigations, economic development records and social service records are among the items shielded by the law.
While the law is intended to ensure that documents created in the course of doing public business are open for public inspection, there is no definition of a “personal” or “confidential” record exemption when the e-mail is sent using a government server.
The situation is complicated by the fact that many, if not most, elected officials do the majority of their public work from private e-mail accounts. The law says that public business done on private e-mail accounts is still a public record.
That hasn’t stopped public servants across the nation from using those private accounts to shield their communication from records requests like ours.
Remember last year’s presidential campaign, when Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was caught using her private account to conduct state business and refusing to release these e-mails?
Maybe I’m oversimplifying this issue, but why can’t public business be conducted on government e-mail systems and personal business be done on private systems? That’s what most private businesses expect from their employees.
Tracking government officials’ e-mail has proven to be one of the most effective ways for journalists to get a full understanding of our public officials’ decisions.
Take, for instance, the ongoing investigation into the actions of former Gov. Mike Easley. The News and Observer in Raleigh has been aggressively investigating a whole host of allegations against Easley and his administration in recent months.
The newspaper’s investigation has mushroomed into a federal grand jury probe, and just this week it resulted in the resignation of N.C. State Chancellor James Oblinger and other top college officials as well as in former first lady Mary Easley’s dismissal from her job at the school.
This all happened after the N&O published a series of e-mails between NCSU administrators, including the chancellor, and top aides from the former governor’s office. Some of the e-mails in question were sent from private e-mail accounts.
The N&O used the documents to piece together the series of events that led to creation of Mrs. Easley’s position at the school. The e-mails showed that Oblinger and others in his administration had numerous detailed exchanges with a university trustee, who served as a go-between for Gov. Easley and the school’s administration. They also show that Easley took an active role in the creation of his wife’s position and salary, which raises numerous legal and ethical questions.
Questioned about the circumstances that led to Mrs. Easley’s employment, Oblinger repeatedly told N&O reporters and his own boss, UNC System President Erskine Bowles, that he didn’t recall how it all happened.
But when he was confronted with the e-mails by reporters, he was forced to own up to the role he played, and he resigned his post.
Do you really think that if we had asked Oblinger, or any of the others involved in this situation, to make a judgment about whether these communications should be considered “personal” that they would have chosen to disclose them?
Call me a cynic, but that’s like asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
The reason we have a public records law is to ensure that we have a process that holds our government officials accountable. This seems like one gigantic accountability loophole that needs to be closed.
So, to the caller who told me to mind my own business, I have one thing to say: Your business is my business. Get used to it.
by Robyn Tomlin, Star-News Executive Editor