That crash you just heard was the sound of the Ohio Supreme Court taking a shot against open records laws. Last Tuesday, the all-Republican court determined that when public agencies hire private attorneys to compile reports, the report can be protected by attorney-client privilege. In the past, reports were often released after legal advice had been removed.
The case in question concerned a lawsuit filed by the Toledo Blade against the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority. The newspaper had sued to gain access to a report regarding claims of an extra-marital affair between the port authority president and the port authority's lobbyist, which may have resulted in the lobbyist improperly receiving money and influence.
The problem with such a ruling is that the court just gave public entities an easy way to avoid giving the media access to what would normally be public records. It's hardly an exaggeration to assume that this loophole will be exploited or that future courts could even make this loophole larger. Many people in positions of power fail to respect freedom of information. Ohio University's own Board of Trustees Chairman C. Daniel DeLawder wrote in an e-mail last summer: I am even unsure that we should provide the next document without a fight. It sickens me to think of the waste and unproductive time being spent in the name of open records and freedom of the press.
The rest of us, however, are sickened at the thought of what the powers that be will get away with if they do not have an informed public and the watchdog eyes of journalists keeping them on their toes.
Last Tuesday, the Toledo Blade lost. If this becomes a trend, so will the rest of us.
4 Opinion
Court ruling creates loophole, lets public entities avoid sunshine laws
