Archives for 2008

Editorial from the Idaho Statesman

GUBERNATORIAL RECORDS

Dirk Kempthorne is lurching toward releasing papers from his seven-year tenure as governor – a mere 27 months after leaving office.

No one can accuse the governor-turned-interior secretary of rushing into this one.

The problem rests not just with Kempthorne, but with state law. Idaho code contains no guidelines and sets no deadlines for the release of the archives.

As a result, Kempthorne and the Idaho State Historical Society have been engaged in a protracted public records Kabuki dance that might result in the release of some 500 boxes of gubernatorial records by September. The two sides have been meeting over the past month. As society Executive Director Janet Gallimore describes it, “We’re just working out the details now.”

Gallimore may feel obliged to put the best face on this mess. We’ll take a detached, dimmer view. It is inexcusable that Kempthorne has dragged his feet for so long – thwarting people from seeing records of his public service. The archives have been available for public viewing only with Kempthorne’s approval. The Historical Society has routinely turned down records requests, since it doesn’t have the documents.

This cloak-and-dagger policy includes equal parts paranoia and entitlement. We’re not sure why Kempthorne is trying to keep people away from the archives, but he doesn’t have the right. These may be Kempthorne’s records, but this phrase describes authorship, not ownership. The records belong to all Idahoans, although Kempthorne’s behavior would have you think otherwise.

State law requires the release of records – but the law is open-ended, and the timetable is subject to the whims of a former governor. Kempthorne’s successor, Jim Risch, promptly released his papers – although, in fairness to Kempthorne, Risch had only seven months’ worth of papers to release.

There’s nothing wrong with putting a deadline in the law; the state’s public records law has guidelines in place. A government agency has three working days to decide whether a requested document falls under the public records law, and then has 10 working days to make it available. The agency’s obligations are clear – and the process is predictable for the business person, concerned citizen or journalist seeking a record.

We don’t expect a former governor to turn over years of paperwork within 10 days.

However, we also don’t believe a former governor has any good reason to sit on records for more than two years. Somewhere in between, a reasonable timeframe can be found – and it can be incorporated into state law.

“Our View” is the editorial position of the Idaho Statesman. It is an unsigned opinion expressing the consensus of the Statesman’s editorial board. To comment on an editorial or suggest a topic, e-mail editorial@idahostatesman.com.

Editorial from the Idaho Statesman

From the Twin Falls Times-News

By Damon Hunzeker, Staff writer

Members of the Cassia County Board of Commissioners sometimes eat lunch together, sometimes bump into each other around town, sometimes discuss personal opinions privately. But according to a report issued by Attorney General Lawrence Wasden’s office Wednesday, they have not violated the Idaho Open Meetings Act.

In March, 12 residents of the Jackson area sent a letter to Cassia County Attorney Al Barrus alleging various improprieties and negligence from county commissioners regarding the law.

“Because you represent the Cassia County Commission on legal matters, we request that an independent prosecutor be appointed,” they wrote.

Barrus forwarded the complaint to the attorney general’s office – which, five months later, refuted the allegations.

The dispute began several years ago when the Jackson area was re-zoned from Minidoka County coordinates and brought into Cassia County, after which residents claimed emergency-service calls were ineffectually received, based upon confusion arising from the address changes.

Jackson citizens wanted to retain Minidoka County status. Cassia County Planning and Zoning agreed with them. The commissioners disagreed, and the residents were zoned away from their former county.

That happened two years ago. The residents attempted to incorporate a new town – Jackson – which would be part of Minidoka County. The request was denied by Cassia County commissioners.

Meetings and deliberations ensued – often, according to Jackson residents’ complaints, without sufficient notice given to the public and sometimes during executive session.

The Open Meetings Act requires that “all meetings of a governing body of a public agency shall be open to the public and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided by this act.”

While granting executive-session allowances that prevent the public from attending during those moments, OMA prohibits the agency from taking any final action during that time.

The complainants’ letter includes five specific allegations and asks that their zoning address be returned to Minidoka County.

However, according to the attorney general’s report, the grievances “fail to meet the timing provisions of the OMA” – which requires that, in order to declare a decision null and void, it needs to be brought forth within 30 days of the time that OMA was violated.

That wasn’t done – regardless, the report denies that the commission violated anything in the first place.

While acknowledging the frustrations of Jackson residents regarding inadequate emergency services, the attorney general investigation found no reason to reverse the commission’s zoning-change decision, nor any reason to consider the commission in violation of OMA.

“A review of the record reveals that the board engaged in significant public debate over the issues and provided multiple opportunities for input and commentary from the Jackson residents,” the report states.

From the Twin Falls Times-News

From the Spokesman-Review

By Betsy Z. Russell, Staff writer

Related Document: Legal brief seeking open court [PDF]

BOISE – Attorneys for The Spokesman-Review and an array of news media organizations in Idaho and eastern Washington filed arguments in federal court today in favor of keeping court proceedings in the Joseph Duncan case open.

U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge is considering closing the courtroom for the testimony of Duncan’s only surviving victim, 11-year-old Shasta Groene, and for the showing of a videotape Duncan made of his abuse of 9-year-old victim Dylan Groene, whom Duncan admits murdering.

“Open and public process is an integral part of the American judicial system,” attorney Duane Swinton argued in a 20-page legal brief. “In fact, the Supreme Court has reiterated on numerous occasions how important it is for the media to be able to effectively cover judicial proceedings.” Swinton noted that the “fundamental principle of openness” has been found to be particularly important in cases involving violent crimes, so the public knows that justice is being done.

The brief also argues for unsealing some of the dozens of court documents that have been sealed from public view in the case. Attorneys on both sides in the case earlier filed arguments agreeing to the unsealing of some of the documents.

“What unfortunately has occurred in the case at bar is that so many documents have been

filed under seal without any indication to the public even as to the general topic of the

documents, that understanding how this case has unfolded has been difficult to follow. The unfortunate result is the undercutting of the ability of the public to have confidence that justice is being accomplished and that standards of fairness are being observed,” Swinton wrote.

He concluded, “Significant decisions and proceedings are yet to occur before the Court, and, given the complexity and public significance of the issues presented in this case, including potential imposition of the death penalty, openness, essential to the ability of the public to understand the proceedings and the fairness of the same, must be provided. The record before the Court does not support sealing of records or closure of proceedings.”

The judge is expected to rule soon on the openness question. Jury selection in the case is scheduled to resume next Wednesday.

From the Spokesman-Review

From the Spokesman-Review

Duncan team OK with closed court if Shasta testifies

Betsy Z. Russell
Staff writer

BOISE – Attorneys for Joseph Duncan argued Friday that the courtroom should remain open when prosecutors play graphic videotape evidence during his sentencing hearing, but that it should be closed if Shasta Groene testifies.

The defense was responding to motions filed by The Spokesman-Review and other news organizations arguing that the First Amendment requires that key evidence in the death penalty sentencing proceedings must be presented in open court.

Duncan could get the death penalty for murdering 9-year-old Dylan Groene after kidnapping him and his 8-year-old sister, Shasta, in 2005. He invaded the Groene family’s home near Coeur d’Alene and killed three family members before kidnapping and molesting the two children.

In documents filed Friday, Duncan’s attorneys said closing the courtroom for the video evidence would violate the First Amendment and Duncan’s Sixth Amendment right to a public trial. As far as closing the courtroom for the key victim testimony, defense attorneys noted that they’ve previously agreed to such a closure and did not elaborate.

That agreement was filed under seal with the court in July 2007. The news media also are seeking the unsealing of it and several other court documents in the case, in which dozens of documents have been kept from public view.

“The interesting thing is they’ve stipulated in a document we’ve never seen to closure of Shasta’s testimony,” said Duane Swinton, attorney for The Spokesman-Review and the other media outlets. “It’s difficult to understand why the stipulation was entered because we haven’t seen the record on which it was based.”

Swinton said his law firm was served Friday with a copy of the response from John Sahlin, guardian ad litem for Shasta Groene, backing closure of the courtroom for the videotape evidence and continued sealing of certain court documents, but suggesting the proceedings will be traumatic for the girl regardless of whether she testifies and whether the courtroom is open.

“The emotional impact exists merely because the case exists,” Swinton said the response suggests, “and it will occur if she has to confront him.” He noted that a motion to seal accompanied the documents, though nothing had been filed in court as of Friday, and Swinton did not release them. Summarizing them, he said “It shows the issues involved in a case like this, and it reflects the concern of all the parties as to those issues.”

In December 2007, both sides in the case reached an agreement to spare Shasta Groene, now 11, from testifying and instead to rely on videotaped statements she made to investigators after her rescue from Duncan in 2005. However, that agreement apparently fell apart.

Federal prosecutors, in their response to the media’s motions, argued earlier that the video evidence and victim testimony should occur in a closed court. They and the defense attorneys agreed that some court documents should be unsealed. The judge has not ruled on the matter.

From the Spokesman-Review

From the Spokesman-Review

By Betsy Z. Russell, Staff writer

BOISE – Attorneys for admitted multiple murderer and child molester Joseph Duncan now say there’s been too much secrecy in the killer’s death sentence proceedings, and they’re objecting to a planned closed court hearing on Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge had ordered the closure of a status conference on “evidentiary and discovery issues” in the case, saying the closed courtroom was required “in order to minimize the likely prejudicial effects that pretrial publicity of such matters would have on the Court’s ability to ensure a fair trial.”

Duncan faces a possible death penalty for kidnapping and molesting two North Idaho children and killing one of them, 9-year-old Dylan Groene. He’s already pleaded guilty to all charges in a 10-count federal indictment. His sentencing hearings have been repeatedly delayed as the court sought evaluations of Duncan’s mental competency after he decided he wanted to exercise his constitutional right to jettison his attorneys and represent himself.

Duncan earlier pleaded guilty in state court to killing the children’s 13-year-old brother, mother, and mother’s fiancée in a bloody attack at the family’s home in order to kidnap the two youngsters. He also could face the death penalty for those killings.

Lodge said in his closure order that the hearing Thursday would involve sealed documents, potential evidence that may not be admissible, and materials in which Duncan has a right to privacy, presumably referring to the mental competency evaluations. However, Duncan has asserted no such right, his lawyers wrote in court documents filed today.

“Mr. Duncan’s privacy interests … cannot be raised for him by the court or the government to justify a closed courtroom,” Duncan’s attorneys wrote.

They wrote, “By the defense’s rough count, approximately 173 documents in the court record have been filed under seal and are unavailable for public inspection.”

The extensive secrecy in the case has prompted an unprecedented alliance of news media outlets, led by The Spokesman-Review, to file legal challenges to the planned closure of key portions of the sentencing proceedings. The court has not yet ruled on those challenges, saying it will take them up after the mental competency and self-representation issues have been dealt with.

In today’s filing, the defense attorneys said the secrecy now has gone too far, and threatens Duncan’s right to a public trial under the 6th Amendment, as well as the 1st Amendment and common law rights of access to court proceedings cited by the media.

In addition, they wrote, the court should “recognize the historical importance of open proceedings, particularly where the government seeks to take the life of one of its citizens.”

Duane Swinton, attorney for the media outlets, said, “It appears from what the defense is saying that they’ve come to the same conclusion that the various media representatives felt from day one, and that is, where you have a case involving the potential imposition of the death penalty, openness becomes even more important.”

He noted that the reason listed for much of the secrecy in the case was to protect the defendant’s right to a fair trial. “It would seem incongruous to continue with closed proceedings and sealed records when the defendant is taking the position that those matters should be open,” he said.

The defense attorneys asked that the judge rule swiftly on their motion, and if he denies it, grant a delay of the planned Thursday status conference to allow them to appeal his decision to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

“The defense acknowledges its participation in the culture of secrecy in this case up to this point,” the attorneys, led by Seattle attorney Mark Larranaga, wrote in today’s filings. “Having now considered the issues implicated by such practices, the defense believes it has mistakenly gone along with the same in the past. The instant motion has been brought to avoid allowing that improper practice to continue.”

Duncan, who earlier had been housed at the Idaho Maximum Security Institution, today was admitted to the Federal Detention Center Sea-Tac in Seattle, Wash., where he arrived just after 9 a.m. today. Earlier, attorneys and the judge had discussed sending him to a federal facility in Seattle where extensive mental evaluations are conducted that include lengthy observation periods.

In addition to the many sealed documents in the case, the judge has issued a gag order preventing all parties from speaking publicly about the case.

In Idaho’s largest-ever jury pool called in federal court, more than 300 jurors are awaiting possible service in the case. They’ll decide whether Duncan should die or get life in prison without the possibility of parole.

From the Spokesman-Review

From the IdahoStatesman.com

Forty-one attorneys general — including Idaho’s own Lawrence Wasden — support a federal shield law for journalists.

And on Monday, they wrote a letter to key senators, urging them to get moving on a shield law.

As the a.g.’s point out, shield laws that allow reporters to protect the anonymity of unnamed sources “advance a public policy favoring the free flow of information to the public.” Idaho and 48 other states already have shield laws, but a.g.’s make a strong argument on the need for a federal law.

“By exposing confidences protected under state law to discovery in federal courts, the lack of a corresponding federal reporter’s privilege law frustrates the purposes of the state-recognized privileges and undercuts the benefit to the public that the states have sought to bestow through their shield laws,” the attorneys general say in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Scroll down for the full text of the letter.

A federal shield law has made considerable headway in Congress. The House passed a version of the bill in October on a 398-21 vote (Idaho Rep. Mike Simpson voted yes; Rep. Bill Sali voted no). The Senate bill received a 15-4 yes vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee — but that was almost nine months ago.

Credit to Wasden and 40 other attorneys general for focusing some attention on this issue.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I wrote a letter on the Statesman’s behalf last week, urging Wasden to support the federal shield law.)

The text of the letter from the attorneys general:

We, the undersigned Attorneys General, write to express our support for the Free Flow of Information Act (S. 2035). The proposed legislation would recognize a qualified reporter’s privilege, bringing federal law in line with the laws of 49 states and the District of Columbia, which already recognize such a privilege. The Senate Judiciary Committee reported S. 2035 favorably on October 4, 2007, by a vote of 15-4. The House passed a
similar reporter’s privilege bill, H.R. 2102, by a vote of 398-21.

Justice Brandeis famously referred to the important function the states perform in our federal system as laboratories for democracy, testing policy innovations. See New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262, 311 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Reporter shield laws, which have been adopted — through either legislation or judicial decision — by every state but
one, must now be viewed as a policy experiment that has been thoroughly validated through successful implementation at the state level.

The reporter’s privilege that is recognized by the laws of 50 United States jurisdictions rests on a determination that an informed citizenry and the preservation of news information sources are vitally important to a free society. By affording some degree of protection against the compelled disclosure of a reporter’s confidential sources, these state laws advance
a public policy favoring the free flow of information to the public. An overwhelming consensus has developed among the states in support of this public policy, and United States Justice Department guidelines, on which the current legislation is largely modeled, likewise recognize the interest in protecting the news media from civil or criminal compulsory process
that might impair the news gathering function. Nevertheless, the federal courts are divided on the existence and scope of a reporter’s privilege, producing inconsistency and uncertainty for reporters and the confidential sources upon whom they rely.

By exposing confidences protected under state law to discovery in federal courts, the lack of a corresponding federal reporter’s privilege law frustrates the purposes of the state-recognized privileges and undercuts the benefit to the public that the states have sought to bestow through their shield laws. As the states’ chief legal officers, Attorneys General have
had significant experience with the operation of these state-law privileges; that experience demonstrates that recognition of such a privilege does not unduly impair the task of law enforcement or unnecessarily interfere with the truth-seeking function of the courts. The sponsors of S. 2035 have sensibly sought to strike a reasonable balance between these important interests, as the states have done, and we are confident that the legitimate concerns for national security and law enforcement can be addressed in the court procedures for evaluating a claim of privilege.

We urge you to support the Free Flow of Information Act and to enact legislation harmonizing federal law with state law on this important subject.

Thank you for your consideration of our views.

From the IdahoStatesman.com

Editorial from the Lewiston Morning Tribune

By Jim Fisher
Lewiston Morning Tribune
Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Television station KTVB in Boise calls itself “Idaho’s news channel,” but it acts like anything but a news organization.

Last week, the station taped what it called a debate among candidates for the Republican nomination to succeed Larry Craig in the U.S. Senate. But it did so behind doors closed to members of the public and to news organizations other than its co-sponsors in presenting the program, which you will not see identified as a debate on this page.

Those excluded weren’t on the approved guest list, explained Bryce Quarve, director of conferences and events for Northwest Nazarene University in Nampa, where the program was taped. Quarve said KTVB News Director Jim Gilchriest told him to block passage to anyone not on that list.

Those excluded include reporters for the Associated Press and for the state’s largest newspaper, the Idaho Statesman at Boise, as well as Rex Rammell, an independent candidate for the same office sought by those permitted in. The reporters left outside apparently thought they were going to cover a news event.

Shame on the Idaho Press Tribune of Nampa, the Idaho Business Review, KREM-TV of Spokane and KPVI of Pocatello for their participation in this affront to the mission of journalism. Their willingness to go along with KTVB’s exclusiveness made them look more like elected officials ducking behind closed doors to conduct the public’s business than like news organizations committed to the widest dissemination of information.

Thanks to those closed doors, there was only one print story about the program, from the Idaho Press Tribune – which appeared in Thursday’s Lewiston Tribune – and it was well short of exhaustive.

After people from other news organizations complained about the privacy of the event, Doug Armstrong, president and general manager of KTVB News Group, boasted in a written statement that his station’s taped programs promise to be “the fairest in the land.” And he charged that “other media comments unwittingly promote media homogeny [homogeneity?] and discourage media independence and diversity.”

The statement failed to explain why Armstrong’s station stiff-armed other journalists, but did sneer at actual debates such as those televised live statewide by Idaho Public Television, and co-sponsored by the Idaho League of Women Voters and the Idaho Press Cub.

“While other debates may probe fewer issues, ours provides information viewers may not get elsewhere,” he wrote.

Armstrong’s brazenness adds another chapter to the decline of what was once the Bullitt family’s great KING Broadcasting empire of Seattle, from which Belo Corp. of Dallas acquired KTVB and its sister stations – including Spokane’s KREM – in 1997.

At one time, KING-TV challenged Seattle’s newspapers for news leadership, broadcasting breaking news and investigative stories as well as incisive commentary from people like Charles Royer, who later served as the city’s mayor. Today, KTVB is reduced to asserting its superiority from behind closed doors instead of demonstrating it where it matters: in the ungated news community where quality is proved by competing with, not by silencing, others. – J.F.

Editorial from the Lewiston Morning Tribune

From the Idaho Statesman

Rows of records in Boise warehouse tell state’s story – minus Kempthorne’s chapter, for now

BY HEATH DRUZIN – hdruzin@idahostatesman.com
Edition Date: 05/13/08

Recent talks between officials with former Gov. Dirk Kempthorne and the Idaho State Historical Society finally could open Kempthorne’s gubernatorial records, which he has controlled since leaving office two years ago.

If they can reach a deal, the former governor’s papers would join a historical record of Idaho used by scholars, lawyers and curious citizens alike that documents everything from the Indian Wars to Micron.

Though Idaho law requires governors to turn over their records to the Historical Society, as every other former governor has done, Kempthorne has not complied.

But Kempthorne officials contacted the Historical Society last week after the Idaho Statesman reported Kempthorne was hanging on to his records, Historical Society Executive Director Janet Gallimore said.

Gallimore said she has not discussed a timetable for receiving the papers, which chronicle Kempthorne’s more than seven years in office but is willing to work out a deal with the former governor. Kempthorne originally wanted to give his papers to the University of Idaho.

“If they want them to be here, we’re happy to talk to them,” Gallimore said. “If they want them to be somewhere else, we’re happy to work with them.”

Before last week’s phone call, Historical Society officials say they had no contact with Kempthorne officials since shortly after Kempthorne left office in 2006 to become secretary of the interior.

A statement sent to the Statesman Monday by Kempthorne’s press secretary, Shane Wolfe, said Kempthorne officials are studying arrangements other former governors have with the Historical Society.

“Secretary Kempthorne’s representatives are in active and productive discussions with the Idaho Historical Society in hopes of forging a partnership to resolve any issues about Kempthorne administration records,” Wolfe said.

The flap over Kempthorne’s papers put a spotlight on the Historical Society, where the story of Idaho is stored box by box.

FROM SIX-SHOOTERS TO GROUCHO

If Kempthorne’s records do make their way to the Historical Society, they will join tons of documents held within the organization’s modern stone building on the eastern edge of Boise. The actions of everyone from prisoners to legislators are available.

Included in the archives is the paper trail of nearly every former Idaho governor’s time in office since statehood and many documents from the state’s rough-hewn territorial days, Historical Society Archivist Rod House said. The few gubernatorial records that are not housed in the building, save Kempthorne’s, are on loan from the society to institutions like Boise State University.

Rows of cardboard boxes and worn leather-bound books stacked 10 feet high in chilly, temperature-controlled rooms in the bowels of the building represent nearly 150 years worth of Idaho governors, from 19th century territorial leaders to Jim Risch, who served a whirlwind seven-month term in 2006.

Among the folders in the tightly packed boxes is Idaho’s history.

An 1876 letter to territorial governor David Thompson asks for a six-shooter and a carbine rifle to help mail carriers protect their Boise to Rocky Bar route. Another contains a “plea to have guns and stores ready for possibility of Indian trouble,” with the 132-year-old cursive nearly perfectly preserved on brittle, faded paper.

There are stacks and stacks of personal letters. A folder from 1956 includes letters to then-Gov. Robert Smylie complimenting him on his appearance on the Groucho Marx show.

Other letters are less cheery. In one, a woman complains to Gov. Phil Batt about ice and dead animals in the roads around Hailey; another decries a lack of school supplies.

“This is Idaho’s documentary heritage,” House said.

Most administrations have hundreds if not thousands of pounds of papers, everything from hand-scrawled constituent mail to orders for weapons.

Ironically, one of the few documents the society has from the Kempthorne administration is a proclamation in honor of Documentary Heritage Month, aimed, in Kempthorne’s words, as maintaining documents “crucial to the way we understand our past and plan for the future.”

TRUTH AND CONSEQUENCES

Governors’ papers are just a fraction of the about 80 tons of records housed at the historic society, but they are among the most highly read, House said. Already this year scholars, lawyers and curious citizens have requested 115 cubic feet of governors’ records, equivalent to about 345,000 pages.

The role of the state in preserving the historical record goes back to an 1864 act by Idaho’s territorial government, calling for newspapers to be bound and sent to the state archives. The Idaho Legislature created the State Archives in 1947 and gave them authority to catalog state records.

Many governors were of both state and national importance, said Todd Shallat, director of the Center for Idaho History and Politics. Gov. Moses Alexander, for instance, was a leader of the Progressive Movement and the first Jew elected as governor in the United States.

The records also provide puzzle pieces needed to determine whether the outcome of policy decisions reflects the intent, Shallat said.

“Ultimately, the governors’ papers are important for accountability in government,” he said. “We have to be able to see not only who did what, but we have to measure the impact over time. Who won and who lost?”

Businesses also use the archives. Barbara Perry Bauer, president of Tag Historical Research, said the archives are a “treasure trove” for her company, which compiles historical research reports for government agencies and private citizens.

“They’re invaluable,” she said. “There’s no way we can do the work that we do without accessing the state’s archives.”

Lawyers, too, rely on the archives. Correspondence can provide a window into a governor’s mind, which can be crucial in the courtroom, said Bob Cooper, spokesman for the attorney general’s office.

“They would be valuable in the way that legislative history is valuable,” he said. “In litigation, you are trying to demonstrate in some instances what the parties were thinking.”

Most of all, though, the records represent Idaho, warts and all, House said.

Echoing Kempthorne’s proclamation, he said, “The historical records of Idaho are crucial to the way we understand our past and plan for the future.”

Heath Druzin: 373-6617

From the Idaho Statesman

From the Idaho Statesman

Curtis Massood receives the honor in recognition of his efforts on behalf of open government.

BY JOE ESTRELLA – jestrella@idahostatesman.com
Edition Date: 05/10/08

Curtis Massood wasn’t looking for a fight when he asked Ada County for permission to build a billboard adjacent to a small coffee shop at 1035 E. Fairview Ave.

But he got one.

On Friday, two years after the county denied his request, the owner of Canyon Outdoor Media in Boise was presented with the 2008 Max Dalton Open Government Award for a successful lawsuit that declared the county’s e-mail system inaccessible to the public.

Along with the award, Massood received a $2,000 check, which he donated to The Shepherd’s Home, a children’s group shelter home in McCall.

The Max Dalton Award is dedicated to a former Idaho resident whose 1981 lawsuit against the Idaho Dairy Products Commission resulted in a landmark Idaho Supreme Court ruling reinforcing the public’s right to have access to state records.

“Curtis Massood has done an incredible service to the citizens of Ada County by ensuring the spirit of the Idaho Public Records Act is fulfilled,” said Idaho Newspaper Foundation Executive Director Tom Grote.

The legal fight with the county began when Kandy Sealy, a 50-year-old widow, and her father, an 88-year-old Pearl Harbor survivor, opened a coffee shop at the site on East Fairview Avenue after being greenlighted by the Ada County Department of Health, Massood said.

County planning officials told Sealy she needed to deal with Meridian city officials because the site was in that city’s impact area and would eventually be annexed, Massood said. When Sealy approached Meridian, he said, she was told she needed a $120,000 city sewer line to her shop.

In the meantime, the county had denied Massood’s request to put up his billboard adjacent to the coffee shop, arguing that it did not have the authority because the property would soon become part of Meridian, he said.

“I told the commissioners that they were trying to force annexation,” Massood said.

Acting under the Freedom of Information Act, Massood asked to see all e-mails between county employees and county agencies involving his case. What he got was a bill for $5,685.12, which the county claimed was the cost of complying with his request. He paid the bill, only to receive a second for $164,700.

“It was a real mess,” said Massood, who estimates it cost up to $80,000 in lawyer’s fees to win his case. “But the Legislature has clearly stated that e-mails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act.”

The two sides landed in court last year.

Massood said the county fell into a trap when it told Judge Kathryn Sticklen that it would involve too much work to retrieve the e-mails.

Sticklen ruled late last year that such a system put county e-mails out of the public’s reach and ordered that the county produce the e-mails.

“They finally had to admit that it would only require about two or three hours of work,” Massood said “We finally got about 20 of them last week, and some today (Friday).”

Massood’s billboard finally went up about two weeks ago, he said.

However, the story did not have a happy ending for Sealy or her father.

Their coffee shop was open for only a short time before they had to close it because most of their capital had been consumed in their fight with the county, Massood said.

Joe Estrella: 377-6465

From the Idaho Statesman