All we wanted was to look at some public records from Hemlock Twp., Columbia County. By the time it was over, we were accused of criminal activity, had a legal bill of more than $3,000, and became front page headlines. A citizens group, formed to investigate inappropriate expenses by the township, learned that in four years the township went from a surplus of $373,000 to having to borrow $117,000 just to pay for road projects. The group has already spent almost $30,000 in legal and miscellaneous expenses--and is still blocked at having easy access to pubic records, even though Judy Snyder, one of its leaders, is an elected auditor for the township. The township supervisors, defending many of their actions to block public access, have already spent more than $55,000 of taxpayer funds to fight right-to-know requests and the citizens' attempt to remove the supervisors for malfeasance. One township solicitor, from a Bloomsburg law firm, even told the press the Hemlock citizens were "unAmerican" for challenging the township authority. The township's Wilkes-Barre attorney stated during depositions that if the citizen's group didn't cease its efforts, he would drag out legal proceedings indefinitely until the township went bankrupt.

    Supervisors chairman Joe Harvey, when confronted by a weak state law on the public's right-to-know, told us and our attorney, "I don't care about the Pennsylvania law. This is Hemlock Township." And, he may be correct. Our case with Hemlock Twp. is typical of citizens dealing with the state's current law.

    Although Hemlock Twp. has only 3,000 residents, it has an assessed value of more than $200 million, with a mall, banks, motels, restaurants, and a major I-80 truck stop. Four years ago, soon after a three-man board of supervisors took office, residents began to hear about bills and payroll increasing drastically. The supervisors soon laid off half the police force, claiming financial necessity. Asking to see where their tax dollars were being spent, the citizens were defiantly refused access to all records. With no other recourse, a citizens' group of over 100 members hired an attorney and filed a lawsuit seeking access. They needed documentation to determine if excessive pay to the supervisors (who were also the paid road crew) or misappropriation of funds had created the crisis.

    In July 1999, we attended a meeting of that nearby township, and formally asked for such records under the state's Right-to-Know law. The chair demanded to know why we wanted public records, then rebuked us for not living in the township, although the law applies to all citizens of the Commonwealth.

    The following day, we contacted the township secretary to review documents and get the necessary copies. She informed us she was going on vacation in a few days, and no one else in the township knew where the records were or could release any information. We would have to pay her overtime and wait indefinitely to get any records.

    A week later, after several unsuccessful telephone conversations, we went to the township office once again to request the financial information the citizens needed. After 15 minutes we left, without seeing the public records, or any promise we would ever see those records. We contacted the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) for assistance. Both state and national SPJ leaders sent strong letters to the township. The township response? Joe Harvey was furious at the "outside interference"--and sent us a bill for $344.99 to be paid before any copies would be made. This included the cost of overtime, staples, paper clips, a toner cartridge, and mileage charges to get the toner and paper clips. (The supervisors also told citizens who were in the offices under a court order to look at certain documents in July that they would have to pay for air conditioning they used.) Despite the supervisors and their solicitor now being aware of the law that permitted citizen inspection of documents, the township would not allow us to look at the records until we paid the bill. We had no way to know if the time and expenses were legitimate, padded, or a violation of state law. The supervisors also refused to let us see any original documents. There was no way to determine if all records requested were provided, or if some records were deliberately withheld or tampered with. We were also told we could not bring in an accountant, lawyer, or other assistance.

    Soon after our appearance in the township office, Chairman Harvey ordered "his" remaining police force to investigate us for harassment, disorderly conduct, and wiretapping, although our tape recorder was in plain view. A police officer came to our home and questioned us for two hours. The police officer twice listened to our tape of our visit, then told us it appeared the township staff were harassing us, not the other way around. He reported this to the district attorney who also reviewed the tape. In the end, our fifteen minute office visit had triggered a two month investigation, which ended when the district attorney told the police chief there was no evidence to support any of the supervisors charges.

    After Hemlock Twp. continued to block our attempts to gain public documents, our attorney began legal proceedings. We asked the township to release documents and to establish a formal procedure so other citizens would not go through the harassment we encountered. Three months and a three-inch thick folder of paperwork produced a form to request documents. Not the documents we sought. Not a guarantee that citizens would get what they requested. Just a form so citizens could ask for what was legally theirs. But the government still could block citizen rights. The office was open on a random basis, and persons couldn't make appointments to get the information from the secretary.

    In three months, SPJ paid over $2,500 in legal fees--and this was at a significantly reduced per-hour rate. Telephone, fax, and postage costs, incurred by us personally, amounted to more than $500. The average citizen cannot afford legal expenses, doesn't have the knowledge or time to pursue such cases, and has no organization to support their efforts to challenge the government's abuse of power.

    Pennsylvania has one of the nation's weakest and most ambiguous Right-to-Know and Sunshine laws. Current penalties are so light, and prosecution almost inconsequential, that the public is being denied information that is rightfully ours. Equally important, every political subdivision can use taxpayer dollars to obstruct public access with little fear of repercussions. Further, there is no law to limit the amount of taxpayer dollars a government can spend to block access to public records.

    Bills have been introduced into the House and Senate to expand the Right-to-Know law and to penalize public officials who deny citizens the right to look at their government's workings.

    The General Assembly and Senate, which approved the 1957 law--which exempted themselves from its coverage--is now faced with looking at proposed legislation. But, the opposition is strong. The Legislature apparently still doesn't want the new law to apply to itself. Gov. Tom Ridge is on record as supporting the extension to the Legislature, and to increase penalties, but opposes most of the proposed reforms, citing an increased bureaucracy that could result. But, 37 states, including neighboring New York which has its own oversight agency, have specific programs to help citizens get public records from their governments.

    Opposition has also come from law enforcement and rape crisis centers, which are using spurious arguments to argue that the public shouldn't have access to certain records. Most citizens don't want to know all the details of ongoing investigations by the police or the details of a rape case, or who called 911. These areas aren't even in the proposed legislation. Frankly, just about any criminal can--and will--get this information without the Right-to-Know law. The citizens, not the criminals, merely want to see where their tax dollars are going, and how their governments are being run.

    The Governor's press secretary has even haughtily told the media that the access to government documents is something of importance primarily to the news media and that most people don't care about it. But, we can't count on the media to vigorously pursue our rights to information; it is a responsibility each of us must undertake in a free society.

    The problem in Hemlock Twp. is not an isolated incident. Many public agencies and governments, perhaps from ignorance, exhibit a demeanor which has a chilling effect on the average citizen, most of whom don't understand the amount of information to which they are entitled. Many officials don't want the people to know how government works because they must think the people . . . just . . . wouldn't . . . understand!

    We, as citizens, must make sure that our elected officials do the right thing. Pass stronger legislation to return to us the Constitutional right to be a part of our government by making it easier to look at public documents, and to severely penalize those who deny us our rights.

Copyright 2000 Walter M. Brasch