Dan Gookin posted this information under another thread but it deserves a spot of its own. Here’s the report from the Idaho Freedom Foundation:
City refuses to disclose public info regarding employees
Idaho Freedom Foundation Executive Director Wayne Hoffman today criticized Coeur d’Alene city officials for refusing to disclose the full identities of its employees. IFF is a non-profit, non-partisan group which is in the process of developing a government transparency website. On Monday, IFF requested the city provide the names, titles, departments and rates of pay for each city employee. City Human Resources Director Pam MacDonald responded on Tuesday with a list of employees, but the first names of the employees were withheld.
“First names will not be provided because that would indicate gender. This is exempt from disclosure under Idaho Code 9-340C(1),” MacDonald wrote in an email to IFF after the organization requested the complete data.
That statute says employee names are a matter of public record. The law also says a public employee or applicant’s gender is exempt from disclosure under the public records law. So far, the city of Coeur d’Alene is the only entity in the state to use gender identification as a means to hide public information.
“Using the city’s logic, employees named Pat or Shannon should have their names fully disclosed, because those names are gender neutral. The city’s response to our public records request is absurd, shallow and indefensible. They’re just looking for ways to keep the public from quickly being able to figure out who makes what,” Hoffman said. “The city’s action also means all emails, correspondence, reports and other documents generated by the city can have employee names removed.”
Hoffman noted that on Wednesday, IFF asked for salary information from the city of Twin Falls and received a response from the city — complete with first and last names of all employees — the same day.
July 30, 2009
From Dan: CdA Refuses
34 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Interesting, so as to make sure I have this right. The city did comply with titles, last names, and salaries, but did not supply first names?
Comment by Eric — July 30, 2009 @ 1:01 pm
The city of Courd A’lene is way off their rockers.
Here is a link to a search of employees off of the State of Idaho website – no problem disclosing names there. Hope it works.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 1:28 pm
It doesn’t – but you can go to Idaho.gov and go to the
State Employee Email & Phone Search and you can type in any full name you want.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 1:32 pm
1st off why is gender recognition a problem? Why does it need to be hidden and who cares about knowing or not knowing about it?
Seems like much ado about nyet from both sides of the aisle to me.
Comment by Wallypog — July 30, 2009 @ 1:43 pm
Wally I’m with you. But again did the city supply names, titles, and rates of pay?
To me it looks like yes they did BUT, they left out the first names. Is my assumption correct or not? Anyone?
Thanks, Eric
Comment by Eric — July 30, 2009 @ 1:57 pm
Reads that way to me, Eric.
Comment by Wallypog — July 30, 2009 @ 2:03 pm
I like arguing public records disclosures and exemptions. I find public records laws facinating as well as the rest of the gamut that comes with it including Federal Privacy Laws, HIPPA ect. I have been a victim of private disclosures and had to court a couple of times pro se to fix it. Idiots.
So, if i get on your nerves just tell me to shut up.
This is how I see it. The city of CDA has found a loophole in 9-340 C in the first paragraph that cites the word “sex”. They interpret this as “gender” so they can hind behind disclosing the names of employees by claiming that it discloses something that is private via their first name that might cause discrimination in some way. This was their theory to keep the information ‘tight’ so it would still be difficult to identify the employees. If this works and folks want emails ect. then they can blank out names to save their butts.
It’s semantics and this is what I have found:
I could be wrong here, please get me straight if I am. The IFF needs to appeal the case. They will win.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
Well, the city has confirmed that secrecy trumps openness. At least when they think they can get away with it. How stupid. Time to demamnd that council members tell administration to open up; at least the ones running for reelection! Gender is established by names? How sexist, how discriminatory, how stupid. I already said that. My name is Francis, Kelly, Shirley, Terry, Tony, ….Am I a male or female?
Coeur d’Alene, The City of Execellence? Hardly.
Comment by Gary Ingram — July 30, 2009 @ 2:30 pm
The irony of this – is just yesterday the city decided to recklessly handle their documents regarding questions Kathy Sims had for the City Clerk so they could leak it to a “gossip blog.”
Thanks Dan and Mary for getting this stuff to us!
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 2:43 pm
Okay, seeing as no one answered my simple question except Wally, and thanks Wally, I’ll go out on a limb and assume that the city complied with the request and supplied everything asked for EXCEPT first names. Which as I read in the statute, they don’t have to. If I’m wrong on my assumption please let me know.
If I’m correct, then this is what I was trying to tell you guys about approach. It might have been much easier and rewarding to simply say;
A request was made to the city by ABC company to supply “public” information on employees, i.e. Salaries, titles, etc. While they complied they found it necessary to leave out first names for whatever reason, be it to hinder such an inquiry or to continue to keep from the public whatever they can about the daily operations of our fair city. In any case they found a statute to justify their actions. Needless to say this information is of interest to other cities our size in order to help define salary baselines and things of that nature. The only people to benefit from actual names would be the general population of our city and most people in our city would know that, Mayor- Bloem, implies Mrs Sandi Bloem. So technically they are hiding nothing other than their own paranoia.
You guys need a PR person, while this is an interesting development and important to point out, indeed, but making it seem as if the sky is falling just weakens your overall cause and we all know there are bigger issues that need to be addressed where we would want to be taken seriously. There are many creative ways in which this could have been stated to turn this back around on those in control of our city. Instead it just feeds them ammunition to say, see these guys are being a pain in the neck for the sake of being just a pain in the neck.
Comment by Eric — July 30, 2009 @ 2:56 pm
It’s just another straw, Eric. Nothing significant by itself, but part of a pattern.
Comment by Dan — July 30, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
Eric, yes. Basically you’ve got to pick your battles and if you choose to boil over on a petty issue it deflates the importance of the serious issues. Now, I would agree that this is clearly a sandbox issue. I would portray it as just an example of how the local yokels work the rules to impeded any level of transparency. On the other hand they are at least consistent.
Mary and Dan, keep in mind also that your critics are furiously looking for any chinks in your armor. You have got to triple check your sources and be crystal clear about any representations, cuz they will nail you for the slightest imperfection.
I for one would like to understand exactly how Chesrown made out on the NIC corridor ride-the-taxpayer-N2-the-ground deal. Do they even have HUD 1 closing audit forms for these big gnarly transactions? Now that information would be some substantial fodder for public disclosure. Eh?
Comment by Wallypog — July 30, 2009 @ 3:09 pm
Eric, the wording, approach and info in this Press Release came from the Idaho Freedom Foundation. I understand that the first names may not seem all that important, if the other information was given, but there are good reasons for disclosing the first names. I called the Exec. Director of the Idaho Freedom Foundation and had an interesting conversation with him on this subject. Here are the highlights:
1. The IFF has been doing this for years and no other municipality has ever interpreted the law to mean that gender must be hidden by withholding first names. Using that argument, the law also says that ethnic background is an issue. Should last names be withheld to prevent any ethnic interpretation?
2. The State of Idaho, (as our Stebbijo has already reported above), lists all state employees’ full names and phone numbers on their web site.
3. The Idaho Freedom Foundation tracks salaries and pay increases over the years, which is impossible to do accurately without full names. Johnson/Smith/Jones etc. could lead to major confusion, as could any partial name really. Full names are part of the public record.
4. If a public employee has serious problems in one jurisdiction, and moves to CdA, it is not possible for the public to discover the connection without the whole name.
5. It’s difficult enough for the public to track how government uses our tax dollars. These types of roadblocks only make it more obscure.
This whole thing reminds me of many of the public records requests Bill McCrory has attempted (perhaps he will describe some of them for us). The city of CdA has been willing to give him the info…..for absurdly large amounts of money. Their actions clearly show their attitude toward the public.
Comment by mary — July 30, 2009 @ 3:46 pm
Eric, try not to get testy with your new friends. Some of us have been fighting the battle for open government for a long time and any attempt to find yet another method to game the statutes is not taken lightly. Anything smacking of secrecy is, in fact, a big issue.
Comment by Gary Ingram — July 30, 2009 @ 3:53 pm
OK Mary that help clear things up some as to the importance of first names. The city unfortunately has found a viable statute that is legit and legal. The fact that no other city has claimed such a stance is unfortunate. Saddly in this case the sun shines on a dogs butt every once in a while and our city with the statute use has seen some sunshine on this one.
Gary, I understand and can appreciate the long battle, I hope I’m not conveying testiness as that’s not my intent at all, just perhaps a fresh set of eyes as to perception.
Comment by Eric — July 30, 2009 @ 4:07 pm
The Idaho Freedom Foundation Director did not seem to think the city of CdA had a legitimate stance on this; he thinks they are misinterpreting the laws in order to hide information from the public. That was the reason for his Press Release. I don’t know what further action this watchdog group will be initiating.
Comment by mary — July 30, 2009 @ 4:17 pm
Eric, the city has found nothing.
I believe the city is way out of line here. They need to disclose the entire names.
Title 9 34OC (8) when it comes to exemptions regarding disclosures states this:
The IFF Director is right. The city is deliberatly skewing the laws to hide information. Not so long ago the SR petitioned the emails of the local county Prosecuter – the Idaho Supreme Court in a landmark case which forced the county to comply and hand over all correspondence – first names included. It’s public information.
If the City of CDA even thinks for a minute they can make their argument stick and if by some bizarre act they did – not one newspaper or blog could disclose a first name legally or anyone else without liability. Title 9 340 C works for more folks other than government employees. It discusses personal information Think about it. No public servant could be referred to by first name or anyone else if they claim their first name as personal – just like a SSN. The above section states that names are not considered personal information.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 5:14 pm
Well done, Stebbijo. And imagine if, as the IFF Director said, race or parentage were interpreted as connected with one’s last name. Some surnames do point to certain ethnic backgrounds, just as some first names lean toward genders. But we all know enough Jamies and Carols and Sandys and Pats to know that its not consistent, just as surnames do not accurately tell one’s heritage.
Clouding the issue by withholding name information makes it that much harder for the public to understand what the city is doing with our tax dollars. These employees were hired with the understanding that their basic ID and work information is a matter of public record.
Comment by mary — July 30, 2009 @ 5:28 pm
Good jobs guy. keep up the good work, just remember breath in breath out.
Eric
Comment by Eric — July 30, 2009 @ 6:28 pm
Exactly, Mary!
You know it, most of us all know it, now let’s see if the city get get it.
This is the kind of stuff that makes national news and makes Idaho look like
I-Dumb-Ho.
Coeur d’Alene, Idaho – The City of No Names.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 6:32 pm
Eric, Jimmy Buffett would appreciate your reference to his song: “Breathe In, Breathe Out, Move On”. I am married to the area’s major Buffett fan!
Comment by mary — July 30, 2009 @ 7:02 pm
Here is another angle, Human Resources Director Pam MacDonald does not know what she is doing. She may have decided to interpret the law herself without meeting with the city attorneys. Maybe she does not know the difference between personnel and personal?
I have seen some really bad releases when it comes to “personal” information via our our government agencies, and then I also have found that our government agencies are way more protective when it comes to their own information being disclosed under the guise of “personell” informations.
I would expect a statement from the city attorneys or mayor on this incident, sometime in the near future.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 9:29 pm
Yeah, my spelling is bad when I am in a hurry and I don’t use spell check. Just to clear it up – it’s “personnel” or “personal” information. I wonder if “Pam” is gender specific, or female or male, since she disclosed her name and all and she happens to be a city employee?
Comment by Stebbijo — July 30, 2009 @ 9:41 pm
Right on Mary, I have this watch that doesn’t have numbers or moving parts, it always just reads,,, now.
I bet he has the same one.
Comment by Eric — July 31, 2009 @ 7:59 am
I just read on the CDA Press that the IFF used the Freedom of Information Act to gather their information.
So, if this is true the IFF would have to take the City of CDA to federal court to get the judgement for them to hand over the names?
I see where Gridley was a smart ass and said it should be up to a judge instead of just complying so their actions are deliberate.
The City of Coeurdalene is an embarrassment and this kind of stuff is not good for tourism or business.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2009 @ 12:43 pm
I am logging this for record. Here is our own city councilman’s take on it by Mike Kennedy from the “other blog.”
So this is a city “policy”? Doesn’t matter that there is not one reference to the word “gender” in the Idaho Public Records Law – 9 340 C? What a bunch of bull****.
Great “policy” from an unknown attorney but he was loved and respected. Gee, that’s factual enough for me to swallow.(not)
They need to hand it all over, now, or it’s going to cost us all money we don’t want to spend – because the city is STUPID!
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2009 @ 1:02 pm
Okay, I may have jumped the gun. That stuff was written by Mike K – not sure for a fact if it was Mike Kennedy. So, just in case, maybe the webmaster should take it down. Sorry.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
Stebb, tourist won’t give a rat’s hind quarter about this topic or the outcome of it.
Comment by Eric — July 31, 2009 @ 2:08 pm
You might be right about that Eric – everyone likes a good joke. The front page of the CDA Press this AM might have given a few of those world class tourists a laugh or two.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2009 @ 5:22 pm
Hey Eric – I am following this subject over at the other blog. So I see Mike K responded to you with this.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2009 @ 5:46 pm
The blockquote on Mike K is messed up – it should be like this.
That was all Mike K said, I said the rest – from the above post.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2009 @ 7:51 pm
Nice job Stebb. Listen, I voted for Mike, and I know he’s less than liked here and that’s fine and everyone is truly entitled to their opinion. Note that I am still at extreme odds with him over what I call the “Library Bait and Switch” and the “Kroc Dirt Scandal”
I want to be clear though that I am not opposed to either in concept and without writing a novel with my opinion on it I’ll leave it at that.
Now, as it pertains to this subject, love him or hate him, I see someone in complete agreement with how we see this situation on disclosure of first names. We can sharp shoot every comment made by an elected official on this subject. If I were a council member I would defer to council’s take on the letter of the law and hope that they knew what they were doing. However, like this particular council member, in this case, I would voice my dislike of the outcome and, to the best of the ability of due process, direct change. Or voice change.
Certainly some here are going to say, “Oh boy, Eric is a Mike K guy” well say what you will, I am as people go, I like and respect him and his better half has a lot to do with that.
We certainly differ on major things though as it pertains to our fair city. Does that mean I’ll vote for him this go around, anyone who knows me knows that that one is not a given.
That being said, I’ve known Mary for some time actually longer, not as close but that’s just because we don’t bump into each other as much via Church, school, and kids sporting events. Nonetheless I’m by all means a “Mary guy” and equally like and respect her just as much. Our pasts have traveled a somewhat similar route business and geographically.
So, where am I going with this rambling? Well, Gary Ingram pointed out to me a few posts back about the long difficult attempts being made to get complete open government and I knew that but, him pointing it out again really helped me to better choose my words and reactions. Point is, I gladly can be a Gary I guy, a Stebb guy, Dan G guy, time will tell. I’m a Dave O guy, a Bloem guy, because I’ve gotten to know them and again while we differ there is always hope for compromise because I witness the core portions where it counts, Love of family, love of friends, and above that love of God. Without sounding like a fanatic, in our house its God, Family, Country, in that order, period. Once that’s established dialog is much more beneficial and genuinely mutual. And that is how things get done and how understanding one another makes openness a given, and indeed a desire from all sides out of respect to actually work together.
OK All “kumbia” aside, can we differ? Heck yes, For example I love my Mom and Dad, of course, but do I think or tell them they’re full of crap, (wait, I would never use those words with them but you know what I mean,) yes sometimes we do differ but we listen and out of love and respect compromise, genuine compromise results.
Lastly, before I go play a double header baseball game in 100 degree heat, (nutcase) do I put my foot in my mouth, do I say things from time to time that I regret and even can’t take back? Oh Yes, I’m guilty but I’m trying and indeed am a work in progress.
Comment by Eric — August 1, 2009 @ 10:09 am
Eric,
Thanks for your feedback. This blog is about rational discussion and I think it is okay to agree to disagree. I haven’t always agreed with everyone here. However, I generally stay out of the NIC and Riverstone discussions because it really is out of my league. Public Records and the Judicial System, however, our an interest of mine. And, I always jump on any bandwagon that informs of possible corruption in the area.
I appreciate your respectful attitude, but I am just not that nice anymore. After years of trying to be nice, I call the kettle black now. This attempt to cover up first names in an effort to keep things secret is nothing but “crap.” Mike K is trying not to ruffle the inside connection’s feathers, while he pansies is way through this. Hiding behind Jeff Jones is sad.
BTW, I have read where folks are seeking an AG opinion on this. They can’t get one. The AG’s office is not allowed to intervene in city government. If the AG’s office releases an opinion citing Coeur d’Alene, they may be out of line.
I believe the only way the AG’s office can intervene is if we file a complaint with the city police and the city prosecuter asks for help from the AG’s office.
I still have not heard from Justin Ruen (Idaho Cities Association Policy Analyst)on the Sim’s letter disclosure, he should also be intrested in this incident since CDA is the only city to buck State law on goverment agency name diclosures claiming gender violations. I guess I will have to call again.
But, I understand – CDA is really a small town. Everyone is connected and unfortunately, politics can make and break friends, reltionships, or lose jobs, when folks actually stand their ground and do what is right. When you know some of these people on a personal level, it is more difficult to remain unbiased if not corrupted from within.
One attorney told me he could not take my case(s) because he would have rocks through his window if he did. I get it, I really do. I know how things work around here.
I have yet to experience/see genuine compromise in this area. But, with that said, you are right, it would be nice if love and respect were powerful enough to fix the current state of affairs.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 3, 2009 @ 11:13 am
Mike Gridley is not a champion of open government, I fully agree! Oops I may have just given up his sex.
The only city to withhold first names for a cheesy at best excuse that it would give up the sex of a person, perhaps they should hide their name tags and names on desks, not answer the phone giving their first names only, sign a letter in only their official capacity without a name, and wear a disguise.
Without question Mike would be pleased to accomodate that!
If that was Mike Kennnedy’s comments and he doesn’t agree then get it before the City Counsel isn’t that your job. And what policy are you exactly referring to, who created it, when, and with what authority? Is it in any City manual?
Comment by Appalled — August 12, 2009 @ 4:21 pm