Woman wins high court decision on school district e-mail records

In a legal decision made during Sunshine Week, which promotes open government and access to public records, the Nevada Court Supreme Court denied an “emergency motion” to delay the release of a year’s worth of e-mail records from the Clark County School Board.

Karen Gray, a Henderson resident who requested the information, will likely get it Friday because of a deadline set by District Judge Susan Johnson.

And she won’t have to pay a cent for it. For now, anyway.

Gray, whose case had been labeled a “nuisance” by Clark County School District officials, said Wednesday’s ruling restored her faith in democracy. Noting she was just a “soccer mom,” Gray said the Sunshine laws not only apply to the news media but also to “everyday people” wanting information from their government.

Maggie McLetchie, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, which represented Gray, said, “We think it’s fitting that Karen will finally be getting her requested documents during Sunshine Week. She will get to do her job as a government watchdog.”

Michael Rodriguez, a spokesman for the school district, said officials were reviewing more than 1,500 e-mails to make sure they would not inadvertently release personal or confidential information.

The case challenging the fees is still under appeal before the Supreme Court.

School officials originally wanted to delay the release of e-mail records until the case was settled. Lawyers said the case could lead the state Supreme Court to rule on the conditions or the extent to which government can charge fees for public records requests.

Rodriguez said the school district has never opposed the release of public records, but the requests should be narrow and specific. If the request is vague or too broad in scope — Gray had requested a year’s worth of records — school district officials should be able to charge for costs incurred in getting the information, Rodriguez said.

Under Nevada law, public agencies can charge for such “extraordinary use,” but extraordinary use is never defined in public records law. School district lawyers have cited an attorney general’s opinion that “extraordinary use” would be a request requiring 30 or more minutes of staff time.

In response to Gray’s request, the school district originally claimed that the e-mail retrieval would cost more than $4,000 and 60 hours of work. In January, school officials revised the figure down to $135 because new technology had shortened the job to three hours. The cost also came down when Judge Johnson ruled that the district could not charge for editing e-mails for confidentiality.

In her decision, the judge said the law favors “public disclosure” and that “extraordinary use” should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

Johnson thought Gray’s request was “focused and direct” and that Gray should be not charged.

McLetchie, the ACLU lawyer, said she fears that if government is given too much leeway with “extraordinary use,” it will impose large fees to discourage access to government.

She rejected the argument that the lack of a fee would open the door on nuisance requests.

“As a practical matter, there aren’t very many Karen Grays interested in open government,” McLetchie said.

Gray filed the public information request for research into education law. She wants to close loopholes so school boards can’t delegate their policy-making authority to the superintendent and school staff.

She originally wanted access to a year’s worth of School Board e-mail records from November 2005 to November 2006, in time for the 2007 Legislature.

Gray said the e-mails could expose how discussion on public policy is subverted and provide insight into the workings of the School Board.

While it’s too late to get a bill introduced in the current Legislature, Gray believes she might have time to get an amendment attached to a bill that could make improvements in education law.

Contact reporter James Haug at jhaug@reviewjournal.com or 702-374-7917.