An aerial view of downtown Lake Charles. (Getty Images)
The mayor of Lake Charles faces a lawsuit for withholding more than 300 pages of public records containing his emails. The case also challenges how much the city charges to obtain such records, arguing that it has a chilling effect on the public’s right to know how local government is run.
The Tulane First Amendment Clinic filed its case Sept. 23 against Nic Hunter in the 14th Judicial District Court for Calcasieu Parish on behalf of the Louisiana Illuminator. Hunter was served with the lawsuit Tuesday. In addition to his role as mayor, Hunter is also the city’s custodian over public records who has the final say over what can be released.
Freelance journalist Natalie McLendon, on assignment for the Illuminator, requested copies of the mayor’s emails from a three-day stretch in April “to better understand who the mayor was in communications with and what public business was being conducted,” according to the lawsuit. The Illuminator is seeking the records in question for a future story regarding the city’s budget.
“On the advice of legal counsel, Mayor Hunter is unable to comment on pending litigation,” spokeswoman Katie Harrington said when asked for comment Tuesday.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
McLendon’s request was filed May 13, and she emailed the city’s designated public records representative five days later after not receiving any response. Louisiana’s Public Records Act requires records custodians to respond within five business days with acknowledgement that a request is being fulfilled or reasons why it’s not.
On May 21, City Attorney David Morgan emailed McLendon and said he would begin a review of the requested documents. He reported there were 1,466 pages to review and estimated that only 1,000 would apply to her request without explaining why the remaining pages would be exempt as state law requires.
The lawsuit contends Morgan violated state law because he was 11 days late in telling McLendon that certain records would be exempt, and he failed to explain why the documents were being withheld.
Morgan also asked for a pre-payment of $262.50, which McLendon submitted the same day.
The city attorney notified her by email May 27 that he had completed his review and found 1,168 responsive documents. He charged her an additional $42 but did not explain why 298 pages were being withheld.
McLendon made the additional payment and received paper copies of the documents May 30. Paper copies were chosen because the city attorney would have charged $584 for electronic records, nearly double the paper rate.
The Illuminator’s lawsuit claims the city’s fee rate for electronic copies, 50 cents per page, is unreasonable and violates state law. Melia Cerrato, an attorney with the Tulane First Amendment Clinic, cites an appellate court judgment from an Ascension Parish case that found “custodians of public records are already compensated for performing their duties, including the duty of responding to public records requests …” meaning any additional fees to compile records can be considered extraneous.
The only cost to the requester for electronic records should be for a CD, stick drive or storage device, which costs between $2 and $10.
The lawsuit asks the court to determine what fees should be charged, if any, and to stop Hunter from charging 50 cents per page for electronic records for any future requests.
“The imposition of high fees for public records, where the law is clear that only actual costs may be charged, serves to shroud the government’s acts in secrecy and discourages the public from exercising this constitutionally protected right of access,” Cerrato writes in the lawsuit.
The court is also asked to make the city provide all requested records or explain why they should be exempt, citing the allowable exception from the state’s public records law.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.