Agencies' interpretations of the law vary widely

Ask to see a couple of days' worth of police calls in Thatcher, and they sit you in front of the computer to scroll through it with you.

Do the same in Yuma and Sheriff's Department personnel tell you no, they don't have anything like that for the public. But press a little further and they do find a way - at a cost of around $120.

These two communities on opposite sides of Arizona reflect a trend uncovered during a statewide audit of public records access: The state's police agencies are all subject to the same open records laws, but few interpret the laws the same.

In Thatcher and in Yuma, auditors walked in unannounced one day during October and asked to see the incidents that law enforcement officers had responded to during a 48-hour period. This list is commonly called a police log.

The auditors reminded officials and clerks about the law: "Public records in the custody of any officer shall be open to inspection by any person at all times during office hours."

In both communities, police officials decided to get a legal interpretation before they acted. They called the county attorney.

The results:

In Thatcher, a rural town of 4,500 that's 2 1/2 hours northeast of Tucson, the chief was puzzled but let the auditor sit down at a department computer and review the log information.

"We've never had anyone request that before," Chief Gary Cleland told the auditor at the time.

He thanked the auditor for spelling out the state law and said, "There's always a first."

Not so in Yuma County, a military and agricultural area of 160,000 that is the state's top lettuce producer.

Personnel within the Yuma Sheriff's Department gave conflicting views of the agency's approach to public records requests.

They told the auditor that the department doesn't keep a log the public can see. Still, officials came up with a way to answer the request: Buy the front page of the incident reports filed during the 48-hour period - 117 pages at $1 per page.

The staff misunderstood the request, Maj. Matthew Catron, chief administrator for the agency, said later when informed of the purpose of the visit.

Catron said a 48-hour incident list could have been compiled after deletion of sensitive information that can be excluded under certain exceptions to the Public Records Law, such as the names of suspects.

The Yuma Sheriff's Department attempts "in every way to cooperate with the press and the public," said Sgt. Rick Hanson, spokesman for agency.

But Hanson said he has noticed that the department may hesitate before releasing files of an investigation, even though it's closed, when it's of a "personal" nature.

He gave suicide as an example.

"We would probably want to know why," Hanson said. "But for the average 'who stole my bike?' report, who cares?"

Administrator Catron denied that public information on a closed investigation would be held back for any reason.

"If it was public information, we'd have to give them a copy," Catron said.

A spokeswoman for the state Attorney General's Office, the top law enforcement agency in the state, saw no problems with the different ways people were treated when they sought the same public record in Thatcher and in Yuma.

"The law is there, but it's up to their legal counsel to make a determination of what is public and what is not public," said Pati Urias, with the Attorney General's Office.

The attorney general, Urias said, has no authority to enforce public records laws. She noted that the law provides one avenue for appeal: Take the case to court.

Said Urias, "You have to sue to get enforcement."

* Contact reporter Jeannine Relly at 573-4213 or by e-mail at jrelly@azstarnet.com.