this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
405 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59607 readers
3431 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lickmygiggle@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

With a total staff of 11 I'm guessing there's not a huge budget for outside contractors to do the work.

If it came down to it the remedy is to challenge it in court. An impartial judge should be able to look at the argument from the local government and determine if their argument is legitimate or not.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not talking about the city budget, I'm saying the person requesting documents could pay for the labor needed to get the documents.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

A third party can't view the un-redacted documents because the city can't share them.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Right, hence the payment. With the payment, the city could hire someone to free up time for someone to handle and redact the documents. Or pay someone overtime. Or however else the city thinks is reasonable. So instead of saying "no", offer a labor price.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The State only allows us to charge $15/hour for staff time for PIRs, so we can't just hire someone or ask an employee to work an extra 20 hours a week for a year to pull some documents the requestor won't even read.

The thing is lots of these ludicrous requests are made by right-wing lobbyists who try to make us spend 80 grand on a pointless request so they can point out how the city is wasting money. They create problems so they can get the state to remove our ability to make local Ordinances.

For legitimate requests, we go out of our way to meet them. I've spent a lot of time digging through paper files from the 1920s to help citizens.

But most of our requests are either automated bullshit from realtors looking for cheap land, insurance companies looking for who to advertise to, contractors looking for work, lobbyists looking to stir up shit, or, oddly enough, lawn service companies.

For those requests, we do what's legally required and not a damn thing more.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That makes sense, but there should always be a way to get information from a government, even if it's expensive. Governments work for the people, so everything should have a process.

I'm sure someone would be willing to pay hundreds of thousands to get the footage in the OP, and saying "no, is it's too hard" isn't acceptable.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

That's why it's important to hire professional city staff. For requeats that are important or reasonable, we find a way to do it. And even with the one from my example, my first reaction wasn't "No," but for me to clarify why the request was so difficult and for me to suggest how they might revise their request in a manner that would both be easier to provide, but also would provide more useful information.

I keep incredibly detailed records, which is why we've won every court case that's come up since I took over these duties. So I know how to search the data and parse out what is actually useful.