Well, it's official. The Woodstock Crime Log has been officially declared not to qualify as "news media" under the Local Records Act.
What is amazing to me is that, when I make a request to the Woodstock police chief, I get a response from the City Attorney. This is not the first time I have made a request to the City of Woodstock and have received a reply from the City Attorney. Perhaps I should feel privileged. Actually, I wonder why a city official cannot or will not reply and why the City spends so much money having the City Attorney reply. Letters from lawyers are not cheap. This one probably cost the City $250-500.
I had requested the crime reports from the Woodstock Police Department, because I believe residents are not adequately informed of crimes in Woodstock. The police department regularly faxes crime reports (whether all of them or selected items remains to be seen) to the news media; however, the Northwest Herald now publishes Woodstock crime reports only about once a month, and The Woodstock Independent publishes a few on a weekly basis. Since the P.D. is already distributing the reports, just how much additional effort does it take to add one more fax number to the distribution list?
Many departments (and I'll assume this includes Woodstock P.D.) use fax machines capable to sending a "broadcast" fax. The operator programs a distribution list of telephone numbers into the fax machine; when a message is sent, the machine takes care of the rest without human attention. Many organizations receive the same message with one press of the Send key.
City Attorney Rich Flood referred to the limited number of postings so far on the Woodstock Crime Log. He's got a point. It's new. And if they won't give me any information about crime in Woodstock, it's probably destined to remain low in number of articles. But a glance at Woodstock Advocate shows well over 1,000 articles in 22 months. I wonder if he considered that. Probably not, since my request was from the Woodstock Crime Log and not the Woodstock Advocate.
The letter also informed me that the Local Records Act doesn't mention blogs. I don't get the crime reports, because the Act doesn't mention blogs? Well, I'll bet it doesn't exclude blogs.
Oh, and hits on the blog? Somewhere the City Attorney must have found a counter that indicated 2,000 hits in one year. The Woodstock Crime Log is new, and I don't have a counter on that site. But I did put a counter on WoodstockAdvocate.com recently. Since January 3, 2009, there have been over 2,400 hits - in 10 days!
It's clear that the Woodstock Police Department and the City of Woodstock do not want to release the crime reports to me. There is another way to get them, which will cost the City much more in time and labor. An obvious solution is to file a Freedom of Information Act request periodically (monthly? weekly? daily?) with the P.D. and then wait for their response within the period of time allowed in the FOIA law.
(The preceding article is also published on www.WoodstockCrimeLog.info)
You never know who is interested…
3 months ago
3 comments:
The hits doesnt mean a thing, get a more detailed one that show unique hits( which means different people) and not ones that just count when ever someone refreshes the page or goes back a page. All it logs is when the server gets a hit to send info. not how many people have actually looked at it. So it like 50 people checking back here every so often everyday. Not enough to become a media source.
Thanks, ace. I'd love to have a sophisticated website and a counter that would record unique visitors. I'm aware that the counter includes each time I publish an article or visit the blog. But I wasn't the one who brought up hits as a reason for approving or denying my request.
We can have transparent governance in Woodstock, or getting information can be like pulling teeth - which is the way it is right now.
Of course, it's the same way at the sheriff's department. I started asking for information about the ICE unit a while back, and the guy in charge won't even return a phone call. All that means is that a FOIA request will be used, as soon as that topic gets to the top of the pile.
Is there a small newspaper in the ares with whom you are friendly? Perhaps they can send in this request on their letterhead, naming you as their online correspondent. You can reward them by placing a link prominently on your site.
It's a low-tech, low-cost solution to your problem.
I get presses releases and agendas mailed/faxes/emailed to me because I often identify myself as a columnist with The Community Word, which I am.
Good luck.
Post a Comment