Citizen activists' suit opened up records

ELON -- Chatham County artist Gretchen Lothrop was a reluctant gadfly at first.

But being denied public records repeatedly and then winning in court on behalf of openness in government has made Lothrop a proud sunshine warrior, even though she and other citizens shelled out $35,000 to get what was rightfully theirs -- and yours.

"I would definitely do it all again, even though it was difficult," Lothrop said Thursday at a Sunshine Week conference at Elon University.

The challenges and virtues of going for it against resistant government officials was the theme of the conference, sponsored by the N.C. Open Government Coalition, whose new Sunshine Center is based at the private college just west of Burlington.

Dozens of journalists, lawyers, librarians and activists discussed obstacles to disclosure of government activity, public attitudes toward government, and the citizen fight in Chatham County.

A common problem is that many government office workers know little or nothing about state laws on public records and open meetings, participants said.

"There is a lot of suspicion in government offices about citizens asking for public records," said Beth Grace, executive director of the N.C. Press Association. "They seem to forget that the real bosses are the people who pay the taxes."

The conference emphasized the rights and frustrations of ordinary citizens, not news reporters.

A recent Elon Poll found that about three in five residents of five Southeast states -- North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Georgia and Florida -- don't know or don't care whether their states have laws requiring open government. (They do, though details vary.)

But 90 percent said it is important for citizens to have access to public records and meetings.

And 85 percent said democracy works best when government operates openly; 80 percent said open records and meetings keep government honest.

The February poll of about 700 people carries a 95 percent probability that its results are within 3.7 percentage points of being accurate for each question.

Lothrop's story captured the interest of the conference audience.

Before she tangled with Chatham's Board of Elections, Lothrop preferred painting, photographing and sculpting over partisanship and inside politics.

But a couple of years ago, news that the elections board would start using new ballot-counting machines worried her.

So she asked for minutes of elections board meetings at which the matter had been discussed.

She was told there weren't any, which seemed unlikely -- and turned out to be false.

"I was upset," she recalled. "I was personally offended that they took the concerns of taxpayers and citizens so lightly."

When citizens showed up at elections board meetings and asked questions, they were rebuffed again, Lothrop said.

"Ordinary, polite, tax-paying, nice people were threatened with being thrown out of meetings simply for asking questions," she said. "That was just unacceptable. A lawsuit was our only option."

Half a year after she and others filed the lawsuit, a judge ruled in their favor on all but one substantive point. The elections board, he ruled, had broken the state's Open Meetings Law three times and its Public Records Law four times.

Citizens shouldn't have to sue public bodies to get them to follow the sunshine laws, Lothrop said. And when they win, she said, they shouldn't have to pay the cost of opening their government.

"It's a grueling battle to have to go through just to make sure that public servants are doing their jobs," she said. "If they're so ignorant of the law, then they do not belong handling our elections."

Elections Board Chairwoman Audrey Poe had agreed to participate in the panel discussion Thursday but later withdrew, its organizer said.

Paul Messick, a lawyer who represented the board in the lawsuit, said in an e-mail message that the board's errors had been unintentional. He also downplayed the citizens' court victory.

"The plaintiffs prevailed in some respects but were unsuccessful in others," he said. "All in all, the case had mixed results."

The biggest disappointment for the citizens was that the judge made the elections board pay only 10 percent of their $35,000 in attorney fees.

"It's funny -- but it's not funny when you're paying the bills," Lothrop said. "We're still paying."

Even so, Lothrop has this advice for others interested in having open government:

"Don't hesitate. Go for it."