Open records — e-mails

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Open records — e-mails

E-mails sent to a state senator are open records, and must be disclosed, without the identity of the sender being redacted.

“Public awareness of ‘who’ is attempting to influence public policy is essential for effective oversight of our government. For example, if a person or group of persons who has played a significant role in an elected official’s election—by way of campaign contributions or other support—contacts a lawmaker in favor of or opposed to proposed legislation, knowledge of that information is in the public interest; perhaps even more so if the person or group also stands to benefit from or is at risk of being harmed by the legislation. Disclosure of information identifying the sender may assist in revealing such a connection. Here, for example, the circuit court observed that ‘Act 10 personally affected all government employees’ and Erpenbach acknowledged in his affidavit that Act 10 ‘directly affected [the] rights and obligations’ of the public employees who e-mailed him. The Institute asserts that ‘there are a number of form e-mails that make up a substantial amount of the e-mails received by Senator Erpenbach’ and that this, along with the content of the e-mails, suggests coordinated activity by public employee unions to affect the outcome of Act 10. Disclosure of the redacted information sought here can provide the public with knowledge and insight regarding who was attempting, either individually or in an organized fashion, to influence the public policy changes under consideration and thereby assist the public in performing its important government oversight function. See, e.g., Milwaukee Journal Sentinel v. City of Milwaukee, 2012 WI 65, ¶4, 341 Wis. 2d 607, 815 N.W.2d 367 (the open records law ‘reaffirms that the people have not only the opportunity but also the right to know what the government is doing and to monitor the government’); Schill, 327 Wis. 2d 572, ¶2 (plurality opinion) (‘The right of the people to monitor the people’s business is one of the core principles of democracy.’ (quoting Editorial, Shine Light on Public Records, WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL, Mar. 14, 2010, at B1)). Whether government employees, another public official, a lobbyist, the CEO or employees of a corporation, the president or members of a union, or other individuals supporting or opposing a particular interest, awareness of who is attempting to influence public policy is of significant interest to the public.”

Reversed and Remanded.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2013AP1187 The John K. MacIver Institute for Public Policy, Inc., v. Erpenbach

Dist. II, Grant County, Van De Hey, J., Gundrum, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Esenberg, Richard M., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Pyper, Thomas M., Madison; Buchko, Cynthia L., Madison