Municipalities — open records

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Municipalities — open records

Where a municipal body denied that a record of motions and votes existed, it violated the Open Records law, and plaintiffs are entitled to attorney fees.

“In this case, the Newspaper reasonably relied on the statutory requirement that the Commission create, maintain, and release a record of the motions and votes at the February 20 meeting when it requested information regarding the motions and votes from that meeting. In providing the requested information following the initiation of this action, the Commission rendered moot the Newspaper’s request for a writ of mandamus. The fact that the Newspaper’s record request became moot when the Commission provided the information, however, does not mandate dismissal of the entire action. The Newspaper still has a viable claim for attorney fees and costs if the litigation ‘was a cause, not the cause’ of the Commission’s March 22 release. See WTMJ, Inc. v. Sullivan, 204 Wis. 2d 452, 458-59, 555 N.W.2d 140 (Ct. App. 1996). To hold otherwise in this case would undermine the purpose of both the Open Meetings and Open Records Laws—transparency in government. See State ex rel. Auchinleck v. Town of LaGrange, 200 Wis. 2d 585, 595, 547 N.W.2d 587 (1996). We therefore remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on whether the filing of the lawsuit was a cause of the March 22 release of information and, if so, for a determination of attorney fees and costs.”

Reversed and Remanded.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2013AP1715 The Journal Times v. City of Racine Board of Police & Fire Commissioners

Dist. II, Racine County, Ptacek, J., Reilly, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Dreps, Robert J., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Letteney, Scott R., Racine