18 comments

  • rahimnathwani 2 hours ago
    Some agencies have a different tactic: go really slowly.

    I sent a public records request to my local school district on March 9th 2026.

    They responded on 19th March 2026 saying they'd respond on in late April.

    Since then, every month they've sent an email with some small portion of the records, with a PDF letter saying they'll send a follow up a month later.

    I've received 8 of those responses so far, and there's no indication when, if ever, I will have received all the records responsive to my request.

    • Hnrobert42 1 hour ago
      Having been on the other side, the delay may not be a deliberate strategy.

      Your question likely landed in someone's inbox. The work falls outside normal scope of the person's job. There's likely zero guidance on how to answer and an implication that the person is personally liable if they accidentally reveal something that legitimately should not be revealed, like PII. And the question is competing with many other priorities in their inbox making it easier to snooze it for another day.

      This is not an excuse just an explanation. I was not aware of some of this until I got here. I try hard to answer thoroughly and with as much detail as possible. Sometimes it just takes a while.

      • rahimnathwani 1 hour ago
        "The work falls outside normal scope of the person's job."

        Maybe in some cases, but not in this case with this agency (SFUSD).

        The responses I've received so far from SFUSD (over several years) were each from someone whose whole job is/was dealing with public records requests.

        One of the requests that was refused was for a Google Slides deck that was visible to all of SFUSD's ~10000 employees.

      • paulddraper 1 hour ago
        As in, the email was misrouted?

        Or simply it falls into no one’s job?

        The latter is deliberate. The former, maybe.

        • Hnrobert42 1 hour ago
          In my case it is the latter.

          In one example, someone wanted all internal training, presentations, engineering documentation, internal policies, etc related to the use of AI to accomplish a specific goal.

          I was temporarily assigned to be a kind of product manager for the project, so I have the best access to all the multiple departments with 100s of staff involved. That said, I have no authority over them. I don't know every related policy, who developed what training, what engineering documents exist in some random share drive.

          It meant calling meetings with the project leads to explain the request. Then hassling them to hassle their staff to check all their drives. Reading through all that material to ensure engineering didn't screen cap PII while making a training slide or put security-sensitive details in an engineering document. There was no guidance on what is not releasable.

          And we get maybe one or two of these requests a year for different projects. So it wouldn't be a judicious use of taxpayer resources to build a reliable system for answering these requests.

        • pixl97 1 hour ago
          Eh, I'd say it's way more complex than that. State agencies are under budget and staffing constraints just like regular businesses. Every employee tends to have more work than they can finish, and tax payers don't want to increase funding or want to actively lower it.
      • gxs 58 minutes ago
        I’m with you and always the first to point out an alternative explanation

        But having to do with this subject specifically, the pattern is so common and the behavior so blatant, the amount of looking out for each other is so absurd, that I’d reject any claim that gives them the benefit of the doubt that doesn’t come with convincing evidence

    • forsalebypwner 2 hours ago
      Yup, the Milwaukee PD took over 6 months for a fairly basic records request, and that was even with me following up monthly to ask them for an update. In the end, the only cost to me was <$5 for the 2GB flash drive they put the files on.

      Unfortunately Wisconsin State Law only gives vague guidelines on this ("must respond reasonably quickly" or something along those lines)

    • kfichter 41 minutes ago
      About 3 years now for the NYC government
    • arjie 58 minutes ago
      Haha, Bay Area agencies are truly amazing. When a driver (negligently, in my opinion, considering that she lied about what happened) derailed a muni train, I asked for what actions were taken as a result and the only thing that was provided was that a hearing was performed.

      I don’t mind waiting but I think I’d prefer paying for faster results. BART took half a year to respond to how they calculate on-time rating but they did finally give me the answer. It had some interesting properties (canceling trains leads to higher on-time performance if trains are late) and I wrote it up here: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/BART_On-Time_Metric

    • garciasn 2 hours ago
      And this is when you get on each and every single school board meeting agenda and sit in on every single public meeting available.

      You ask them repeatedly why there’s a delay in public record release. You ask them all privately at every meeting for an update.

      Be patient. Be polite. Be kind. But be fucking absolutely persistent; especially at the public meetings.

      They want to be a fucking obstructionist? No problem; be persistent and public. School board members are not generally career politicians; they’re largely single issue members who leave once their kids are done with the district or they move on to another office or area.

      School board members don’t like political pressure from the public. School district administrators are largely shielded from the public. Make them feel the pressure.

    • kotaKat 1 hour ago
      Took over a year for me and the NSA, so the benchmark is pretty slow. Ended up free, though.
    • toomuchtodo 2 hours ago
      Let muckrock.com know, they track this data when requests are made on their platform.
    • paulddraper 1 hour ago
      Strangely, the article never posted what the request actually was.

      There usually is a fee for the amount of information, or for the scope of the search, lest they get spammed for low value drive-bys.

      If the request was “anything anywhere anytime related to X” they could be expensive (millions is incredulous, but expensive).

      If the request was “last 9 months arrest records by X” that is more scoped.

      The article never says.

  • cactacea 2 hours ago
    > the Eugene Police Department claimed searching for records and processing the request would take at least 44,816 hours of staff time and cost approximately $2,484,599.04.

    44k hours is ~21 years. Beyond absurd

    • AnimalMuppet 1 hour ago
      Yeah, that's begging for a lawsuit compelling them to produce the requested records.

      44,000 hours? For one individual? What are they doing, transcribing with quill pens, and they first have to capture and pluck a bunch of geese in order to get the quills? Even that shouldn't take anything like that long. I can't see any way that such a number is justifiable; they should certainly be force to justify it.

      • natebc 46 minutes ago
        At that rate surely they started with just goose eggs.
  • black_puppydog 28 minutes ago
    Worth pointing out that Germany is having an ongoing battle over our FOIA equivalent, in which a host of people who were bitten badly by it (most notably Jens Spahn) are proposing to allow exactly this kind of prohibitive fee, as well as reducing access to natural persons (so the individual reporter, not the newspaper) and only to people who have a reasonable interest, etc.

    Sure, the current form of the law has some issues on the receiving end, but boy is this an obvious move to cover their own corruption better...

  • ghusto 1 hour ago
    Freedom of Information Act in the UK means I make a request, and I get the information I asked for within 30 days. No excuses, no nonsense "fees".

    Just what in the hell is happening in the USA?

    • Hnrobert42 1 hour ago
      That surprises me. When I worked in the Uk in a regulated industry, I observed it is very risk averse and process focused. I'm surprised the government can consistently turn around a response in 30 days.
    • hibikir 1 hour ago
      Any corrupt organization anywhere will do its very best to protect itself from reputational loss whenever possible. It just happens that in some societies, the amount of protection those organizations can provide to themselves without quick consequences is much higher than in others.

      In the US, a lot of supposed government organizations are basically immune to pressure from elected officials. A police department can do more to harm the standing of a mayor than the mayor can do to said department. In fact, sometimes you even have state involvement to make sure the mayor looks bad. See, for instance, the wonder of the St Louis Police Department. The state votes in a different way than the city, and the state passed laws to take over the local police department. Thus they control budgets and leadership, even though the actual taxpayers that foot the bill are local. As you might imagine, this leads to very strange incentives.

    • callamdelaney 51 minutes ago
      That’s not true. They can reject requests for basically any reason and routinely do. They’ve actually patently ignored requests I’ve sent previously.
    • petcat 1 hour ago
      USA states have their own public records laws on top of federal FOIA laws. The national FOIA law is basically the same as UK.

      In this case, they are using the Oregon Public Records Law to drag their feet. Other states have better laws, or worse depending on which side of the information the state's voters are more keen on protecting.

    • darkmarmot 1 hour ago
      Corruption, grift, fascism.
  • mistrial9 3 minutes ago
    An Oregon State official came on to a State of California zoom meeting as an invited speaker. The Zoom meeting was public, but niche.. maybe the man did not realize it, or maybe just had confidence. The Oregon State govt bureaucrat described in detail a two-layer system for storing certain public records, such that the records subject to Freedom of Information Act were "not available" to the public facing system. The bureaucrat said quote "this is designed to avoid public information requests". I assume that he thought he was in a closed meeting of California bureaucrats to use such language openly.
  • dabinat 1 hour ago
    This is comparatively a bargain compared to what the DoD wanted to charge:

    > In 2015, the Department of Defense told a Freedom of Information Act requester, who was asking for records on tools used to preserve data on seized devices, that fulfilling their request would take 15 million hours and cost $660 million.

    (15 million hours = over 1700 years)

  • tyrabound 41 minutes ago
    There are very few things that are as important as existing this insidious organized criminal syndicate we erroneously call the justice system.
  • sellmesoap 2 hours ago
    I've been seeing more FOIA request costs going up, justice for those wealthy enough to pay for it, as per usual!
  • infinite_spin 2 hours ago
  • sarjann 1 hour ago
    Is there no organisation with power to police this? In the UK we have the ICO and if we're not satisfied with the response to a FOIA request we can escalate it to them.
    • b33l 1 hour ago
      This sounds like a job for ... Ombudsman!
  • leptons 2 hours ago
    They probably know their bad cops are going to end up costing them at least $2.5mil in fines and settlements.
    • sleepybrett 1 hour ago
      i was going to say, fundraising for the eventual civil suit.
  • HumblyTossed 2 hours ago
    The people should do something about this.
    • degrees57 32 minutes ago
      Well, it _is_ an opportunity for someone in Eugene who is willing to run for city council. Whoever is currently in that seat would either have to defend the police department (which for this issue would look pretty bad), or they would lean on the police department too, which _would_ be helpful.
    • Razengan 1 hour ago
      Good idea! Let me open up my internet and post a comment.
  • hluska 1 hour ago
    This story gets even more interesting when you pull out other sources:

    > During a Thursday, Oct. 8, meeting of the Eugene Police Commission, Chief Chris Skinner said: “We reached out to the requester, gave them a heads-up that it was going to be a big number, and asked them if they’d like to collaborate with us on how they can narrow their scope, change their scope, get them to yes on something to release that, and they chose not to do that.”

    But James Croxton, editor-in-chief for Double Sided Media, in an email Friday to Lookout Eugene-Springfield said police never made such an offer, describing how managing editor Mary Bell called to follow up on the initial request and was told by a records supervisor that the number of potentially responsive documents was 2.6 million.

    “The call lasted for 5 minutes and 11 seconds and there was no offer to help narrow the scope or anything of the sort,” Croxton said Friday.

    (Source - https://lookouteugene-springfield.com/story/justice/2026/10/...)

    —

    Or a further quote from that article says:

    > Double Sided Media sought “[all] completed internal affairs complaints, intake logs, investigative summaries, witness interviews, audio/video evidence logs, and disciplinary notices issued to or involving Justin Peckels where findings of misconduct were ‘sustained,’” with the request covering an eight-year time period, June 18, 2018, through July 30, 2026.

    The request also sought “[a]ll internal and external communications, correspondence, and logs sent, received, or maintained by EPD’s executive staff — specifically including Police Chief Chris Skinner and Deputy Chief — dated between June 18, 2018, and July 30, 2026, regarding any misconduct investigations, internal status, negotiations, discipline, stipulation, or certification of Justin Peckels.”

    —

    Contrast that with this statement from the posted article:

    > The city’s response is beyond belief. In its response to the request on Monday, the Eugene Police Department claimed searching for records and processing the request would take at least 44,816 hours of staff time and cost approximately $2,484,599.04. (A separate request by the outlet for similar records concerning a former police officer, Eric Klinko, was met with a comparatively modest estimate of $195,869.52, for a grand total of nearly $2.7 million for both requests.)

    —

    Charitably, Justin Peckels’ supervisory bandwidth appears to be roughly 12x that of another officer.

  • the_real_cher 1 hour ago
    It should be called Pay for Information Act
  • underlipton 2 hours ago
    At some point, we need to face the functional corruption of many of our basic institutions. Defund/Abolish the Police tried to force that reckoning, but no one wanted to hear it. This, in the same country that dismantled many of its own public school systems when racial integration was ordered, proving that such sweeping changes are possible when there is the will and funding behind it.

    An outside observer could credibly conclude that Americans actually favor corruption in many instances. Certain instances.

    • spencerflem 1 hour ago
      People wanted it, the protests were historically big. It’s billionaires, the politicians they buy, and the people influenced by the media they own that are opposed.
  • Razengan 1 hour ago
    How much should we charge the fuckers for keeping records on our entire lives?
  • phendrenad2 2 hours ago
    If a hyper-left-leaning place like Eugene, Oregon is powerless to control their police department, what's the point of voting?
    • natebc 34 minutes ago
      To flip Congress in the hopes that a few people that will actually obey The U.S. Constitution are elected.
    • fn-mote 1 hour ago
      Just the police department? Seems like the politicians are complicit. That’s a problem that voting can fix.
      • rootusrootus 40 minutes ago
        Sort of. But you may have to fire most of the police force first. They lean pretty hard to the right and as soon as a left leaning politician tries to hold them to any accountability they immediately respond by turning their backs (sometimes literally) on the public and their sworn responsibility. Basically bullying the public into voting out any politician that rocks the boat.
      • Exoristos 55 minutes ago
        Eugene has been a one-party town for forty years.
      • ghusto 1 hour ago
        I'm looking at this from across the pond, and I'm not convinced that's true. From here it looks like you have a choice between voting for the liar who says things you don't like, or the liar who says things you like. Neither will do what they say.

        UK and EU politicians are also liars, but some are only so out of necessity. I see corruption here too, but I also see people trying to go the middle road and do what they believe is right. I do not see that in the USA.

        • rootusrootus 38 minutes ago
          > I also see people trying to go the middle road and do what they believe is right. I do not see that in the USA.

          You only have visibility through a lens that is intentionally showing you only the most click-worthy perspective. In real life there are plenty of people trying to do what they believe is right. But it's hard, thankless work, because even when they succeed someone or another will claim they are biased, etc.

        • johnisgood 23 minutes ago
          You are correct in EU politicians being liars and corruption, though I want to mention the recent events in Hungary, and our fight against corruption and the corrupt politicians, many of them have been arrested after almost 2 decades of no accountability. There is hope, it seems! I would have never expected this to happen. Seems like our new PM and Govt wants to be on the good side of the history books.