Editor's Notes

An obligation to tell the truth

By kelly moyer

The Sherwood Gazette, Nov 28, 2007, Updated Oct 30, 2009 (1 Reader comment)

ADVERTISEMENTS

About 10 years ago, a group of professional journalists sat down and tried to define what it means to be a journalist and what the role of journalism actually is. What they came up with was a set of rules they called “The Principles of Journalism.”

There are nine of them. No. 1 dictates that “journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.”

No. 2 says journalism’s “first loyalty is to citizens” and No. 5 reinforces a big one: that journalism “must serve as an independent monitor of power,” reminding us that this country’s founding fathers recognized that an independent press was the best way to keep check on the checks and balances they’d just established.

Recently, in the course of pursuing a story regarding a possible lawsuit against the city of Sherwood I had to keep these nine principles in the very front of my mind.

Since my first obligation is to tell the truth, before I printed anything I had to make sure there actually was a potential lawsuit.

Under Oregon law, a person wishing to file a tort claim against a public body like the city of Sherwood must first file notice of their intent. This is called a tort claims notice and, under Oregon’s Public Records law, these notices are considered public documents.

I believed that the former police chief wanted to sue the city so I requested a copy of a tort claims notice from former police chief Bill Middleton or his attorney, to the city or the city’s attorneys. This document request wasn’t meant to cause city leaders great distress or trample on former police chief Middleton’s personal freedoms. Rather, this was my way of pursuing the truth - and of relaying that truth to you, the citizens of Sherwood.

Unfortunately, city leaders (on advice from their attorneys) didn’t see it that way.

They denied my request, and told me the document I had requested was not a tort claims notice and therefore was exempt from the Oregon Public Records law. They didn’t say it didn’t exist, only that it wasn’t a tort claims notice.

When a journalist (or any member of the public) is denied a document he or she believes to be a public record, the next course of action is to appeal that denial to the proper authority - in this case, the Washington County district attorney.

I filed my request for the document on Oct. 17. One week later, the city denied my request. I filed an appeal to the district attorney on Oct. 25.

On Oct. 26, the district attorney sent notice that he had received this appeal and asked the city of Sherwood to send him the document in question.

“Your prompt reply within seven days would be appreciated,” Washington County District Attorney Bob Hermann wrote to Sherwood City Manager Ross Schultz.

Seven business days (11 actual days) later, an email from the city’s attorney arrived in my mailbox. It was addressed to the district attorney and contained the document I had originally requested, as well as an explanation that the city had denied my request because the city’s attorneys felt the document was not a tort claims notice.

Before the district attorney could rule on this matter, however, City Manager Schultz had a change of heart.

“Whether the document can somehow be treated as a tort claims notice or not is, at this point, irrelevant and the city manager has opted to authorize release of a copy of the document to Ms. Moyer,” city attorney Paul Elsner wrote to the district attorney (and to me.) “There is no need to get into an extensive debate about it or to have your offices spend any more time on the matter.”

1 | 2 Next Page >>