Average user interactions: How the number of people involved affects public record request complexity

Although minimizing the amount of time spent and the number of people involved in requests would seem the most strategic approach for agencies dealing with public records requests, it’s not always that straightforward — especially when the requests and the environment they arise from are becoming more complex by the day.

The capabilities and resources of the specific agency — and if it exists within a larger jurisdiction, its overall transparency and responsiveness requirements — are factors that must be considered when looking at user interactions.

How a request goes wrong

Some requests really are uncomplicated: easy to understand, easy to fulfill, and easy for one person to handle. With automated tools that flag records for proactive sharing, agencies can create environments that require no staff involvement as requesters “serve themselves” with records they can find and download with no help.

But even apparently simple requests handled by one person can go wrong, as a 2019 Washington State lawsuit showed. A request was made to the Kittitas County Sheriff’s Office for police reports, photos, and videos related to an individual. The records officer made two critical errors:

• They failed to identify 95 responsive photos and two responsive videos.
• They called the requester for clarification and during the call stated, erroneously, that under state law he was not a party to the subject incident, so he was not entitled to receive most of the records.

After the records officer retired, the successor reviewed the request, concluded it might have been mishandled, and again contacted the requester. The Washington Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling finding that the county had acted negligently and awarded the requester $15,498.

Not only did Kittitas County have to pay a penalty of more than $15,000, they paid for three court trials, which likely dwarfed the amount of the penalty.

More complexity calls for greater expertise

While this kind of mishap is probably rare and many requests are successfully handled by one person, it does represent the worst-case scenario governments are intensely focused on preventing. Granicus’ 2021 Public Records Priorities survey results show meeting request deadlines and avoiding lawsuits are the top two public records priorities for most jurisdictions (and meeting deadlines is one way to avoid lawsuits).

The number of staff interactions serves as a measure of complexity but also adds a different perspective on the portfolio of skills required to handle requests appropriately while promoting transparency and community trust.

The other priority areas for jurisdictions show the range of expertise needed to make sure everything runs smoothly and efficiently, especially with technology galloping ahead. These include:

• Data security
• Adapting to legislation
• Managing large file sizes
• Cross-department coordination
• Tracking and logging exemptions
• Reporting and oversight

A complex request, end-to-end

Many hands and minds can get involved in a complex public records request.

As an example, consider an initial request to a medium-size city by a citizens’ rights organization for a range of records related to law enforcement activity at a protest. Since the request was complex and potentially controversial, the intake staff referred it up to the records administrator. The administrator worked with other staff to identify several categories of records that were likely responsive, including written reports, logs, operational plans, emails and officer-worn bodycam video.

The videos were housed in an online digital evidence management system to which the records administrator didn’t have access. So, the city’s IT manager had to spend the bulk of one day searching the online system for potentially responsive videos based on multiple criteria and came up with almost 150 videos totaling around 100 hours. After an initial review of the footage, the records administrator concluded the videos contained non-disclosable information and had to research redaction methods.

When this process revealed the request would be unduly burdensome under state law, the records administrator involved the city attorney and department management to vet a proposal to ask the requester to voluntarily reduce the request, since state law did not allow staff costs to be recovered from requesters. The attorney then communicated with the requester about narrowing the ask, to which they agreed.

Redacting the reduced quantity of videos required the records administrator to identify the exempt visual and audio segments then separate the audio and video tracks as separate MP3 and MP4 files. They then uploaded these files to stock video creation software, edited them, then reunited them as MP4 files, totaling 35.3 hours. The records administrator then worked with the intake staff to create the invoice for the minimal costs the city was allowed to recover and coordinated with the requester to provide the video files.

More than just receive and respond

Nearly every public records request includes a shared group of steps in their process. Once complex requests get started, some steps can keep cycling before the request can move on to the next one.

• Intake: Successfully connect with the requester to start the clock on the request.
• Vet/Assess: Review the request to determine what’s needed next. Is the request straightforward, or does it require further input through clarification, coordination, or consultation?
• Plan/Delegate: Once the assessment is complete, plan to the extent possible the “life” of the request. Can it be filled in one installment? If one installment isn’t possible, when could the rest be provided? When is a first installment due? What kind of review will be needed? What further communication with the requester will be needed and when? How does the plan need to change given ongoing progress while still achieving needed results?
• Gather/Review: Begin the process of reaching out to staff for needed documents, input, and direction from legal, management, and other agencies.
• Review/Redact: Review rounds provide necessary chances to identify sensitive and exempt data that cannot be released. This is where some of Granicus’ features best maximize efficiency and time savings: Attachment Search with OCR, which makes image documents machine-readable and searchable for responsive keywords and non-disclosable data; and Veritone Video Redaction, which can be integrated with Granicus and uses AI to redact exempt data from video, reducing staff time required by 90%.
• Respond/Release: Work with the requester to provide records and document request closure.
• Report: Keep relevant parties notified on request metrics, as needed.

A diverse mix of sophisticated skills

As the example above illustrates, a variety of skills is needed across records request processing steps:

• Ability to track systematically: Make sure no requests are lost and that they are appropriately followed through the process. This is a core automated function of Granicus’ Records Request Management Solution.
• People skills and diplomacy: Efficient processes are helped by the ability to work with all kinds of people, keep functions smooth and cooperative, and sometimes be a lightning rod for frustration or even hostility.
• Analytical and strategizing: It’s helpful to be able to identify and implement best methods for maximizing efficiency across all steps and parties involved. Can someone make the request “go away” through a conversation with the requester to provide information? Will half an hour of costly attorney time still allow the agency to save five hours of other staff time? If a requester will end up getting documents from several agencies, is it better to create one point of contact for the requester or separate points of contact at each agency? What can be learned from past requests to improve request handling and systems in the future?
• Good judgment: An important ability is to recognize when there is sufficient information to make the right decision about handling request steps and when other eyes or opinions are needed. Does staff understand a statute well enough to accurately assess what exemptions may apply, or do they need guidance from more experienced staff or the legal department?
• Persistence and thoroughness: Even though public records requests come with built-in deadlines, persistence is still needed to see requests through from intake to close-out every single time. Any request that is lost or mishandled could end up in a lawsuit.
• Tech/IT skills and knowledge: Increasingly, those involved in public records requests must be savvy about rapidly emerging technological developments in gathering, analyzing, and managing records. It might not be necessary to keep up with IT staff blow for blow, but in a world where big data rules, not having some common understanding will decrease efficiency and risk staff responsible for providing data being cut off from it.

Upping the game to keep pace with public records challenges

The world is getting more complex and moving faster every day, which directly impacts the complexity of public records requests. With governments trying to keep up, regulations and policies become more complex. Tools and technology (such as email, social media, drone videos, etc.) often solve one problem only to be replaced by another. Often that problem is vast increases in the amount and size of records, which can up the risk that searches for records are inadequate — a common reason for public records-related lawsuits.

All this results in the need for higher and more specialized skill levels and experience to try to meet the letter and spirit of public records laws, public expectations, and government goals for transparency and efficiency — making it ever more challenging to keep the number of staff involved as low as possible. And, of course, involving more staff adds even more complexity.