logo
Borowski: We use and fight for open records. When we do, we're fighting for you as well

Borowski: We use and fight for open records. When we do, we're fighting for you as well

Yahoo14-03-2025
Years ago, I attended a conference on investigative reporting and a particular way of thinking about reporting stuck with me: Operate with the conviction that every piece of information you may need for a story is written down somewhere.
And: You are entitled to it.
Not just you, as a journalist, you as a citizen.
Think about it.
Every ticket written, every bill passed, every judgement filed, every contract signed, every bonus paid, every campaign contribution received, every dinner bought, every report filed – about inmates being punished, potholes being filled, travel being taken, taxes raised.
That's nothing to be alarmed about. Quite the opposite: It's something to be celebrated.
That's what news organizations do each year, as they mark Sunshine Week, which begins Sunday. The week recognizes a bedrock aspect of our Constitution, the First Amendment, and two things that give it real teeth – open meetings laws and open records laws (often given the shorthand of FOIA, for the federal Freedom of Information Act).
Now, in practice, these laws carry some exceptions. We understand that. But the spirit is clear: Information about what government is doing should be available to the maximum extent possible, to be used by the people that government serves. That's all of us.
At the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, we use these laws all the time in pursuit of stories that serve our readers and our communities. This ranges from exposing gaps in Milwaukee County's 'Brady List' of police officers found to be untruthful to gathering data from 72 Wisconsin counties to understand the real picture of gun deaths in the state.
We've also used public records to expose problems at the Milwaukee Housing Authority, in state prisons, Milwaukee Public Schools, even how the chair of the Milwaukee County Board expensed roller blades and a MAC membership.
Nowhere in those laws does it say this information is available to journalists. All of that same information is available to anyone.
It's why you can search court cases online, and check campaign contributions and read the same information elected officials do before they vote on bills and measures. If you want to see what you're paying in property taxes, compared to your neighbor, you can. If you want to see how many times cars have been ticketed for speeding on your street, you can.
That's why I'm especially proud of an initiative launched by our staff.
To help bring more awareness to public records, Journal Sentinel staffers have been offering public records training sessions to resident-led groups across the city.
For instance, on a recent Saturday, reporters Ashley Luthern and John Diedrich – members of our investigative team – joined a dozen residents at Amani United's regular meeting to talk about public records. In an interactive presentation, the two walked through what a public record is — and is not — and where residents can find data, information and other records.
They gave practical examples: How to request a police report, where to look up property inspection records and how to find the latest on licensing of new businesses in the area.
Our reporters will be back with Amani United next month for a second session to give hands-on help to residents who want to find specific pieces of information or file their own records requests. If you would like reporters to join your neighborhood meeting to talk public records, let us know – you can email Ashley, our deputy investigations editor, at ashley.luthern@jrn.com.
That's one thing we can do.
What can you do?
First, you can support independent journalism. It can cost a lot of money to obtain records – from police body cam footage to databases to stacks of documents. Often, those holding the records will drive the costs as high as possible, causing some to abandon the effort.
There are many ways through the Local Media Foundation, a nonprofit group, that you can make a difference for our newsroom – including a donation that will advance our work.
Second, push back when a public official wants to give you less information, or create new barriers to getting information it should provide readily.
We've seen that most recently at the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner's office, which suddenly is refusing to provide basic information to the public in a timely manner on deaths it investigates: homicides, fatal crashes, drug overdoses, weather-related deaths. This includes such key information as when and where an incident occurred.
Under the recently-retired Karen Domagalski, the office had set a gold-standard for openness. No longer. Combine the new hurdles with the Milwaukee Police Department's refusal in its news releases about incidents to even give the gender of a victim, and it means you know much less about the public safety picture in our community.
Now, as a newsroom, we can push back – and we will. And we will keep seeking the same information from alternate sources, from family members and others, in order to cover such a vital topic with depth and context. We will not be deterred.
But something important is lost when information becomes less available.
And if it is harder for us to get it, that means it is harder for you as well.
So, if you have a question someone is refusing to answer, or the answers you're getting don't make sense, tell us about it. You can leave us a news tip at projects.jsonline.com/tips, or by emailing wisconsininvestigates@gannett.com, or by calling 414-319-9061.
Remember those two principles from the start of this piece?
What you want to know is almost certainly written down somewhere. And: With few exceptions, you're entitled to see it.
Here's a third: If someone says you can't, keep trying.
Because chances are there is something to see.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Mary Spicuzza and Wisconsin public records legal expert Tom Kamenick will be answering questions about open records requests on Reddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/wisconsin/ Monday at noon.
Greg Borowski is executive editor of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. You can follow him on X, formerly known as Twitter, @GregJBorowski and reach him via greg.borowski@jrn.com.
Connect with the Journal Sentinel
Support our reporting on the environment, underserved communities and other areas: givebutter.com/milwaukee-journal-sentinel
Send a news tip: projects.jsonline.com/tips
Reach the newsroom: jsmetro@journalsentinel.com or 414-224-2318
Subscribe and support independent journalism: jsonline.com/deal
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Borowski: We fight for open records. When we do, we're figting for you
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump shows '4 more years' hat to European leaders after White House meeting
Trump shows '4 more years' hat to European leaders after White House meeting

USA Today

time17 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump shows '4 more years' hat to European leaders after White House meeting

WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump showed one of his "4 more years" hats to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders at the White House following their high-stakes meeting on Aug. 18, according to a photo released by the White House. The photo shows Trump holding the red "4 more years" cap, while Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron look on, inside a room in the White House that contains Trump's hat collection and other memorabilia. Another hat in the collection says, "Trump 2028." Under the Constitution, Trump is barred from running for a third term. Nevertheless, he's repeatedly toyed openly about the idea of running again in 2028. "Probably not," Trump said in an Aug. 5 interview on CNBC when asked if he will run again in 2028. "I'd like to run. I have the best poll numbers I've ever had." During his Aug. 18 Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy, Trump remarked to the Ukrainian leader how Zelenskyy has postponed Ukrainian elections amid its war with Russia. "So you say, during the war you can't have elections?" Trump said to Zelenskyy. "So let me just see: Three and a half years from now, so you mean, if we (the United States) happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections." Trump added: "I wonder what the fake news would say of that." Trump previously took Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev to see his hat collection when the Azerbaijan leader was at the White House on Aug. 8, according to video released at the time. "You're not allowed to run," Trump said with a smile as he showed Aliyev a "Trump 2028" hat. "I'm 28 points higher than anybody else. Everybody wants me to run." Trump then pointed to the "Four more years hat," drawing laughs from Aliyev. Serving a third presidential term is explicitly barred by the 22nd Amendment, which states, "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice." Trump has said his vice president, JD Vance, is his "most likely" heir apparent to win the 2028 Republican nomination. "It's too early, obviously, to talk about it, but, certainly, he's doing a great job, and he would be probably favored at this point," Trump said on Aug. 5. The president has also pointed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio among other possible contenders. Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.

Trump's remarkable statement against states' rights
Trump's remarkable statement against states' rights

CNN

time2 hours ago

  • CNN

Trump's remarkable statement against states' rights

President Donald Trump's announcement Monday that he will sign an executive order aimed at getting rid of mail-in ballots and voting machines seems unlikely to amount to much. He doesn't appear to have any such authority, and legal challenges would surely follow. But it was instructive in one way: It made clear the president elected to lead the party of states' rights has very little regard for states' rights. Indeed, he almost seems to disdain them. It's difficult to read his comments any other way, especially as he has spent much of his second term attempting to chip away at states' rights — or at least, the ones he doesn't like. While selling his new pitch to get rid of mail-in voting and voting machines, Trump included this remarkable pair of sentences. 'Remember, the States are merely an 'agent' for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes,' the president wrote on Truth Social. 'They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do.' Trump has described the states as 'agents' of the federal government before in this context, but without casting them as subservient to him personally. This is a rather novel take on the Constitution, to put it mildly. As CNN's Daniel Dale notes, the Constitution says the 'Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections … shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.' Congress has a role, in that the Constitution says it can 'make or alter such Regulations.' But there is no role for the president. And Trump isn't saying that Congress should outlaw mail-in voting or voting machines, mind you. Instead, he's saying the states 'must' get rid of them because he tells them to — apparently because he was elected president and because he has determined it's 'FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY.' This is merely the latest in a long line of drastic Trump claims to power. He often claimed during his first term that the Constitution gave him absolute power. Even when out of office, he floated terminating portions of the Constitution, while repeating his false claims that the 2020 election was rigged. And earlier this year, he posted a quote often attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte suggesting his actions couldn't be illegal as long as he was acting to 'save' the country. But just as striking as Trump's claim to power on Monday was his explicit statement that states are merely his 'agents.' This is very difficult to square with decades of conservative orthodoxy, which holds that the federal government should be small and that states should lead the way. When Trump was first elected in 2016, the Republican Party platform devoted an entire section to its apparent devotion to states' rights. It said the federal government should not have any powers beyond those specifically enumerated in the Constitution. 'Every violation of state sovereignty by federal officials is not merely a transgression of one unit of government against another; it is an assault on the liberties of individual Americans,' the platform said. The platform also decried the 'bullying of state and local governments,' apparently a reference to the Obama administration. What were those state and local governments being bullied over? According to the platform, it was on 'matters ranging from voter identification (ID) laws to immigration' and on 'healthcare programs,' among other things. Trump has now taken constitutionally dicey executive actions that sought to undercut states' authority in all three of those areas: But those aren't the only areas in which he's sought to impose the federal government on the states: But few of these efforts loom as large as Trump's growing attempts to exert himself over the American elections system. Trump has not only sought to expand citizenship requirements and talked about nixing mail-in voting and voting machines; as CNN's Fredreka Schouten wrote earlier this month, his administration and its allies have taken a series of steps to apply pressure on the elections system — often in line with Trump's false claims of widespread voter fraud. This has raised fears among Democrats and watchdogs about a concerted effort to reshape the elections system in a way that benefits Trump and his party. It remains to be seen how much his new executive order might ultimately play into that, given it's not clear how such a thing could pass legal muster. But this is also an area that interests Trump greatly, owing to his years of voter fraud conspiracy theories. And it's difficult to see him standing back, no matter what the Constitution says about his powers (or lack thereof). And if nothing else, Trump has finally said how he really feels about the concept of states' rights.

The Latest: Trump planning for Putin-Zelenskyy meeting while affirming security guarantees
The Latest: Trump planning for Putin-Zelenskyy meeting while affirming security guarantees

San Francisco Chronicle​

time3 hours ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

The Latest: Trump planning for Putin-Zelenskyy meeting while affirming security guarantees

President Donald Trump said he's begun arrangements for a face-to-face meeting between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy to discuss a pathway to end Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Trump affirmed that the U.S. would back European security guarantees but stopped short of committing U.S. troops to a collective effort to prevent Moscow from reinvading its neighbor. Relying on the false information and conspiracy theories that he's regularly used to explain away his 2020 election loss, Trump has pledged again to get rid of both mail voting, used by about one-third of all voters, and voting machines used in nearly all of the nation's election jurisdictions. Based on the Constitution, U.S. elections are managed by the states, and there is little to no way for Trump to change this. Trump says he didn't speak with Putin with European leaders in the room The president said he thought it would have been disrespectful to handle the phone call that way since Putin and the European leaders meeting with him at the White House haven't had the 'warmest relations.' But despite that, he said during an interview on Fox News Channel's 'Fox and Friends' that he has managed to maintain a 'very good relationship' with Putin. Trump was holding talks at the White House on Monday with Zelenskyy and the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Finland, the European Union and NATO on ending Russia's war on Ukraine The president, in a morning interview on 'Fox & Friends,' said that he's optimistic a deal can be made to bring an end to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But Trump underscored that Ukraine will have to set aside both its hope of a returned Crimea, which Russia seized by force in 2014, and its aspirations to join the NATO military alliance. 'Both of those things are impossible,' Trump said. Putin, as part of any potential deal, is looking for the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. Government argued 'Alligator Alcatraz' lawsuits need a different court The state and federal government had argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility is located is owned by Miami-Dade County, Florida's southern district was the wrong venue since the detention center is located in neighboring Collier County, which is in the state's middle district. The defendants made an identical argument last week about jurisdiction for a second lawsuit in which environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe sued to stop further construction and operations at the Everglades detention center until it's in compliance with federal environmental laws. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in Miami has yet to rule on the venue question. On Aug. 7 she ordered a 14-day halt on additional construction during a hearing last week and said she plans to rule before the order expires this week. Judge dismisses part of lawsuit against 'Alligator Alcatraz' lawsuit A federal judge in Miami dismissed part of a lawsuit over the legal rights of detainees at the 'Alligator Alcatraz' immigration detention center and moved the case to a different jurisdiction. U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz's 47-page ruling late Monday says claims the detainees lack confidential access to their lawyers or to immigration hearings were rendered moot when the Trump administration recently designated the Krome North Processing Center near Miami as a site for their cases to be heard. The judge heard arguments from both sides in a hearing earlier Monday in Miami. Civil rights attorneys were seeking a preliminary injunction to ensure detainees at the facility have access to their lawyers and can get a hearing. Next steps in the negotiations turn back to Putin Trump, who bragged on numerous occasions during the campaign that he could settle Russia's war in Ukraine in a day, said repeatedly Monday that it was far more complicated than he ever thought it would be. But he also suggested — likely implausibly — that the fighting that has raged for years could wind down quickly. 'A week or two weeks, we'll know whether we're going to solve this, or if this horrible fighting is going to continue,' said Trump, even suggesting the issues yet to be hammered out weren't 'overly complex.' Still, much remains unresolved, including red lines that are incompatible — like whether Ukraine will cede any land to Russia, the future of Ukraine's army and whether the country will ultimately have lasting and meaningful security guarantees. Zelenskyy says meeting with Putin should be held 'without any conditions' Zelenskyy says that if he starts to set conditions for the meeting, regarding a potential ceasefire or other matters, then Russia will want to set conditions, too, potentially jeopardizing those talks. 'That's why I believe that we must meet without any conditions,' he told reporters. Zelenskyy said Trump showed him a map of the Ukraine front lines in the Oval Office and they got into a little debate about territories it showed. But they didn't argue, he said. 'We had a truly warm, good and substantial conversation,' Zelenskyy said. NATO leader says 'Article 5 kind of security guarantees' will be discussed in coming days NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte says Trump agreed that the United States would contribute to Ukraine's security following a peace deal, a development he called 'a breakthrough.' Membership in NATO is not on the table, but the U.S. and European leaders are discussing 'Article 5 kind of security guarantees for Ukraine,' Rutte said in an interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham. Article 5 of the NATO treaty says an attack on one member nation is an attack on all members, the heart of the transatlantic defense compact. Details around U.S. involvement in Ukraine 'will be discussed over the coming days,' which will give Zelenskyy the clarity he needs to decide whether Ukrainians can remain safe following a peace deal. 'It is important to also know what the situation will be with the security guarantees to prevent Vladimir Putin from ever, ever trying again to invade parts of Ukraine,' Rutte said. The possibility of U.S. troops in Ukraine was not discussed Monday, he said. DC told of intent to arm National Guard troops Washington has been informed about the intent for the National Guard to be armed, though it has not received details about when that could happen or where armed Guard members could be deployed in D.C., according to a person familiar who was not authorized to disclose the plans and spoke on condition of anonymity. It would be a departure from what the Pentagon and Army have said about the troops being unarmed. The Army said in a statement last week that 'weapons are available if needed but will remain in the armory.' Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson also said last week that troops won't be armed. In response to questions about whether Guard members in Washington would be armed in the coming days, the District of Columbia National Guard said troops 'may be armed consistent with their mission and training.' Maj. Melissa Heintz, a spokesperson for the D.C. Guard, didn't provide more details and said 'their presence is focused on supporting civil authorities and ensuring the safety of the community they serve.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store