Hello Folks.  I've been inactive here for awhile and just activated my
subscription again.  I'm very curious about something that has to do with
the "bridge gate" scandal up in NJ and just wondering about the
following...from the news reports.

Here in Florida we have a very broad public records law, but I find it's
still fairly similar in many ways to other states.  Records and information
are only "limited access," not open to public access, only if they are
specifically exempted by Florida statute from public disclosure.  It seemed
to me so far in this matter in NJ with the Governor's Office, Port
Authority in both states, etc. that the records that have been produced had
an awful lot of redactions.  And that has been commented on by the
media...but nobody I've heard comment thus far has specifically stated that
information that was redacted was "confidential/limited access" by state
statute.  So, I'm wondering if it's the same in NJ and NY as in
Florida...that they have to release the information and records if there's
no statute specifically restricting release of the information.  It just
seems like there were way too many redactions in those emails, other
documents, etc. that wouldn't be restricted...but was redacted anyway.
I'm just wondering why it's been so hard thus far for public legal
officials and the media to get alot of the information????

Can some of you up in NJ and NY comment?...or anyone else who knows about
this.  I'm curious as a public records manager here in Florida.

Gus Harris
Records Manager
Univ. of West FL
Pensacola, FL

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]