Advertiser is going to find out the names from the Sugar Bowl trip

HA Note: "The Honolulu Advertiser intends to file suit in Circuit Court tomorrow to force the University of Hawai'i to disclose the list of its state-funded traveling party to the Jan. 1 Sugar Bowl in New Orleans."

About how the Advertiser's lawsuit will charge that by witholding the Sugar Bowl names UH is twice violating Hawaii's open-records laws, Jeff Portnoy (HA's attorney) said:
"First is the ongoing refusal to produce records which are clearly public and should have been produced at or about the time of the trip, but certainly no later than early March when The Advertiser first made a formal request." (HA)

HA Note: "The second challenges UH's ability to remove names of people in the travel party from the list if they have reimbursed the school for the trip."

About UH trying to allow people to remove their names from the list, Portnoy said:
"This blatant and illegal attempt to modify public records is unacceptable and cannot go unchallenged." (HA)

HA Note: "UH-Manoa spokesman Gregg Takayama, declined comment "at this time." The Advertiser's case was supported late today by state Office of Information Practices opinions affirming UH's responsibility to disclose the records in a timely manner and inability to alter records."

Portnoy said that OIP opinions are:
"highly persuasive when a court is asked to resolve the matter." (HA)

HA Note: "Takayama declined comment on OIP's stance."

About how UH has been trying to keep the list of names secret, HA editor Mark Platte said:
"It's bad enough that the University of Hawai'i has been stonewalling us for more than two months on a simple request about who traveled at taxpayer expense to the Sugar Bowl. But for university officials to now allow those same people to have their names removed from the list by reimbursing the expense is unethical and illegal." (HA)

The OIP ruled today that UH's response was "untimely" and that:
"UH's failure to provide this record within the time period set by rule is effectively a denial of access." (HA)

The OIP also ruled that UH's:
"response must be based upon the list as it existed at the time of (the) request. We believe that the list of people who were on airplanes chartered by UH to New Orleans would meet (The Advertiser's) request. Because an agency may not retroactively dispose of or alter requested records after receiving and prior to responding to a record request, persons on that list may not pay UH for the expense of their trip in order to have their names 'removed' from that list." (HA)

HA Note: "Moreover, the OIP ruled that while UH had concerns about the "privacy of individuals who are on that list," it noted "... it is unlikely that OIP would generally find that individuals who were on a chartered plane have a significant privacy interest in that fact that would justify UH's withholding of their identities under (the state's) privacy exemption." "

HA Note: "UH officials have been in discussions about how to deal with The Advertiser's request since March, according to people familiar with the situation. Tuesday, UH administrators told a group of 20 to 25 staff members and others they had the option to have their names removed from the travel list if they paid UH for their portions. Today a UH spokesman declined to say how many people have taken advantage of the opportunity to pay. One school official with knowledge of the situation who asked not to be named estimated the number at "maybe a dozen." The staff members were told the list of the UH travel party would be made available "early next month." In response, The Advertiser Wednesday morning asked for the OIP's assistance in compelling UH to disclose the information immediately."

HA Note: "The composition of the traveling party has been an item of controversy since the travel policy was drawn up by then-athletic director Herman Frazier in December in consultation with UH-Manoa administrators. Some staffers complained that people with little or no official duties were taken and, in some cases, spouses and family members also were extended spots, while others were not offered places in the group. Earlier this month, the University of Georgia detailed to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution its 745-member Sugar Bowl travel party and accounted for $2.2 million in expenses."