You’re requesting public information, not guessing file types and formats

Until we get clarity from the Missouri Supreme Court, it is probably a good idea to state overtly in your records request that you will accept the record in whatever format the City maintains the file if your preferred option is unavailable.”

Dan Curry, MPA Hotline Attorney

In the story of Ali Baba, the hero speaks the phrase “Open Sesame,” and the cave door swings open, re­vealing a fortune. Ali Baba, though, had a brother, named Cassim, who guessed at another phrase, “Open Barley.” The door did not swing open, and Cassim met a grim fate.

In February I wrote about the case Weeks v. City of St. Louis No. ED112624 (Mo.App.E.D. January 28, 2025), in which the Court of Appeals held that the city did not have to turn over a database because it would have had to convert the database into a different file type than the one the requestor asked for. In April, the Missouri Supreme Court accepted transfer. At the time I am writing this column, we are putting the finishing touches on an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff.

I mention the story of Ali Baba’s brother in that amicus brief. Reporters should not be forced to guess what the magic words are to spring open public documents. Specifically, a records-seeker should not need to know the name of the type of file under which an electronic record has been stored. The file type does not matter – the underlying information is what is important.

The Sunshine Law, I argue, is on our side. It contains no language placing the burden on the requestor to specify the data file. In fact, the Sunshine Law strongly suggests the opposite – that a public body should give the requestor the file, even if the specified file type is not available.

I also push back against the lower courts’ rulings that tend to use the requestor’s follow-up emails against him. Often a records request involves several good-faith exchanges between a reporter and a records custodian before both parties comprehend what documents are being sought, and that is perhaps necessary and normal.

A requestor’s attempt to clarify should not be used to catch the requestor up on a technicality.

In the case of Mr. Weeks, in his effort to help the City of St. Louis understand what the database was he was seeking, he suggested the city could produce it in an Excel file. It was this type of suggestion that the City and the Court of Appeals used to deny the request – even though the database was in the possession of the City and clearly a public record. That shouldn’t be how this works.

Until we get clarity from the Missouri Supreme Court, it is probably a good idea to state overtly in your records request that you will accept the record in whatever format the City maintains the file if your preferred option is unavailable.

The Sunshine Law seems to be under siege these days. Mr. Weeks’ request for a database was denied because he said “Open Barley.” The Missouri State Highway Patrol’s decision to remove crash reports continues to be nettlesome. Efforts to silence elected officials from revealing closed session violations are disturbing. On a daily basis, I hear from you on notice and meeting deficiencies.

Your association continues to stand up to efforts to ratchet back the Sunshine Law. I urge everyone to remain vigilant and to keep our public bodies informed about their duties.

In other notes, it has finally happened: I’ve fielded a Hotline phone call on using AI to help write a news story. The question was about disclosure, ethics and copyright.

I anticipate that at some point, many of you will face the same questions. I don’t pretend to have all the other answers, especially in regards to a paper’s internal journalistic policies. I recently attended the 2025 Media and the Law Seminar held in Kansas City. This always informational conference draws journalists and lawyers from across the nation.

AI and disinformation were the hot topics this year, and I took this away from the panelists discussing AI in the newsroom: First, you do want to have a policy on AI. It probably should address when to disclose use of AI; it probably should require human oversight; and caution should be used on using it for audience-facing content.

The Poynter institute has a good website discussing key considerations, and even a policy generator to help you create your own AI policy at bit.ly/43DKII9.

I anticipate the Association will have more to offer on this topic soon.