There is contempt of court. There is contempt of Congress. But there should also be contempt of public.
This past week Nevada Policy Research Institute?s (NPRI) legal arm, Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation (CJCL), filed suit in district court in Carson City seeking to force the state Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) to release information about the taxpayer-funded pensions of retired public employees.
After the Reno Gazette-Journal newspaper sued under the public records law in 2013 and won in the Nevada Supreme Court, this information was disclosed for 2013 and 2014 and posted on NPRI?s TransparentNevada.com website ? names, former employer, years of employment, retirement year and pension amounts.
According to transparentnevada.com, in 2014 there were more than 1,000 Nevada state and local retirees receiving annual pensions in excess of $100,000. American Enterprise Institute found Nevada full-career PERS retirees fetch the most generous retirement checks of any state in the union ? $64,000 a year on average or more than $1.3 million in lifetime benefits. That doesn?t include police and firefighters, who can retire earlier and generally have higher salaries.
But when NPRI filed a public records request for the same information this year for 2015, PERS had changed how it compiles the data. It replaced the names with Social Security numbers, making the data useless.
?By replacing names with ?non-disclosable? Social Security numbers in its actuarial record-keeping documents, PERS has attempted to circumvent the 2013 ruling of the Nevada Supreme Court requiring disclosure,? explained Joseph Becker, the director of CJCL.
After two years of disclosing the pension records, the bureaucrats at PERS apparently decided to nit pick a portion of that 2013 Supreme Court ruling that said, while public records must be disclosed, the agency has ?no duty to create a new document by searching for and compiling information from existing records.? In order to circumvent the law, PERS altered its records.
But as Becker points out in his suit, there is a 2015 case out of the Nevada Supreme Court in which the court held that ?when an agency has a computer program that can readily compile the requested information, the agency is not excused from its duty to produce and disclose that information.?
In an NPRI press release about the litigation, Becker is quoted as saying, ?Not only has PERS attempted to re-engineer its record-keeping in a way that obscures from public view its critical financial instability ? for which the taxpayers of Nevada are ultimately on the hook. PERS is also violating both the letter and spirit of the Nevada Public Records Act ??
The manipulation of the records by PERS is a clear act of contempt for the public, as well as the law and the courts.
The purpose of the public records law (NRS 239) is made abundantly clear by its opening paragraph: ?The Legislature hereby finds and declares that:
?1. The purpose of this chapter is to foster democratic principles by providing members of the public with access to inspect and copy public books and records to the extent permitted by law;
?2. The provisions of this chapter must be construed liberally to carry out this important purpose;
?3. Any exemption, exception or balancing of interests which limits or restricts access to public books and records by members of the public must be construed narrowly ??
We urge the court to make short work of this naked effrontery. ? TM