Posted Oct. 24, 2002 

Editorial: Biskupic’s refusal to release records troubling
 

The Democratic Party of Wisconsin’s request for records involving the Outagamie County District Attorney’s crime prevention fund is obviously political. The Democrats suspect or hope there is something in those files they can use against Dist. Atty. Vince Biskupic, the Republican candidate for attorney general. Their motive, however, doesn’t matter under the Open Records Law, and Biskupic’s refusal to release the records is disturbing.

The Dems want to know who put money into the crime prevention fund — whether, in other words, the defendant the court ordered to contribute pursuant to a plea or deferred prosecution agreement complied with the court order — and where it went. Who, that is, benefited from money the court ordered defendants to pay.

In his refusal, Biskupic said that prosecutorial files are exempt from the Open Records Law, which, according to experts, is true. However, it seems improbable that all of the information concerning this fund is segregated in individual prosecutorial files and that there are no central records.

He also denied the Democrats’ request because making the information public “could jeopardize the safety of cooperating witnesses, defendants and confidential informants” and “would be detrimental to officers’ investigations and jeopardize the crime detection process.” If that’s the case, the Open Records Law permits Biskupic to edit out the names in question and provide the rest of the information. He didn’t.

The Open Records and Open Meetings laws protect the public’s access to business that government officials conduct on the public’s behalf. The laws say that, with few exceptions, all government documents are public information and all meetings of government bodies, elected or appointed, are open to the public. 

Without the Open Records Law, we would not know who got taxpayer-funded legal advice in the ongoing caucus investigation in Madison, the investigation that has so far resulted in criminal charges against leaders in the state Senate and Assembly. The legal bills are pushing $1 million, and the state fought hammer and tongs to keep the public from knowing who benefited from the public largesse. Even with the law, three newspapers had to sue to get the records released.

If Biskupic is elected attorney general, he becomes chief arbiter of the state’s “sunshine” laws. Instead of honoring the Democrats’ request — to honor the law — he found reasons not to.

“Democracies die behind closed doors,” U.S. District Court Judge Nancy G. Edmunds said this summer. That’s why these laws are so important and why Biskupic’s refusal to release the information, especially to political foes, is so troubling.