Maine Government Agency Tries To Charge Public Records Requester $750 For Opening A PDF
from the gov't-agencies-and-their-'get-rich-quick'-schemes dept
We've seen lots of ridiculous amounts tossed around by government agencies in response to public records requests. Most of the ridiculous amounts we've covered give the appearance that the agency making the demand feels requesters are also spending other people's money. Like a Texas agency demanding $1 million for prison sexual assault records or the FBI wanting $270,000 to hand over files on defense contractor Booz Allen.
Other demands are smaller, but no less of a deterrent to government transparency. In one infamous example, the Massachusetts State Police erected a $180 paywall around documents related to the agency's marijuana enforcement efforts. Once the agency had the money in hand, it turned around and asked the state supervisor of public records to declare the requested records exempt from release. That was back in July. The MSP still has yet to release the records the requester paid for.
Up in Maine, something just as devious is taking place. MuckRock member Adanya Lustig asked the Maine Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority (located in Brunswick, ME) for a copy of the proposal it sent to Amazon in hopes of talking it into opening a second headquarters there.
Lustig did receive a copy of the proposal… and a very dubious email/clickwrap "agreement" in response:
Good afternoon Adanya,
Per your FOAA request of November 3, 2017, I am submitting a digital copy of our proposal to Amazon. The proposal was prepared by our in-house staff, within our current marketing budget. There were no third-party entities involved in its preparation. We do not agree to waive any fees. By accepting and opening this document, you agree to reimburse the Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority $750.00 for associated administrative and legal fees. Please remit check to:
Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority
15 Terminal Road, Suite 200
Brunswick, ME 04011Sincerely,
Steve
Steven H. Levesque
Executive Director
Lustig won't be paying this fee. As it noted in the MuckRock post, Maine law prohibits the collection of more than $30 in public records fees without advance notification. There was no notification here -- only the idiotic assertion that opening a PDF would result in Lustig agreeing to pay $750 to the Brunswick agency. The agency has yet to respond to Lustig's refusal, which seems to suggest other people not named Steven Levesque realized it was a stupid, unenforceable, and possibly illegal demand.
If you want to know what a $750 PDF looks like, it's embedded below.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: charges, demands, fees, foia, maine, maine midcoast regional redevelopment authority
Companies: amazon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Maine - centrally located ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maine - centrally located ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What goes good with bullshit?
Megh... I'm a beer guy anyway.
Regardless this is how these weasels (sorry to the actual weasel animals for the insult) keep ordinary people from finding out what they are up to and interfering with their plans...
Seems fairly unconstitutional... But then what's a constitution good for these days anyway?
Just an old piece of paper with a lot of suggestions scribbled on it... Right?
They'll probably lock that old nuisance up behind a paywall too before long... Wouldn't want ordinary folks knowing All those rights they lost.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amazon's Revenge
Amazon's 1-click patent expired on September, and now even your local government charges you a $750 1-click payment for a Freedom of Access Act request regarding Amazon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FOR ALL THE TECH!!
WHY is it that State/Federal agencies REFUSE to use them??
For all the SUPPER computers the FBI/CIA have monitoring the internet... They could get a FOIA out in a year..Let alone ANY TIME SHORTER..
Do we expect anything Better from OTHER agencies.
ANd who is responsible for Checks and balance in the laws and regulations that EVEN the state didnt know that they COULD NOT over charge..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: FOR ALL THE TECH!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: FOR ALL THE TECH!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Boolean logic
I read this as "if (A and B) then do C".
with A="accepting", B="opening this document" and C="reimburse".
By only "opening" without "accepting" it, only one of both conditions is met so there is no need to "reimburse".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Boolean logic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Outrage!
There should be an agency whose whole purpose is to uphold the laws!! ...crickets chirping... Anyone? Anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By reading this comment, you own me 0.50c per view. Bitcoin accepted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]