|
Seizure of reporter’s papers intolerable
Published October 11, 2009
It’s one of the first lessons our parents teach us: Keep our hands off things that don’t belong to us.
What Clute Police Chief Mark Wicker did when he rifled through Facts reporter Katlynn Lanham’s papers during a council meeting Thursday night at City Hall went beyond bad manners, though.
On the instruction of City Councilwoman Shelly Key, he took a document he had no right to have on the hunch Lanham had a document the city didn’t want her to have.
Not a document that she didn’t have a right to have, mind you. One they didn’t want her to have.
And just as Key and Wicker waited for Lanham to look the other way to do something even a toddler knows to be wrong, others in the room, including Clute City Council members and city employees, chose to turn the other way when it was happening.
All of this is inexcusable, though those responsible were doing their best Friday to excuse it.
After a closed-door discussion ended and council members voted unanimously to accept Kyle McCain’s resignation, the now former city manager handed papers to Lanham as he left the room. Key said she thought Lanham had been given a copy of a report about McCain’s stint as city manager in Mexia, which was discussed in executive session and which she thought Lanham shouldn’t have.
Instead, what Lanham was handed was a copy of McCain’s resignation letter. She compared it with a draft McCain had given her earlier Thursday, added it to the stack of papers on the press table in council chambers, and hurried from the room to catch McCain before he left.
When Lanham left chambers, Key motioned to Wicker, who went to the table, picked up Lanham’s papers and reviewed them with city attorney Wallace Shaw before putting some back. He did not return the copy of the draft letter, instead folding it up and putting it in his pocket.
It wasn’t until the next day, after city employees denied knowing where the document might have gone, that an audience member told her what had happened.
Only then did Wicker and Key admit what they’d done. He claimed then he was going to tell her later, but didn’t have time.
The document was returned Friday afternoon, along with attempts to justify the actions, none of which hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.
Key argued Lanham wasn’t entitled to see the report about McCain’s tenure in Mexia — a report which had been rumored but not officially acknowledged until Friday. Numerous attorney general’s office opinions about personnel documents disagree with Key’s opinion. It clearly is public record.
Secondly, as any rookie law enforcement officer knows, and certainly a chief of police should, probable cause is needed before considering confiscating someone else’s property as evidence. Just thinking that Lanham had the report falls well short of that barometer.
And really, silly as it would seem to have to point this out, if they wanted to see the document, all they had to do was ask.
Now it will be The Facts that is doing the asking.
We filed open records requests Friday for a copy of the Mexia report. We also want the city to fill in residents on how much it cost to put together that report. Certainly the public has a right to know where its tax dollars are going.
If none of this bothers you, if you think city officials ought to be able to take whatever they want from a reporter, without asking and without cause, then put yourself in the reporter’s place. Imagine it was your property the police chief confiscated when you were looking the other way. It shouldn’t be much of a stretch, because that reporter’s information was yours.
Residents would be right to wonder about their leaders, including the top law enforcement officer, who sees no problem with such underhanded, arrogant tactics to keep information from the people they represent.
This editorial was written by Facts Managing Editor Yvonne Mintz and Assistant Managing Editor Michael Morris.
Share |
Save |
Mail |
Print
|
|
|
 |
|
Click for all
Top Ads listing
|
