Campus checked for open records compliance
Dave Campbell
Issue date: 4/9/08 Section: News
In accordance with the Tennessee "sunshine" and open records laws, an open records audit was performed at various locations at APSU.
Auditors randomly requested publicly accessible records from offices across campus.
The requesters recorded the offices visited, time audits began and time audits ended.
Auditors also tracked whether records were retrieved on first request and if auditors were asked why records were needed.
Audits were reported at the following locations: Campus Police, Shasteen, Purchasing department, Physical Plant and Chartwells Dining services.
Records were also requested for campus parking violations. However, they were not retreived.
According to the report, one auditor was asked why records were necessary and referred the request to a supervisor, but was not asked for identification. The auditor was told that parking ticket information "was not public," according to audit records. The auditor was informed that parking tickets contained Social Security numbers, which are kept confidential.
Records requested on the campus crime log were retreived by auditors. The auditor obtained records on first request without identification or reason for retreiving records.
According to audit records, the worker at the front desk "immediately" gave records. When the auditor requested copies "they were provided without wait," according to the audit report.
Records were also requested at Chartwells dining services. The auditor was refered to a supervisor and asked why information was needed when requesting the health inspection records.
The auditor was asked what the information was being used for and that records could not be given out, but was refered to the health department Web site.
Cost for the new university pool and the indoor pool bid were also records requested at the physical plant.
The auditor was asked for identification and why records were needed.
The auditor was refered to a supervisor and told that the purchasing department did not deal with bids over $100,000.
Three of the four auditors did not receive compliance on the first attempt; half were asked for identification. Also, three out of four auditors were refered to a supervisor and asked why records were being requested.
Most of the auditors were refered to another location when information was requested, though records were not retreived.
All auditors reported that they were treated politely when dealing with public records.
Auditors randomly requested publicly accessible records from offices across campus.
The requesters recorded the offices visited, time audits began and time audits ended.
Auditors also tracked whether records were retrieved on first request and if auditors were asked why records were needed.
Audits were reported at the following locations: Campus Police, Shasteen, Purchasing department, Physical Plant and Chartwells Dining services.
Records were also requested for campus parking violations. However, they were not retreived.
According to the report, one auditor was asked why records were necessary and referred the request to a supervisor, but was not asked for identification. The auditor was told that parking ticket information "was not public," according to audit records. The auditor was informed that parking tickets contained Social Security numbers, which are kept confidential.
Records requested on the campus crime log were retreived by auditors. The auditor obtained records on first request without identification or reason for retreiving records.
According to audit records, the worker at the front desk "immediately" gave records. When the auditor requested copies "they were provided without wait," according to the audit report.
Records were also requested at Chartwells dining services. The auditor was refered to a supervisor and asked why information was needed when requesting the health inspection records.
The auditor was asked what the information was being used for and that records could not be given out, but was refered to the health department Web site.
Cost for the new university pool and the indoor pool bid were also records requested at the physical plant.
The auditor was asked for identification and why records were needed.
The auditor was refered to a supervisor and told that the purchasing department did not deal with bids over $100,000.
Three of the four auditors did not receive compliance on the first attempt; half were asked for identification. Also, three out of four auditors were refered to a supervisor and asked why records were being requested.
Most of the auditors were refered to another location when information was requested, though records were not retreived.
All auditors reported that they were treated politely when dealing with public records.
Be the first to comment on this story