Iowa auditor says proposed public records bill could negatively impact his office

State Auditor Rob Sand told Newton residents on Oct. 10 that a proposed bill from the Iowa Public Information Board allowing governments to ignore public records requests made by “vexatious requesters” would absolutely have a negative impact on his office, which has already been limited by legislators.

“State government wants to give itself the ability to deny your access to your records because you used mean words, I am not kidding you,” Sand said, noting the legislation could be used to bar journalists. “… And there’s nothing in it that says they can’t use it to bar members of the state auditor’s office.”

Instead of having a really tightly defined definition and standard to meet to be considered a “vexatious requester,” like making 100 requests in a year, Sand said the bill would limit or restrict public records requests based on the number, scope, nature and tone of the requests. Which he disagreed with.

Iowa Capital Dispatch’s Clark Kauffman reported in September that the proposed bill was largely in response to one person from Newton. Michael Merritt, a Navy veteran who says he has PTSD and calls himself Cipher Hunter, sent 35 complaints to the Iowa Public Information Board in August alone.

Kauffman reported Merritt has long been a thorn in the side of public officials in Jasper County and Newton, based on records Iowa Capital Dispatch obtained.

This year, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed a law limiting the state auditor’s access to certain documents and information. Sand has been vocal about the law ever since, saying it is motivated by a small group of political insiders and now grants state agencies the ability to willingly hide documents during audits.

Sand noted that public officials, like Reynolds, already have a storied history with denying records questions. In June, Reynolds agreed to a settlement with a number of journalists and advocates who were denied public record requests for more than a year. The state agreed to pay more than $100,000 in legal fees.

Eight requests were filed between April 2020 and April 2021, according to Associated Press’s Scott McFetridge. Only after receiving the lawsuit in December did the state provide the public records requests. Reynolds even argued to have the case dismissed. The Iowa Supreme Court refused.

“It goes right back to this public records settlement that we just paid out, and when I say ‘we’ I mean we the taxpayers,” Sand said. “About $175,000 of your money just got used to pay the costs of a lawsuit centered on hiding information from you. Public information.”

Commenting on the new state law passed this year that restricts his office’s access to information, Sand said it is what it is.

The Iowa Constitution says the auditor’s office exists, but its duties are defined by the legislator, Sand said. If lawmakers want to define the duties of the auditor’s office in a way that provides fewer protections for taxpayers, technically speaking it would not be unconstitutional.

“We’re going to keep doing our job the way we believe we’re supposed to be doing it,” he said. “We’re going to ask for the records we need to ask for to do our job. If they don’t provide access to them, we’re going to let you know. We’ll issue a report saying, ‘Hey, we asked for these records. We were denied access.’”

Although there may be no repercussions enforced by his office by denial of records — apart from, perhaps, some bad press instead of a trip to the courtroom — saying that someone denied the state auditor’s office access to records, he said, “is a form of accountability.”