The Student News Site of Colorado State University

The Rocky Mountain Collegian

The Student News Site of Colorado State University

The Rocky Mountain Collegian

The Student News Site of Colorado State University

The Rocky Mountain Collegian

Print Edition
Letter to the editor submissions
Have a strong opinion about something happening on campus or in Fort Collins? Want to respond to an article written on The Collegian? Write a Letter to the Editor by following the guidelines here.
Follow Us on Twitter
From the Rockies to the Races: Why College Students Are Joining the Celebrity-Packed  Kentucky Derby
From the Rockies to the Races: Why College Students Are Joining the Celebrity-Packed Kentucky Derby
April 24, 2024

The Kentucky Derby, often celebrated as “the most exciting two minutes in sports,” transcends mere horse racing to become a staple of American...

Update to CORA law should be substantial

As technology has rapidly developed in the 21st century, our society has adapted to the changes in how we can communicate and access information. However, public policy has yet to adapt effectively during this time to the same circumstances.

One area in particular in which government has yet to get up to speed is in transparency and the free flow of information. Specifically, I’m referring to the laws governing records requests from public organizations. In Colorado, record requests are regulated by the Colorado Open Records Act, which mandates access to most records of information and business communications of local and state entities.

Ad

The CORA plays an important role in the transparency of public institutions and giving anyone concerned with public affairs an avenue to request information from the state. However, the act itself is a little out-of-date.

Thankfully, one of our local representatives is taking action to attempt to update the law.  State Senator John Kefalas has proposed a bill to update the CORA to require that any public records that are available in digital form to an organization must be delivered that way to the party that requested the information. The update proposed by Kefalas is long overdue and is necessary to keep information flowing at the rapid rate we have become accustomed to in the digital age, as public entities are currently not required to provide information requested via CORA digitally, and have the ability to reject a CORA request if they have requested data available in a physical format.

However, while Senator Kefalas should certainly be applauded for his efforts to increase transparency, the proposed bill does not go far enough in optimizing the flow of information under CORA. You see, while Kefalas’ proposal updates the medium in which public records must be made available to requesting parties, it ignores the media over which CORA requests can be filed. In other words, the bill will mandate that one can expect to receive public records digitally, but it doesn’t mandate that one can expect to actually file their CORA digitally. 

This can create problems when organizations choose to adopt their own additional internal guidelines surrounding CORA requests. For example, one might assume or think that any modern organizations would accept requests for information over e-mail, but there are some, amazingly, that do not. The Colorado State University System, for one, has a policy that any CORA requests it receives must be sent via the mail or fax, and reserves itself the right to reject any requests sent through e-mail.

While this might seem like a minute critique, consider how significantly this one policy detail can slow down communication between CSU and outside parties. It seems practically impossible for a modern business to communicate without e-mail; if an organization can provide records to others digitally,  than it can be reasonably expected to receive requests for such information digitally, too. Open records requests are frequently utilized by journalists in an attempt to offer more detailed information to their readers, and any obstacle to communication with a public organization directly impacts the overall flow of information back to public audiences.

It’s surprising and frankly laughable that CSU insists on using such arcane technologies for receiving records requests, but this should also reiterate the importance of legally updating the entire records requesting process through CORA. While the bill that Kefalas has proposed will go a long ways towards optimizing the flow of public information in our state, it does not go far enough in providing the legal backing necessary to make the dissemination of public information more efficient.

Collegian columnist Sean Kennedy can be reached at letters@collegian.com, or on Twitter @seanskenn.

View Comments (10)
More to Discover

Comments (10)

When commenting on The Collegian’s website, please be respectful of others and their viewpoints. The Collegian reviews all comments and reserves the right to reject comments from the website. Comments including any of the following will not be accepted. 1. No language attacking a protected group, including slurs or other profane language directed at a person’s race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, social class, age, physical or mental disability, ethnicity or nationality. 2. No factually inaccurate information, including misleading statements or incorrect data. 3. No abusive language or harassment of Collegian writers, editors or other commenters. 4. No threatening language that includes but is not limited to language inciting violence against an individual or group of people. 5. No links.
All The Rocky Mountain Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • H

    harvieFeb 5, 2016 at 10:19 am

    Senator Kefalas’ bill is well intentioned and reportedly receiving intense push back by custodians to protect their interests. It also unfortunately removes what appears to me to be an important protective sentence about unreasonable delay and unreasonable cost that Colorado citizens are frequently subject to when requesting public records. And it cements into law the opportunity for custodians to charge for unpredictable recovery of costs for redaction of confidential information that may have been carelessly (or intentionally) left scattered throughout the public’s records. Delays and huge costs do in reality present impossible obstacles to the free flow of information that is under control of less public minded or perhaps more self protective officials. Most recent reforms to CORA have tried to solve a real problem but created more opportunity to charge money and or delay production. This bill is another example (in its introduced form).

    Harvie Branscomb

    Reply