With so much controversy surrounding a troubled building in Havelock, the construction company owed $85,000 for a new roof wanted to cut through the confusion.
So it requested records from the city.
But then the city requested $8,000 from the company.
“I was astounded,†said Wes Oestreich, president of Cheever Construction. “We’re exercising our rights as a citizen and as a company.â€
So far, much of the debate over 6117 Havelock Ave. has focused on its crumbling façade, roof replacement and a $174,000 loan the city almost made to its owner. But now the fight has veered into the question of fair prices for public records.
“This is the old trick -- you make it so damned difficult and so damned expensive that the public can’t afford the cost of the documents,†said Lincoln Sen. Bill Avery. “So, in effect, you don’t have a public records law.â€
People are also reading…
But that’s not the case here, said Chris Connolly, the assistant city attorney who estimated the cost of retrieving documents for Cheever. The company’s request was so broad it would require a search of the city’s archived emails -- and that’s where most of the potential cost comes from.
It’s not as easy as searching an email account’s inbox, he said.
“It’s the things that are archived that get very expensive to recover,†Connolly said. “It takes a lot of computer run time.â€
Last fall, Cheever put a new roof on the historic, two-story storefront. The company had been approached by the city’s Urban Development Department, which already had spent three years and nearly $80,000 trying to repair the building after a publicly funded improvement program revealed structural problems.
Urban Development asked select contractors for roofing bids, supplied engineering plans and ultimately chose Cheever. It told the company to sign the contract with 6117’s owner, Maria Rico, but it also told Cheever the city was loaning Rico enough to finish the façade and replace the roof.
The company wouldn’t have taken the job if it didn’t believe the city was providing the funding, Oestreich said.
Rico signed the loan’s promissory note in late October. Cheever finished the $85,000 roof in early November and, two weeks later, was reassured by the city the money was coming.
But in December, the mayor killed the loan.
Cheever then took three steps: It filed a lien against the property. It filed claims against the city. And it sought records connected to the property, loans and roof replacement.
“Our attorney felt, and I agree with him, it’s best we know all the background to the situation. Did they make these commitments or didn’t they make these commitments?†Oestreich said. “A logical way to see what really transpired is to request the records to see what’s there.â€
In his April 14 letter to the city, Cheever attorney Brian Koerwitz detailed his request. He wanted all documents relating to loans for Rico’s property, plus correspondence between the mayor’s office and Urban Development about the decision to rescind the $174,000 loan.
He asked for records addressing the roof repair, the related bids and Cheever’s role. And, finally, he sought documents surrounding the Building and Safety Department’s March 24 notice to Rico declaring the building dangerous and suggesting demolition.
He defined documents as emails, notes, summaries, agendas, meeting minutes, faxes and phone logs. He asked for all records since January 2012.
A few days later, Connolly responded. Urban Development had identified about 420 documents. The Law Department found about 50 pages, the mayor’s office 30 and Building and Safety about 10.
But there might be more in the city’s archiving system, he wrote.
“I am informed that such retrieval will take approximately 80 hours of programming/computer runtime, which is billed at $86 per hour,†Connolly wrote.
And Cheever would be billed that estimated $6,880, even if the search of 11 email accounts yielded nothing, he wrote.
On top of that, the city would charge Cheever 48 hours of staff time -- at an average hourly wage of $22 -- to retrieve the documents. That’s another $1,056. And that doesn’t count the cost of the copying, generally a few cents per page.
Connolly estimated it would take about seven weeks to fulfill the request -- a month to search and three weeks to review.
Last year, the Legislature passed a bill designed to ease access to public records and outlaw prohibitive pricing. Avery, who introduced the legislation, said governments were charging so much for staff time the public couldn’t afford to get public documents.
Avery wasn’t surprised to hear about the city’s response to Cheever’s request.
“This infuriates me. The city of Lincoln is the worst offender anyway. What they’re doing is selling public documents, documents that belong to us, and they have no right to sell those.â€
The new law prevents public agencies from charging for the first four hours of staff time. But the public is still at a disadvantage.
“As a private citizen, you have a difficult time challenging what they claim it’s going to take to retrieve those documents,†Avery said.
Connolly said he offered to help lower the expense by narrowing the search. In fact, the day before he formally replied, he sent Koerwitz an email.
“If you want to discuss ways to reduce the cost, I will be happy to visit with you,†he wrote. “In general, that will involve reducing some of the search parameters.â€
Cheever hasn’t decided whether to keep pursuing the documents, Oestreich said. The company is already $85,000 into 6117 Havelock, and it’s not eager to spend more.
“It’s probably time for some pause here to let things kind of seek their level.â€