Sam Spagnola and I had our day in court today for our suit against the City of Greensboro regarding our public records request. Frankly, Sam and the city attorneys made some good arguments. The judge agreed to review the RMA report and minutes from closed City Council sessions in camera to see what may legally be released.
We had asked for the results of the polygraph tests taken by eight of nine City Council members in 2006 to ferret out the "leaker" of the RMA report. We were told that there were no written records to deliver. However, the polygraph examiner has agreed to write a report of each council person's results provided they agree. The News & Record's Amanda Lehmert reports:
"So far, three council members have agreed to sign -- Mayor Yvonne Johnson, Sandra Anderson Groat and Mike Barber. Other test takers said they would not sign, City Attorney Terry Wood said.
"The tests were taken by eight current and former council members, including Sandy Carmany, Florence Gatten, Keith Holiday, Tom Phillips and Goldie Wells."
It is really very strange, when you think about it: A polygraph was apparently necessary because council members wanted to "prove" their honesty about whether or not they "leaked" the RMA report. But if someone showed deception during their polygraph test, would they not also deceive in self-reporting their results? And if they honestly reported the results of their polygraph test, why would they now refuse to allow a written report to be provided to the public?
When we were verbally told by then-Mayor Keith Holliday that all eight members of the City Council who took the polygraph test reported to him that they "passed," we were left to draw our own conclusions about what it meant that one council person would not take the test. Now we are left to draw our own conclusions about what it means that some City Council members do not want a written report of their results.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete