Never pay more than $0.50 per request and the first one is FREE! Pricing details here.
Opinion: Girardville’s “Safe Senders List” Raises Serious PA Right to Know Law Concerns
Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law (RTKL) was designed to ensure equal access to public records for all citizens, journalists, watchdogs, and businesses without discrimination.
However, Concerns have been raised about whether Girardville Borough has implemented a “Safe Senders List”; a policy that, if true, would determine who is allowed to request public records and who isn’t.
Solicitor Arlen Day of Fanelli, Evans & Patel who represents Girardville Borough recently responded to legal inquiries about this policy by stating that Girardville Borough “did not have a Safe Senders List at the time” of a specific denial. This statement does not deny that such a list exists now or that it was implemented afterward.
While officials have not publicly confirmed the existence of this policy, the implications raise serious concerns about transparency, potential Right to Know Law violations, and taxpayer liability.
What This Article Covers:
What the Safe Senders List is and why it matters How restricting public records access could violate PA law What Arlen Day’s statement reveals about Girardville’s transparency practices The legal risks Girardville Borough may face if this policy exists How taxpayers could be footing the bill for secrecy
What Is the Safe Senders List? A Policy That Raises Transparency Concerns
The Safe Senders List, if it exists, would be a government-created policy that determines who is “approved” to submit public records requests.
If you’re on the list, your Right-to-Know request is processed.
If you’re not on the list, your request may be delayed, ignored, or denied; which could raise legal concerns.
While some government agencies use vetting mechanisms for cybersecurity or spam prevention, applying such a list to control access to public records could violate PA transparency laws.
Why This Matters:
- Public records belong to the people. Government officials do not have the right to decide who is “worthy” of access.
- If such a list exists, it could be a form of selective enforcement, raising concerns about due process violations.
- Without transparency, there is no accountability. This could create a slippery slope toward secrecy, where agencies deny records based on preference rather than law.
- It undermines public trust. When agencies restrict access to records, it erodes confidence in government operations and raises suspicion about what they are trying to hide.
Without transparency, there is no accountability. This could create a slippery slope toward secrecy.
How a Safe Senders List Could Violate the PA Right to Know Law
The PA Right to Know Law (RTKL) explicitly states that agencies cannot deny records based on who is making the request.
Key Legal Provisions: Section 102 of Right to Know Law: “A record is presumed to be public unless exempt under law.” Section 703 of Right to Know Law: “An agency may not deny a request based on who is making it.”
If a Safe Senders List is being used to control access, it could mean:
Public records access is being restricted based on identity, not the request itself. Some individuals are granted special treatment while others are denied. The agency may be in violation of Pennsylvania’s transparency laws.
This raises an important legal question: If some individuals are blocked from requesting public records, is the government breaking the law?
What Solicitor Arlen Day’s Statement Reveals
During legal proceedings, Girardville’s solicitor Arlen Day responded to questions about the Safe Senders List by stating:
“The information requested is irrelevant to, and will not lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, as Girardville Borough did not have a safe-senders list at the time Plaintiffs’ RTKL Requests were denied.”
Key Takeaways: This is not a denial that the Safe Senders List exists, only that it didn’t exist “at that time.” This raises the question: Does it exist now? Was it implemented after the initial denials? If such a policy is in place, Girardville Borough could be facing serious legal trouble.
Legal Consequences: What Happens If This Policy Exists?
If a Safe Senders List is being used to block public records access, Girardville Borough could face:
Lawsuits – Denied requesters may have the right to sue under the PA Right to Know Law. Fines and Civil Penalties – Courts can impose financial penalties for unlawful denials. Court-Ordered Compliance – A judge could force the borough to release withheld records. Taxpayer Costs – Any legal battle will be paid for with public funds.
Who benefits? Solicitors billing for legal defense. Officials keeping records out of public hands. Not the taxpayers, who pay for it all.
The Bottom Line: The PA Right to Know Law Applies to Everyone
If the Safe Senders List exists, it is a threat to transparency and could be violating the law.
Public records belong to the public.
Government officials should not control access.
Taxpayers must demand accountability before lawsuits drain public funds.
What Can You Do?
Submit a Right-to-Know request – Find out if your government is blocking access. Share this article – Help expose potential transparency violations. Demand accountability – Ask why some people might be denied access to records.
More Articles
Why I Became a Pro Se Litigant for Public Records
It’s issues like the Safe Senders List and other government transparency concerns that led me to become a pro se litigant. When public agencies create barriers to access deciding who can and cannot request records it threatens the integrity of the PA Right to Know Law and the public’s right to hold officials accountable.
Read more about why I took legal action to fight for transparency:
Why I Became a Pro Se Litigant for Public Records
Disclaimer
This article is based on publicly available information, legal filings, and official statements. The views expressed herein are opinions based on a factual analysis of the Pennsylvania Right to Know Law (RTKL) and Girardville Borough’s transparency practices. Any conclusions drawn are reasonable interpretations of the solicitor’s statements and government policies. This article does not assert any unlawful conduct but raises questions regarding government accountability.
Help Us Fight for Transparency
If you believe in government accountability and the right to public information, consider supporting FOIA Buddy. The more people who push back, the harder it becomes for agencies to keep hiding the truth.
Transparency shouldn’t require a lawsuit. But if it does, I’ll be there fighting as a pro se litigant so you don’t have to.
Public Comment Opportunity
Contact Us: Be Part of the Change
If you have information about fraud, abuse, or retaliation, contact FOIA Buddy today. Let’s work together to expose the truth, ensuring transparency, accountability, and justice for all.
