Kansas town cleaned house of top public servants — and doesn’t want you to know why

“Most of us,” writes author Eric Metaxas, “don’t understand the idea of self-government enough to be properly astonished by it.” And we should absolutely be astonished by it, if for nothing else than its fragility and its rarity in human history.

Likewise, we should all be alarmed at the least bit of breakdown in self-governance — much less the kind of small-town meltdown we’re witnessing in little Frontenac in southeast Kansas.

After the city council summarily fired the city clerk, city attorney and city administrator by a 6-2 vote Sept. 16 — without any warning or discussion, and without a closed meeting to discuss personnel — the Frontenac city government has gone on to stonewall repeated attempts to look into the matter.

At least two media organizations, including the Morning Sun newspaper of nearby Pittsburg, filed formal requests for written and electronic communications between the city officials involved, records that might shed light on the firings. Initially, the city replied that it had no city attorney — he’d been one of those fired, of course — and therefore could not produce the records at all.

Later, the city changed course and demanded $3,500 from each of the two media organizations to find and copy the requested records.

The city’s first response — that it couldn’t comply with a lawful Kansas Open Records Act request because it had fired the city attorney — was completely bogus and illegal.

“Any claim that a KORA request can be lawfully put on hold because of the presence or absence of any particular person does not comply with applicable law,” Ron Keefover, president of the board of directors of the Kansas Sunshine Coalition for Open Government, wrote to the city, adding that the city’s response “was clearly in violation of established law, was likely in bad faith, and … provides grounds to potential plaintiffs to claim attorney fees in a district court action brought under the KORA.”

The city’s second response, billing the media entities for $3,500 each, was excessive, unnecessary and likely punitive.

“I and the organizations on whose behalf I write,” Keefover explained to the city, “refuse to believe that the ‘actual costs’ the city would incur to respond to the requests would reasonably approach $3,500 for either of them.”

Keefover is a former public information director for the Kansas Judicial Branch, and his Kansas Sunshine Coalition for Open Government — founded at the Elliott School of Communication at Wichita State University — represents the Kansas Association of Broadcasters, the Kansas Press Association and the Kansas Professional Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.

The irony of all this is, if Frontenac officials hadn’t sandbagged the public and the media in an apparent effort to cover up their actions preceding the firings, the matter might never have made news outside the Frontenac/Pittsburg area.

Now, however, this has become a statewide issue touching on Frontenac’s very ability to govern itself within the law. It has now evolved into a source of concern for citizens across the state and beyond, because rank lawlessness among public officials anywhere is a threat to anyone in a free and self-governed nation.

Indeed, a formal complaint about the Frontenac municipal government’s actions has been made to the Kansas Attorney General’s office. A spokesman said the complaint is under review.

Alas, the potential penalties for violations of the Kansas Open Records Act are pitiable: but a $500 fine at the most. Adding insult to that injury is the fact that fines would be levied not against the official perpetrators of the violations personally, but against the very taxpayers they’ve betrayed.

What is Kansas thinking with that? What other law actually punishes the victim?

Kansas lawmakers must take action on several fronts.

First, they must increase the penalties for violating the state’s open records laws, observance of which are an essential component of self-governance by a free people. In addition, the law must provide strict limits on the costs associated with open records requests, so government officials can’t use arbitrary fees to dissuade citizens from seeking records that are lawfully theirs to begin with.

And in the most egregious cases, officials who violate the open records act should be hit in their own wallets.

These are not the Kansas Sunshine Coalition for Open Government’s proposals, though the coalition will have its own suggestions for lawmakers next month. But, says Keefover, “Frontenac is one of, if not the poster child for reforming the Kansas Open Records Act.”

If the open records violators in the Frontenac case are penalized at taxpayer expense, it would be at least the third time citizens of Frontenac have been victimized in this case — after having three of their public servants shown the door without explanation, and having their right to see relevant official correspondence so illegally blunted.

The good people of Frontenac deserve better — as does every inhabitant of the Sunflower State.

This story was originally published December 30, 2019 at 5:00 AM.