APPEALS COURT ORDERS LEBANON TO PAY LEGAL FEES IN DRUG RAID CASE

An appeals court has ordered the city of Lebanon to pay more than $20,000
in legal fees for wrongfully withholding details of a settlement between
Lebanon police and the widow of an elderly man killed in a bungled drug
raid three years ago.

The Tennessean had sought the settlement agreement between the Lebanon
Police Department and Lorraine Adams under the state Public Records Act.
The city claimed it had signed an agreement with the woman, agreeing to
keep secret the fact that the settlement had cost the city $400,000.

The state Court of Appeals, in an opinion rendered last Friday, found that
none of the three reasons City Attorney Peggy Williams used to decline to
make public the records was valid.

The judges also found that the city ignored a previous Court of Appeals
decision and an opinion by the state attorney general that clearly stated
public officials cannot contract away the provisions of the state's open
government laws.

". We can find no basis in existing law for the City's refusal to provide
the settlement agreement," the ruling stated. "To the contrary, existing
authority . required disclosure, and we find no lack of clarity in that
authority."

The court noted that the city asked a Wilson County judge to seal the
agreement the day after the newspaper requested details of the settlement.

Lebanon Mayor Don Fox said he was not aware of the case or the ruling.

"It would be an insurance company issue. It's not a city check. It won't
affect our (insurance) premiums. It will have no bearing on us financially
as a city."

Here are the three reasons the city used to keep the settlement secret and
the appeals court's finding regarding that claim:

. The city claimed that the agreement was part of a mediation settlement.

The Court of Appeals said no mediation existed because no lawsuit had been
filed by the widow; therefore, there was no claim to mediate.

. That a then-pending criminal investigation against the officers involved
in shooting Lorraine Adams' husband "precluded disclosure of investigative
reports that were also part of the city's file."

The Court of Appeals found that The Tennessean had never requested the
investigative file and thus that was not a valid reason to withhold the
settlement details.

. Lorraine Adams' desire for confidentiality based on privacy and security.

"We can find no legal authority supporting an exclusion from the Public
Records Act for an otherwise public record based on the wishes of the
citizen involved," the court held.