July 23, 2001

Dear Mr. Ristow,

I went to your office to examine the JCEDC response you said had arrived last week.
I compared the items of my request with what was provided in the folder. As I see it, most of the items in my request were ignored. A very few items cannot be supplied because the items have not been started or completed. For many items, my request was ignored explicitly.

Under "Organization Development Activities", they provided the database in printed form. However, I requested the database in electronic form. As I see it, this record naturally exists in this form, and I can request it as such. A printed version is not a faithful reproduction. I cannot study it in its original form.

They claim this is only ever supplied in customized form. However, as such they could have been able to supply what they did in electronic form, not paper form. This would have been a simple operation on the computer, very similar to the print function.

If they are claiming there is other information in the database that wasn't in the printed version, then what they supplied is not what I asked for, either. I am not requesting any sort of customized report. Customized compilations are not allowed under the Open Records Law.
I would like the unaltered electronic database, as-is. I believe they prepare it in Microsoft Access.

A number of other records described below and in their response should be available in electronic format, seeing as they were all created in a word processor. I reiterate my desire to receive these in electronic format.

Under "Business Retention" I asked for items 1 through 11. They responded only to items
1, 3, 7, 8 and 11, ignoring my request for 2, 4, 5, 9 and 10. Certainly records must exist for these other items such as the Tourism Council minutes. They were not supplied.

As for item 8, I do not see how the County should pay $65 to receive this. In terms of your contract, it is something you are getting in exchange for the $71,000. Similarly, I am sure it was created in electronic format and should be made available in paper form for the cost of reproduction, not the arbitrary price stated here.

There should be many records associated with the production of the Visitor's Guide, for example. Their response skipped this item 9. They claim to have attached invoices for item 11 for the tourism web site but I did not see them in the packet.

Under "Business Attraction Activities" I requested items 1, 2, 4 and 6. They responded with items 2, 3, 5 and 6. For item 2, the contract claims they prepare these proposals for prospects.
I requested to see any that they have created. I did not ask to see a customized report. I am asking if any were created. Their response is evasive.

For item 3, a great number of items were supplied in printed form. I'd like to know which are available in electronic form. They ignored item 4, the evidence of costs associated with trade show trips. I did not seek item 5.

Under "Workforce Development" I asked for items 1, 5 and 6. They responded with items 3 and 4. I assume the JCEDC must possess some records regarding 1, 5, and 6.

Under "Community Development" I asked for items 3, 4, 5 and 6. They did not respond to any of the items in this section.

On the face of it, the JCEDC's response is only a small step beyond their previous refusals. They have turned over nothing that they haven't probably already given to public prospects, and they explicitly ignored any records that might show the details of the actual work they might have performed.

Sincerely,

John Foust
235 South Main Street
Jefferson, WI 53549
(920) 674-5200