By Jeffrey A. Roberts
CFOIC Executive Director

A Weld County Sheriff’s Office requirement that records request forms be notarized “creates an arbitrary and unreasonable hurdle” and “does not serve any legitimate government interest,” a letter from an attorney for two news organizations says.

Before pursuing a court order on behalf of 9NEWS and Colorado Public Radio, Madison Schaefer of the Killmer Lane law firm gave the sheriff’s office until Jan. 9 to “voluntarily cease” what her letter calls “an erroneous policy which contravenes the statutory intent and purpose” of the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act.

Under the CCJRA, anyone seeking access to records of official action and criminal justice records must sign a statement affirming they will not use the records for “the direct solicitation of business for pecuniary gain,” such as finding customers for a business venture.

But the statute “makes no mention of requiring notarization of that statement,” wrote Schaefer in the letter, sent Friday to Sheriff Steve Reams and other Weld County officials.

“WCSO’s notarization requirement creates an arbitrary and unreasonable hurdle intended to deter open records requestors,” added Schaefer, who is a member of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition board of directors. “WCSO’s additional notarization requirement is not contemplated in the CCJRA and contravenes its purpose and statutory intent, which favors the broad disclosure of records.”

A Denver Post reporter wrote about the Weld County Sheriff’s Office notarization requirement in 2023 after making his own records request and then contacting CFOIC. A deputy county attorney defended the policy in the story by calling it “a more consistent way to confirm identity” than having someone submit a photo ID to a law enforcement agency.

In July, 9NEWS investigative producer Aaron Adelson asked the sheriff’s office about the policy after he requested a booking photo and was told to fill out a form, get it notarized and send it back. A records technician offered to have the form notarized at the sheriff’s office “free of charge” if Adelson showed up in person.

“It is a massive hurdle to obtaining public records, and there is no legal reason to require it,” Adelson responded. “… While offering to notarize the request in person is kind, that is also hours of driving.”

Melissa Chesmore, public relations officer for the sheriff’s office, replied to Adelson with an explanation from county attorney Will Grumet:

“Mr. Grumet advised if we choose not to require the notary, the effect would essentially be that we grant the requester a free pass to break the law by divesting ourselves of the ability to hold them accountable when they do. It isn’t that we have any reason to think that a given person would use the requested record to break the law. Mr. Grumet further advised, the law on this subject is in place to constrain potential bad actors. This law, unfortunately, isn’t intended to be convenient for the good actors that are out there in the journalism community trying to do their job.”

If the county needed to prosecute someone criminally for violating the pecuniary gain affirmation, Chesmore added, “we will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was that specific person who held the pen; or we don’t meet the identification element at trial, and we will not be able to get the conviction.”

But Schaefer’s letter says the notarization policy “does not serve any legitimate government interest: a signature affirming the requestor’s compliance with C.R.S. § 24-72-303.5 is a sufficient enforcement mechanism for the County to prosecute statutory noncompliance.”

A prosecutor “could authenticate the signature just like any other evidence under Colorado Rule of Evidence 901 — by presenting evidence sufficient to support a finding that the signature is what it purports to be,” the letter adds. By requiring notarization of records requests, the sheriff’s office “abuses its discretion under the CCJRA.”

CFOIC learned recently that the Eagle County Sheriff’s Office also requires records requests to be notarized.

Records custodian technician Beth Therese Dobransky told Summit Daily reporter Ryan Spencer in an email: “The request for a notarized signature is an agency stipulation and guarantees that we are truly releasing documentation to the requestor.” Dobransky wrote that Spencer could instead “provide a copy of a valid photo ID, when picking up any releasable documentation once it is ready.”

There is no language in the CCJRA requiring requesters to show a photo ID to obtain records of official action or criminal justice records. The Colorado Open Records Act explicitly prohibits records custodians from requiring requesters to show a driver’s license or another form of identification — unless the requested records are confidential or available only to a “person in interest.” The legislature added that provision to CORA in 2023.

Follow the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition on X and Bluesky. Like CFOIC’s Facebook page. Do you appreciate the information and resources provided by CFOIC? Please consider making a tax-deductible donation.