The court rejected an appeal filed by the borough and upheld a decision by the state’s Government Records Council, which had ordered the borough to release call destinations for municipal cell phones.

The borough had released some records, but removed both the numbers called and the destinations, the court said.

The records are being sought by Gayle Ann Livecchia, a borough resident, who submitted Open Public Records Act demands for calls in September and October 2007.

Livecchia wants to know if employees used their cell phones for personal business without reimbursement and if employees — including, specifically, JoAnne Sendler, who was borough administrator at the time — made personal calls from home during working hours, the court said. She is seeking a list of the towns and states called, but has not requested the phone numbers involved, agreeing that would be a violation of privacy.

For the record, there is no question that the law firm faxed the OPRA request to the Hoboken City Clerk’s Office on September 29, 2010 @ 4:02pm and entered into the OPRA LOG file the following business day, September 30, 2010 @ 9:36am. 

The Law Office of C. Elston &Associates, LLC, Wall, New Jersey filed a Notice of Appeal with the New Jersey Civil Service Commission on behalf of WILLIAM D. CAMPBELL ("Appellant “ or “Campbell”) for his recent layoff from the permanent position of assistant Public Information Officer in the Department of Administration for the City of Hoboken.

The legislation prevents government agencies from charging residents more than the cost of copying to obtain public documents.

The bill was backed by Assemblyman Joseph Cryan (D-Union), Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) and the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey.

"This marks the end of a barrier that for far too long kept the public from having access to government," said ACLU-NJ Open Governance Project attorney Bobby Conner. "Now public records will be more available to everyone, not just those who can afford it."

The Appellate Division of Superior Court ruled in February that beginning July 1 public entities could only charge the actual costs of making copies, including paper and toner.

“For most, if not all public agencies, the actual cost for copies will be less than the prior rates under OPRA,” said Lisa Ryan, spokeswoman for the state Government Records Council said. “So, access to records will be cheaper.”

A bill approved by the Legislature, which reached Christie’s desk on June 28, sets a uniform rate of 5 cents per page for letter-size documents and 7 cents a page for legal size. Previously, the rate was 75 cents for the first 10 pages, 50 cents for the next 10 and 25 cents for every page after that. Under that rate, a 100-page report would cost more than $20, a far cry from the proposed rate’s $5.

"We want to change the culture of those people who are custodians of records, of public officials, who think it is their responsibility and duty to keep these things from the public," Weinberg (D-Bergen) said at a news conference in Trenton. "The public owns everything we do."

One measure would update the 2001 Open Public Records Act and rename it in honor of Martin O’Shea, a retired newspaper reporter and editor who bedeviled government officials with detailed requests and a willingness to take denials to court. O’Shea died in December.

The other measure, involving the Sen. Byron M. Baer Open Public Meetings Act, would affect how officials publicize upcoming meetings, and require they list the precise time when the meeting will be open to public comment. It also would add provisions involving electronic communication.

Russo has proposed amending the state's Open Public Records Act, which provides guidelines for interaction between the public requesting government information and the agencies that provide it. Under his proposal, there would be a limit on the number of requests individuals and private agencies could make during a certain time.

Open government advocates have cringed at the idea of putting any type of restriction on records requesters. The current law, some say, already offers solutions for records requests that pose to substantially disrupt operations in towns, big and small.

Moreover, advocates say municipalities that put off investment in e-governance technology — such as providing a searchable electronic database of government documents on the Web — do more to hurt taxpayers than help them.

"It's just a reality that a government agency needs to come to terms with," said Bobby Conner, an open government attorney with New Jersey's American Civil Liberties Union. "(Lawmakers) should not legislate to address problematic requesters."

The “public reporting of civil judgments and settlements ordinance” — the first of its kind in New Jersey — was passed unanimously by the Township Committee Monday night.

The law requires officials to “make every effort to publicly announce the amount and terms” of lawsuit settlements and judgments against the township that result in public money being spent.

The ordinance was suggested by state open government activist Martin O’Shea, who passed away in December. O’Shea had suggested the model ordinance to Andover last summer, but the committee tabled it at the time, citing a lack of funds to advertise it in local newspapers.

Governments and agencies, with the help of the Legislature’s hazy wording in the state’s Open Public Records Act of 2001, have been charging copying fees that are more than five times the actual costs.

At a time when elected and appointed officials are being investigated by the dozens, taxpayers should be encouraged to dive into the murky waters of local, county and state government. But exorbitant copying costs are discouraging them.

The law allows most agencies to charge at least 75 cents per page for the first 10 pages, 50 cents per page for the next 10 pages, and 25 cents for each additional page. That means a 20-page document costs a taxpayer $12.50.

That’s about 10 times what a copy chain charges.

That's expected to change next month when a new rule recently adopted by the state's highest court to goes into effect. Evidence admitted in New Jersey courts are just some of the records specifically defined as "open for public inspection" in the state's new guidelines.

Records not open to residents after Sept. 1 will include financial information in divorce proceedings and what the court calls "personal indentifiers" such as Social Security, driver's license, insurance policy and credit card numbers.

"We have to take into account the need for openness while taking into account the need to protect those who are most vulnerable in our society," said Justice Barry Albin, who chaired a 21-person committee whose 35 recommendations were accepted and slightly modified by the justices last month.