Re: privileged information

[escape@alt-escape.com]

At 08:43 AM 12/8/98 PST, you wrote:

>The funny part is that we won't be able to read that decision.  It has 
>been labelled "attorney-client privelege."
>
>How can this be? Both the attorney and the client are hired by the 
>people of Latah County.  The decision relates directly to the people's 
>business.  What kind of privilege is this protecting?

In this case, I would contact the state Attorney General and file a
complaint, and possibly sue under the Freedom of Information Act.  Bill
Clinton had no attorney/client privilage concerning his publicly paid
lawyers, and neither should our local officials.

There was a similar case in Pullman a while back, where the city tried to
trade an old school building for a few acres of land.  Values of the
properties were appraised, but the city also claimed "privileged
information" for the appraisals.  As I recall, a threatened or actual
lawsuit forced release of the documents (because if it's paid for by the
public, it's public property).  The building/land swap was reversed.