At its core, journalism is a public service. That can mean a lot of things: from “news you can use” like where to find a cooling center, or informative summaries of public meetings, to accountability stories produced by scouring public records. There may be no greater service in our sphere than holding elected officials accountable to the people they are elected to represent.
The Mercury takes that responsibility seriously.
On September 1, the Mercury filed a lawsuit against the City of Portland and City Councilor Dan Ryan for withholding public records dating back to January 2025.
We request elected officials’ records all the time. But we were interested in these specific records after an image obtained by the Mercury last November showed a local real estate broker sending talking points to Councilor Ryan, which he repeated from the dais minutes later.
Naturally, that made us curious about other interests who may have his ear and voice. So, we requested records that could give insight into his office’s communications with the real estate broker, Portland’s police union, business lobbyists, and connected labor leaders. But by and large, the city responded by saying that no communications exist—in some cases despite clear evidence, through the images and lobbying reports, demonstrating that the messages existed.
Oregon public records law is clear, and it favors disclosure. “Oregon’s public records and meetings laws establish a simple expectation: that its government will be transparent to her people,” reads a 2024 Oregon Department of Justice public records manual. A public record is defined to include “any writing that contains information relating to the conduct of the public’s business,” the manual says.
Put simply, any member of the public has a right to see the communication being sent to or from a public official or a public agency, with some narrow exceptions.
Under state law, the custodian of a public record—like a city bureau or an elected official—is required to provide a copy of the record to a requester or give them an opportunity to inspect it. Conveniently, public records like text messages are archived on elected officials’ city-issued phones, and typically arrive in the requestor’s inbox in spreadsheet format within a few weeks.
Still, messages held on a personal device that fit the definition of a public record are, legally speaking, public records. And under state law, it is a misdemeanor each time the official obstructs the message. The requester can appeal to the district attorney’s office if the city fails to provide records for non-elected officials, but the only remedy for obtaining public officials’ illegally withheld records is through the courts.
This is why we’re suing Councilor Ryan. In January 2025, Portlanders voted to change how City Hall operates. The new system was designed to increase transparency and community access to government, rather than operating as a club for connected corporate interests. Councilor Ryan is one of the only current councilors elected to serve under the new government structure who previously served in the prior opaque system.
In other words, Ryan has more experience on City Council than anyone currently serving in the role, and has little excuse for failing to provide the Mercury with messages containing the public’s business. It’s Public Office 101.
Declining to provide the records has clouded transparency in other ways too. Public officials, including Councilor Ryan, enjoy access to the city attorney’s office, which handles city records. Ordinarily that office can produce the files without unreasonable delay. The attorneys are also familiar with how to exempt or redact records under state law.
Instead, our requests to Councilor Ryan’s office were delayed for weeks longer than other offices, likely due to an increase in requests after news reports about his personal phone use earlier this year. Oregon’s public records laws have guardrails meant to prevent any undue delay in the release of requested records, but those kept on private devices can be harder to chase down without resorting to litigation.
In an era of backroom deals and corporate handouts federally and locally, the Mercury is committed to fearless accountability journalism that serves the public interest.
This lawsuit is not punitive. We want the messages that the public deserves, and nothing more. It is simply the only available mechanism we currently have to demand transparency from officials doing the public’s business. Then and especially now, transparency is integral to accountability.