Transparency Delayed: Youngsville’s Pattern and Practice

Access to public records is not a privilege. It is a constitutional right guaranteed to every citizen of Louisiana. Article XII, Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution provides that “No person shall be denied the right to observe the deliberations of public bodies and examine public documents, except in cases established by law.” That guarantee reflects a simple but powerful principle: public records are not the private property of the officials who create or maintain them — they exist for the public’s benefit and are subject to the public’s right of access.

Unfortunately, there remains a common misconception that citizens who exercise this right are somehow creating unnecessary work or wasting taxpayer dollars. It is akin to saying that requiring the government to repair a roadway constructed for your use is a waste of tax dollars. But critics of public records laws, often elected officials and bureaucrats, often portray the process as burdensome, particularly when it involves controversial subjects or raises uncomfortable questions. Transparency is not optional. It is one of the costs of operating an accountable government.

Producing public records is a routine governmental function, and citizens should not be blamed for expenses arising from a public body’s own decisions. Costs can escalate when agencies involve attorneys, consultants, or other outside professionals to review, analyze, or contest requests rather than simply producing the records the law requires. It is little different from government spending $100,000 on a consultant to tell officials something they already knew.

A Promise of Transparency

The issue becomes even more troubling when requests are acknowledged, production dates are promised, and months pass without the records ever being produced. That has become an increasingly familiar pattern at the Youngsville Police Department.

Since January 2026, numerous public records requests involving unrelated subjects have followed a remarkably similar course. The Department typically has an attorney acknowledge receipt of the request and advise that responsive records will take approximately seven to ten business days to produce. Follow-up inquiries are made after those deadlines pass. Sometimes partial responses are provided; rarely is a new production date given. In many instances, however, the requested records remain outstanding months later.

For example, on January 19, 2026, we submitted requests seeking crime reporting data from the Department under the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the Louisiana Incident-Based Reporting System (LIBRS), along with incident counts, offense classifications, and clearance rates for 2025.

These are the very statistics used to measure crime trends, evaluate police performance, and inform the public about public safety in their community. These are precisely the kinds of crime statistics one would examine before proclaiming Youngsville the “safest city” in the state. We followed up in early and late February, April, May, and most recently July. To date, not a single record has been produced.

Other Examples

Later that month, on January 30, 2026, another request sought communications involving Chief J.P. Broussard concerning the John Davison disciplinary appeal, the Youngsville Municipal Police Civil Service proceedings, and the widely discussed Professional Association of Law Enforcement Officers billboard controversy. Those communications may shed light on how the Department’s leadership handled the disciplinary proceedings and billboard controversy. You may recall there were allegations that Chief Broussard attempted to interfere with the organization’s First Amendment rights by having the billboards removed, something he publicly denied.

We were initially told 10 – 14 business days. We followed up again — April, May, and July. No response. No records.

On March 19, 2026, we requested records concerning opioid-related activity within Youngsville, including calls for service, departmental analyses identifying crime trends and enforcement “hotspots,” and communications discussing opioid investigations in conjunction with surveillance technology, license plate readers, and camera systems. We were told on April 15, 2026, we could expect a “formal response by the end of the week.” We followed up again in May and July. No response. No records.

A Pattern of Delay

The handling of more recent requests involving Detective Tyra Dorsey provides an especially revealing example. In May, records were requested regarding employee grievances reportedly filed by Detective Tyra Dorsey together with any written findings resulting from those complaints. To date, those records have not been produced.

Then in July, two separate requests were submitted. One sought records or communications concerning Dorsey beginning January 1, including complaints, transfers and potential transfers. The second was considerably narrower: it sought only communications between City of Youngsville personnel concerning Dorsey beginning July 1, including e-mails and text messages.

After the requests were further clarified, YPD advised on August 21 that its IT personnel were working to retrieve the responsive records and that the process could take “at least a week.”

A week later, the explanation changed. The Department advised that an electronic search had generated approximately 948 e-mails that would have to be reviewed individually. YPD presented two choices: wait up to 30 additional days for the records to be reviewed during normal working hours, or pay to have Deputy Chief Gabriel Thompson perform the work on overtime. The Department subsequently estimated that the actual review would require approximately six to eight hours of Thompson’s time. In other words, a task estimated to require less than one working day could take as long as 30 days unless the requester agreed to pay hundreds of dollars for overtime.

Another Problem

The requests did not seek only e-mails. They expressly sought other communications, including text messages. When questioned about that omission, YPD acknowledged that its response had addressed only e-mails because they represented the “first and most significant hurdle,” and stated that other communications would be produced “in due course.” But difficulty reviewing e-mails does not explain why available text messages or other responsive records should be held while that process continues. Those records can be produced as they are located.

We have since been told that YPD only recently instructed officers to check their phones for responsive messages. If accurate, that means the 948-e-mail review was not merely delaying production of text messages — the process of gathering those messages apparently had not yet begun.

The contrast is difficult to ignore. Compliance with Louisiana’s Public Records Law is a mandatory governmental responsibility. CALEA accreditation is voluntary. Yet YPD has demonstrated a willingness to devote personnel and resources to pursuing accreditation, while suggesting that the six to eight hours required to fulfill a public records request may take 30 days unless the citizen requesting the records pays for overtime.

Kicking the Can Down the Road

In June, requests sought communications concerning P.O.S.T. Council training deficiencies, waivers, and certification issues affecting law enforcement officers. Most recently, requests were submitted seeking records concerning court reporter transcripts associated with several disciplinary proceedings, including the appeal hearings of John Davison, Lloyd Henry, and Hannah Gentry, as well as invoices, payment records, communications regarding transcript preparation and delivery, contracts with the court reporting service, and related documentation. We have received a partial response, but no timeline for when the request will ultimately be fulfilled.

These requests involve different topics, time periods, records, and governmental functions. Yet they share one common characteristic: weeks and months after they were submitted, they remain incomplete or unresolved.

Why does this keep happening? What explains the repeated delays? In some instances, the requested records may not exist. If so, say so. If they exist and require additional time to review, explain why and produce what is available in the meantime. Instead, the recurring pattern has been another acknowledgment, another anticipated production date, another follow-up and another delay.

Transparency Should Not Depend on Persistence

No one disputes that some public records requests require time to gather. Large requests may involve multiple departments, electronic records, or legal review before production. Louisiana’s Public Records Law recognizes those practical realities. What the law does not contemplate is an indefinite cycle of acknowledgments, promises of future production, repeated follow-up requests, and continuing delay.

When records documenting government activity are withheld for months, their value to the public diminishes. Citizens cannot effectively monitor their government, evaluate official decisions, or participate meaningfully in public debate if the information necessary to do so remains unavailable long after the events in question have occurred.

Government transparency is measured not simply by whether records are eventually released, but whether they are produced while they remain relevant to the public’s understanding of current events.

The Public Has a Right to Know

The outstanding requests involve issues of legitimate public concern: crime statistics, officer training and certification, internal communications by senior officials, employee grievances, opioid enforcement strategies, and records related to disciplinary proceedings involving public employees. None of these subjects belong exclusively to government officials. They belong to the public.

Louisiana’s Public Records Law was enacted to ensure that government remains accountable to the citizens it serves. That accountability depends upon timely access to public information — not access months or years after the public’s interest has passed. If “justice delayed is justice denied,” then transparency delayed is transparency lost.

The citizens of Youngsville deserve more than promises that records will be available in “seven to ten business days.” They deserve a government that recognizes public records for what they are: not the government’s information, but public information that should be available to all.

###