Kanab » When the president of a taxpayer group asked for records concerning how much Kane County has spent in seven years on its battle with the federal government over ownership of roads on public lands, he couldn't believe the answer.

"They told us it would cost $27,000 and take a few years to get," said Sky Chaney, who heads the 400-member Taxpayer Association of Kane County. "This is ridiculous."

For nearly a decade, the Kane County Commission has battled the Bureau of Land Management in federal court over ownership of roads lacing the redrock country of southern Utah.

The county has mostly been on the losing end of court rulings, including appeals, except for the latest challenge. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals initially ruled against the county, but has now decided to rehear several issues.

That case centers on the removal of 31 BLM road closure signs on hundreds of roads in the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in 2003. The court has asked lawyers to file briefs on several issues.

Chaney's group wants to know the total amount spent not only on the legal maneuvering, but on activities like those in the 2003 case, when the county replaced the removed signs with new ones.

Chaney filed his request under the Government Records and Management Act (GRAMA), which specifies what records are public and under what conditions the agency can charge to produce them. After getting their initial response, Chaney met with county officials, who turned over 56 pages of spreadsheets from the their legal and technical fund. Chaney paid $12.50 for those documents.

But Chaney said what he got still does not provide a complete picture of how much the county has spent on wrangling with the BLM. In addition to how much money has been spent from the general fund, Chaney wants to know how much time county employees have spent on road projects; how much has been spent on any private contractors; all attorney fees, including depositions; any vehicles or other equipment that was purchased or leased; per diem costs for associated travel; and any surveys and maps created in the process.

"Attorneys fees are less than half the costs," Chaney said. "We think that the expenses listed in these spreadsheets constitute well under half the cost of the roads battle, as the county has not yet disclosed all the other expenses associated with their legal challenge for roads."

Chaney said his group does not take sides in the legal battle. "We just want to get the public information out there and let the taxpayer decide."

County Attorney Jim Scarth said the scope of the requested information was too broad and vague to expect the county to respond in a reasonable cost and time.

"We've asked [Chaney] to narrow the scope of his request and be more specific," said Scarth. "We're not trying to hide anything. We just don't want to be overburdened with a gigantic request."

He estimated it would take two paid researchers and at least 1,500 hours to gather the information Chaney's group wants.

Scarth said some of the requested information could only be gathered by him or the county clerk.

He also said some of the information requested doesn't exist in a document and would have to be created, which is not allowed under GRAMA.

Scarth sees some irony in the request.

"It's interesting that [Chaney] wants to save tax money and yet submits a request so extensive, it will cost taxpayers money," he said.

Joel Campbell, an associate professor of communications at Brigham Young University and a member of the Society of Professional Journalists' Freedom of Information Committee, thinks the county's request for $27,000 for the documents is excessive.

"I've read [Chaney's] request and think it is outrageous they want to charge that much," said Campbell. "It is a taxpayer just wanting to know how tax dollars are being spent."

Campbell said Chaney's group could appeal to the state's Public Records Committee, which settles disputes involving the release of public documents, but has no jurisdiction over how much can be charged by a government entity.

"The Legislature needs to address the cost problem," said Campbell.

Meanwhile, Chaney is preparing a second GRAMA request.

"The taxpayer association is in the process of refining its next GRAMA request to the county," said Chaney. "Our goal is to narrow the scope of our request, while covering all of the many areas where Kane County has been spending taxpayer dollars in their effort to secure county roads on public lands."

Glenn Webb, a resident of Kanab who isn't a member of the Taxpayers Association, is pleased to see someone going for the records. He said many taxpayers are frustrated with the county doling out money to finance a stream of losing efforts in the courts.

"There are plenty of roads for the public to go on," said Webb. "If they [the BLM] want to close some for whatever reason [county commissioners] feel they have to fight it and they always lose."

He said many county residents are tired of seeing their taxes increased, only to have the money disappear in futile litigation.

"When we try to find out where our money's going, all we get is a runaround," he said.