Once again, the administration of Mayor Tom Henry is cloaking the actions of its public safety agencies with a veil of secrecy.

Once again, city officials are giving residents reasons to question – justified or not – how well its public safety officers are serving the public.

The public should be informed about the circumstances regarding the Jan. 23 fire at the Willows of Coventry apartments that killed three college students who had huddled in the bathroom of their second-floor apartment.

Certainly, the owners of the apartments, the estates of the deceased students and the college they attend deserve answers.

But the city refuses to provide them.

On Monday, attorneys for the apartments, the college and one of the estates sued under the Indiana Access to Public Records Act seeking some of the information the city has refused to provide. They are seeking the tapes of the 911 call, radio transmissions, documents, photographs, videos, witness statements and other information regarding the Jan. 23 fire as well as two other fires at the same complex within the previous three months.

The city refused, saying the requested items were all investigatory records, which state law defines as “information compiled in the course of the investigation of a crime.”

City Fire Department officials said two months ago they were almost finished investigating the fire, but they have yet to release a cause. City officials have never before said the fire involves a crime.

The city owes the public answers. Why did the young women who died remain in the bathroom? How soon after arriving did firefighters begin rescue efforts? Is there a possibility arson was involved?

The city’s refusal to provide information only creates more questions, more doubt, more skepticism.

According to Monday’s lawsuit, the city has provided only the fire incident report. The city never answered a follow-up letter from an attorney for those seeking the records, including reasoning on how the 911 call and radio logs can be classified as investigatory records.

This isn’t the first time the city has used the “investigatory records” designation to justify refusing to release information important to the public. City officials have also refused to release videos showing the fatal police action shooting of an unarmed man on Dec. 23, 2007, when a single officer fired 18 rounds into the man’s car. The officer was exonerated and returned to active duty. Police also claim those videos are investigatory records.

Both the 911 tape related to the fire and the police videos were recorded as part of the normal course of business, before any investigations existed. If current law indeed permits the city to keep them under wraps, that law should be clarified.

In any event, no law forbids the city to make them public, only the opinions of administration officials who apparently believe the public is better served when the truth is hidden.