that disclosure of rate information is mandatory under Miss.Code Ann. § 79-23-1(1). Requiring Entergy to disclose rate information does not preclude it from having other confidential information in the special contract redacted pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 25-61-9(2). This balances the competing interests of the public’s right to know about the decisions of the Public Service Commission and Entergy’s right to protect confidential proprietary information. ¶29. Today’s majority opinion strays from this Court’s presumption in favor of requiring disclosure of public records, see Mississippi Wildlife, 740 So.2d at 936 (noting that doubts regarding disclosure should be resolved in favor of disclosure); Roberts v. Miss. Republican Party State Executive Comm., 465 So.2d 1050, 1053 (Miss.1985) (<HOLDING>); Harrison County Dev. Comm’n v. Kinney, 920
recognizing that refinement of rule governing confidential court records was a necessary step in providing the public electronic access to court records recognizing that intent of public records act is to provide all citizens with access to the records of all public governmental bodies holding that municipal court records were admissible under  official records or public documents  exception holding that records in the possession of a party with whom an agency has contracted to perform a governmental function on behalf of the agency are presumptively public records subject to public access so long as the record a directly relates to the governmental function and b is not exempt under the rtkl holding that the public records act does not mandate disclosure of records protected by tennessee rule of criminal procedure 16