(ECWd) –
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), is the law outlining people’s rights to public records.
“Sec. 1. Pursuant to the fundamental philosophy of the American constitutional form of government, it is declared to be the public policy of the State of Illinois that all persons are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts and policies of those who represent them as public officials and public employees consistent with the terms of this Act.” (emphasis added)
Unfortunately, we are seeing more and more people posting false claims of entitlement to public records on social media, which results in spreading false information that followers believe to be true, and from there the infection of ignorance grows into division and political hatred for their local officials, all based on a false premise of entitlement to a record in the possession of a public body.
Words Matter – “consistent with the terms of this Act”
We see too many people read the first part of the statute above and it’s as if all they understood was “all persons are entitled to full and complete information. Yes, they are, “consistent with the terms of this Act”.
In order to understand FOIA one must first read it, then read it again. In fact, we encourage everyone to take the online FOIA training offered by the Attorney General PAC office on their website. The PAC also has information about the basics of FOIA that we believe, if people read it, would eliminate a lot of social media propaganda regarding one’s “rights” to certain records. Once that self-education is complete they should read the actual AG opinions issued on FOIA which will help to see how the law is applied.
A simple example.
A “draft” document is in the possession of a County Chairman. Is it subject to FOIA?
Social Media Post – “The Chair has no more authority or right to public documents than anyone else. Public included. That “draft” is still subject to FOIA.” (emphasis added)
The person who posted the comment is hidden behind what appears to be an anonymous account, which should be a red flag to most people but all that aside, people read it, and the very next post a person posts “I believe we should all be able to see the draft that was sent..”
We agree with the first sentence of the post in part, which is qualified for those who can read and understand FOIA. Public records (documents) are defined in paragraph (2c) of FOIA. and people have a right to them, “consistent with the terms of this Act”. The last sentence of the post is where one should read the law and stop putting out blanket statements that easily mislead people.
Reading the FOIA sections on exempt records we find the blanket claim that the draft is still subject to FOIA is not that simple.
Exemptions – “5 ILCS 140/7 (f) Preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, memoranda, and other records in which opinions are expressed, or policies or actions are formulated, except that a specific record or relevant portion of a record shall not be exempt when the record is publicly cited and identified by the head of the public body. The exemption provided in this paragraph (f) extends to all those records of officers and agencies of the General Assembly that pertain to the preparation of legislative documents.”
The PAC has consistently ruled that drafts are exempt from FOIA unless the head of a public body publicly cites and identifies the record in a public meeting. While we understand the law does not say, “in a public meeting“, it’s been the practice of the PAC to apply that interpretation as it relates to “publicly cited and identified”. That being the case, a draft in the possession of the public body is exempt from FOIA unless during a meeting the head of the public body cites that record. Once cited and identified in a public meeting it would be subject to FOIA.
While we could spend hours exposing false beliefs regarding FOIA that are found all over social media, we will close with yet another time-wasting FOIA request we see public bodies getting on a regular basis.
“In accordance with the FOIA, I am requesting to know answers to the following questions”, then they list half a dozen or more questions.
Such a request is not an FOIA request as FOIA pertains to public records, not answering questions.
4 Comments
Michael Hagberg
Posted at 09:55h, 05 AugustI’d like to know more about the definition of a “draft” document. I’ve got an outstanding PAC review for a “Sports Complex Feasibility Study” that the city paid $23,000 for. The study was mentioned 6 times during a 45 minute meeting, but because speakers don’t identify themselves before speaking, it’s hard to know if one of those references was by the chairperson. The chairperson did sign the minutes which states the Feasibility Study was discussed. I’m hoping this meets the definition of “cited and identified” I’ve also had other FOIAs denied when the city claimed items discussed in meetings are ‘working documents’
John Kraft & Kirk Allen
Posted at 11:54h, 05 AugustIf the Chairman of the board mentioned it and referenced something within it (the mere mention of its existence does not meet the threshold), then it is a public record even if it is still in draft form.
Dave
Posted at 17:45h, 04 AugustSENATE BILL 3649 bans free speech which is contrary to:
ARTICLE 1, SECTION 4. FREEDOM OF SPEECH
” All persons may speak, write and publish freely, being
responsible for the abuse of that liberty. In trials for
libel, both civil and criminal, the truth, when published
with good motives and for justifiable ends, shall be a
sufficient defense.” (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Section 1. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Worker
5 Freedom of Speech Act.
6 Section 5. Findings; legislative intent.
7 (a) The General Assembly finds that it is in the public
8 policy interests of the State for all working Illinoisans to
9 have protections from mandatory participation in
10 employer-sponsored meetings if the meeting is designed to
11 communicate an employer’s position on religious or political
12 matters.
NOWHERE IN THE ILLINOIS BILL OF RIGHTS DOES IT SAY THE COMMUNIST LIKE DEMOCRATS IN THE ILLINOIS STATE LEGISLATURE MAY ENACT LAW WHICH WATERS DOWN OUR GOD GIVEN UNCHANGEABLE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH! Our founding document of the Declaration of Independence says our Rights are unalienable (Unchangeable) and come from God”:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness… ” Our rights aren’t given to us by the democrats in the Illinois state legislature, our rights are unchangeable. Our constitutionally protected rights are not mere privileges granted by the communist regime controlling the state legislature.
Our Illinois Constitution is the Standard by which the validity of all Acts of the state legislature, all acts of the Executive Branch, and all judicial opinions is measured and judged. I remember when companies could have meeting and ask the employees to chime in with their state reps because a proposed action the state legislature would harm the company and cause job losses. The likely reason for the bill, because the democrats don’t want to hear from the people they harm.
Margaret Toniny
Posted at 17:19h, 04 AugustThank you for showing me the answer to a question I have had for a long time….”Why are drafts not readily shared?”
And, “…unless during a meeting the head of the public body cites that record. Once cited and identified in a public meeting it would be subject to FOIA.” would have opened the door to a document a few months ago.