Date:
08/19/2021
Subject:
Mallory Hoyt/Davenport Civil Rights Commission - Acceptance Order
Opinion:
The Iowa Public Information Board
|
In re the Matter of: Mallory Hoyt, Complainant And Concerning: Davenport Civil Rights Commission, Respondent |
Case Number: 21FC:0045
Acceptance Order
|
COMES NOW, Margaret E. Johnson, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Acceptance Order:
Mallory Hoyt filed formal complaint 21FC:0045 on June 4, 2021, alleging that the Davenport Civil Rights Commission (DCRC), a governmental body as defined by Iowa Code section 21.2(1), violated Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22.
Ms. Hoyt, who is the assistant city attorney for the City of Davenport, alleged that on May 20, 2021, a staff member attempted to join a meeting of the DCRC via the meeting link provided about four minutes after the meeting started. She alleged that the city staff member was logged off and placed in the ‘waiting room’ when attempting to rejoin.
She alleged that the DCRC had provided a telephone number for access as well, but not the code number necessary to join the meeting. The staff member remained waiting for access to the meeting for more than an hour, notified DCRC members of the lack of access, and requested a copy of the recording of the meeting.
When the requested link and recording had not been provided, Ms. Hoyt submitted a records request on May 27, 2021, requesting a link to the video recording of the meeting, a list of attendees and the times they joined and left the meetings, and a copy of the administrative rules discussed during the meeting.
Ms. Hoyt provided a copy of a letter she received from the DCRC on June 1, 2021, denying the record request and characterizing the record request as harassing. The DCRC Director also stated that the documents distributed, reviewed, and discussed at the open meeting were draft documents that would not be released.
Latrice Lacey, director of the DCRC, responded to the complaint on June 10, 2021. Ms. Lacey argued that the meeting incident was an isolated incident and should be dismissed pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.8. She also raised an argument that Ms. Hoyt cannot file a complaint due to her “lack of standing” as she did not show that she is a taxpayer or citizen of Iowa or that she is aggrieved by the inability to access the open meeting or receive the records she requested.
Ms. Lacey further argued that the “claim is not ripe” as there had been no indication that the records would not be released, directing Ms. Hoyt to the deputy city clerk for public records requests.
Records responsive to the record request were provided to the IPIB and forwarded to Ms. Hoyt, except for a copy of the documents distributed, reviewed, and discussed at the open meeting. Ms. Lacey stated those records were confidential pursuant to Iowa Code section 22.7(65), as ‘draft’ documents.
Iowa Code section 22.2(1) states: “Every person shall have the right to examine and copy a public record and to publish or otherwise disseminate a public record or the information contained in a public record.” There is no requirement that a record requester be a taxpayer, a citizen, or aggrieved.
Iowa Code section 23.7(1) requires the IPIB to adopt rules “providing for the timing, form, content, and means by which any aggrieved person, any taxpayer to or citizen of this state” may file a complaint with the IPIB. Iowa Administrative Code rule 497-2.1(1) does not restrict Ms. Hoyt from filing a complaint with the IPIB. Alleging a violation of Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22 is sufficient to establish the aggrievement needed to file a complaint with the IPIB.
In a previous complaint accepted and resolved by the IPIB1, it was determined that presenting and reviewing a document at a public meeting may waive any confidentiality. In an advisory opinion issued on November 19, 2015, the IPIB stated:
The issue was recently raised concerning whether discussing and making viewable a document at a public meeting made the document a public record. We are of the opinion that a document that is discussed and made viewable to the public at a public meeting makes the document a “public record” that shall not be treated as confidential under Iowa Code section 22.7. We note there are times when a confidential record is discussed or referenced at a public meeting. We do not deem such situations as removing the confidential nature of the record. Rather, this opinion applies solely to situations when the document is also made viewable or accessible to the public at the meeting. 2
The parties disagree in their analysis of the withheld record and whether it is confidential. Upon acceptance of this complaint, IPIB staff can review the documents at issue and determine whether the documents should be considered as confidential pursuant to Iowa Code section 22.7(65).
Iowa Code section 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint. This complaint does meet those requirements.
IT IS SO ORDERED: Formal complaint 21FC:00045 is accepted pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.8(1) and Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(2)(a). Parties shall cooperate with IPIB staff to reach an appropriate informal resolution to resolve the complaint pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.9.
Pursuant to Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(3), the IPIB may “delegate acceptance or dismissal of a complaint to the executive director, subject to review by the board.” The IPIB will review this Order on August 19, 2021. Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.
By the IPIB Executive Director
________________________________
Margaret E. Johnson
1.Formal complaint 15FC:0047, Carrie Schoenebaum and the Waukee School District.
2. IPIB AO 2015-08
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
This document was sent by electronic mail on the ___ day of August, 2021, to:
Mallory Hoyt
Davenport Civil Rights Commission, Latrice Lacey, director