24FC:0038 Joe Monahan/Ames Public Library - Dismissal Order

Date:
07/18/2024

Subject:
Joe Monahan/Ames Public Library - Dismissal Order

Opinion:

The Iowa Public Information Board

COMES NOW, Erika Eckley, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order.

Joe Monahan filed formal complaint 24FC:0022 on April 17, 2024, alleging the Ames Public Library (“Library”) violated Iowa Code chapter 22 on April 10, 2024.

Facts

Mr. Monahan requested copies of emails sent by the Library Director or manager containing search terms: “SF496”, “SF 496”, “banned books”, “book ban”, and “diversity.” Mr. Monahan was told approximately 220 emails were found with the terms he requested and the charge would be $116.22 for the records. The charge included one hour of IT services at $42.89 and one hour of the director's time to check the records for confidentiality at $73.33.

In his complaint, Mr. Monahan believes the IT effort should be easily contained within the 30 minutes of free service that the law suggests and the email system, Microsoft Outlook Exchange Mail server, can be searched for tens of thousands of records in a very short period of time. He also believes a lower paid employee, rather than the Library Director could be used to check the records for confidentiality to reduce costs. 

Mr. Monahan believes the City should take steps to reduce the time to respond to his records request to below 30 minutes and provided to him at no cost. He believes the current charges essentially make even the simplest FOIA requests financially untenable, essentially thwarting the intentions of our state’s public records legislation.

Mark Lambert, City Attorney, provided a response on behalf of the Library. The IT department of the library conducted the search of emails using the terms provided by Mr. Monahan. The search took one hour and cost $42.89, which is the hourly wage for the IT staff person who ran the search. The charge is the actual cost for the search and should be considered reasonable.

A review of the records for confidential information was conducted by the Library Director, who is the only staff person with the expertise to do the review. For this record request. the Library Director spent more than an hour reviewing 220 emails for confidentiality, but her time was rounded down to only one hour. The city’s attorney also spent more than one hour reviewing the emails and consulting with the Library on the request. His time was not included in the estimate for fees.

The Library worked with Mr. Monahan on his records request to narrow the search terms and did three separate searches to reduce the emails down to 220. In addition, in an attempt to work with Mr. Monahan, the Library agreed to reduce the quoted IT time in the estimate. The Library provided a new estimate of $76.90 ($73.33 for the Library Director’s time, plus $3.57 for the IT staff time) in response to this complaint. 

Law

“Although fulfillment of a request for a copy of a public record may be contingent upon receipt of payment of reasonable expenses, the lawful custodian shall make every reasonable effort to provide the public record requested at no cost other than copying costs for a record which takes less than thirty minutes to produce. In the event expenses are necessary, such expenses shall be reasonable and communicated to the requester upon receipt of the request.” Iowa Code § 22.3.

Analysis

The record request from Mr. Monahan was concise and clearly defined for the Library to conduct a search. The Library ran the search prior to providing an estimate of fees and knew 220 emails were found. The estimate for the IT staff time was based on actual time needed for the search to be completed and based on the employee’s actual hourly wage. Mr. Monahan’s assertion that there is a quicker or more efficient method for the search does not make the Library’s actual search method unreasonable. 

The estimate provided to Mr. Monahan only charged for part of the time spent by the Library Director in reviewing the documents and did not include any of the time spent by the city attorney in assisting in the processing or review of documents. Further, the Library agreed to reduce the estimate in response to Mr. Monahan’s arguments regarding the IT time spent. The new estimate is $76.90. This is a reasonable fee based on less than the actual staff time spent and the number of emails retrieved.

While Mr. Monahan would prefer there be no cost for his records request and believes costs make it difficult for individuals to make records requests, the Iowa Supreme Court has recently affirmed the ability of government bodies to charge for the actual costs of responding to records requests. “[R]etrieval fees may in fact hamper access to public documents. However, such fees may also ensure continuing access to public records through increased funding and deterring excessive or overly broad requests. In any event, weighing these policy interests is for the general assembly. (citation omitted) We hold that in allowing for the recovery of expenses incurred in fulfilling requests for public records, Iowa Code section 22.3(1) authorizes reasonable fees for the time spent by the custodian or its employees in fulfilling the request.” Teig v. Chavez, No. 23-0833, 2024 WL 2869282, at *10 (Iowa June 7, 2024).

The fee estimate provided to Mr. Monahan is based on the actual costs to the Library of responding to the request and do not violate Iowa Code chapter 22. 

Conclusion

Iowa Code section 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and could have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint.  This complaint does not meet those requirements. 

The Library provided an estimate based on the actual cost of retrieving Mr. Monahan’s records request.

IT IS SO ORDERED:  Formal complaint 24FC:0038 is dismissed as legally insufficient pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.8(2) and Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(2)(b).

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 July 18, 2024.  Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.

By the IPIB Executive Director

________________________________

Erika Eckley, J.D.