24FC:0119 Tony Reed/Central Iowa Juvenile Detention Center Commission - Dismissal Order

Date:
12/19/2024

Subject:
Tony Reed/Central Iowa Juvenile Detention Center Commission  - 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:

On November 25, 2024, Tony Reed filed formal complaint 24FC:0119, alleging the Central Iowa Juvenile Detention Center Commission (CIJDC Commission) violated Iowa Code Chapters 21 and 22.

Facts

The Central Iowa Juvenile Detention Center (CIJDC) is a juvenile detention facility and social services agency based in Eldora, Iowa, formed pursuant to a 28E agreement to exercise certain government functions, including juvenile detention, drug and alcohol testing, and in-home counseling. The CIJDC Commission is comprised of one designee per member county, with a Chair and two Vice Chairs elected to serve as Executive Officers. The complainant, Tony Reed, is an employee of the CIJDC who serves as the agency’s Executive Director.

On September 27, 2024, Reed alleges the CIJDC Commission Chair sent a “Confidential Personnel Report” to approximately 95 people, including to members of the general public. The Report concerned an attorney’s review of a complaint which Reed had made. Reed alleges the contents of this Report were entitled to confidentiality under both Iowa Code § 22.7(11)(a) as “personal information in confidential personnel records” and as privileged communications shared in the context of an attorney-client relationship. Reed alleges the CIJDC Commission violated Chapter 22 by publicizing a public record entitled to confidentiality, thereby damaging his reputation with the member counties served by the CIJDC.

Additionally, Reed alleges the CIJDC Commission violated Iowa Code chapter 21 on October 25, 2024, when the CIJDC Commission held an open meeting which included the following agenda item: “9. c. Executive Director Mentoring update from Shawn with possible closed session Pursuant to Iowa Code 21.5 (1) (i).” Upon reaching this agenda item during the meeting, the Chair proceeded to discuss the topic in open session, without providing Reed the option to request the CIJDC Commission move into closed session. By failing to provide an opportunity to request a closed session for the portion of the meeting discussing Reed’s professional competency as an employee, the CIJDC Commission caused serious harm to Reed’s reputation which could have been avoided by going into closed session, as authorized by Iowa Code § 21.5(1)(i).

Applicable Law

“The following public records shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise ordered by a court, by the lawful custodian of records, or by another person duly authorized to release such information.” Iowa Code § 22.7.

“A governmental body may hold a closed session only by affirmative public vote of either two-thirds of the members of the body or all of the members present at the meeting. A governmental body may hold a closed session only to the extent a closed session is necessary for any of the following reasons:

1. To evaluate the professional competency of an individual whose appointment, hiring, performance, or discharge is being considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury to that individual’s reputation and that individual requests a closed session.”

Iowa Code § 21.5(1)(i).

“Nothing in this section requires a governmental body to hold a closed session to discuss or act upon any matter.” Iowa Code § 21.5(6).

Analysis

In its initial facial review, IPIB considers all factual allegations provided by the complainant to be true and accurate for the purposes of deciding whether to accept or dismiss a complaint. 

On the first allegation, even assuming the Report would have been entitled to confidentiality, under Iowa Code § 22.7(11)(a) or because of confidential attorney-client privilege, government bodies are not required to assert confidentiality merely because confidentiality is authorized under Iowa Code § 22.7. Thus, a government body has the discretion to release a public record for which it is a lawful custodian despite having the option not to. See Iowa Code § 22.7 (“[t]he following public records shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise ordered by a court, by the lawful custodian of the records, or by another person duly authorized to release such information). Because Iowa Code § 22.7(11) does not provide for a requirement of confidentiality and because attorney-client privilege may be waived by a client’s consent, it would be within the Commission’s discretion to release the Report as a public record, so there is no violation of Iowa Code chapter 22. 

As for the second allegation, even of the CIJDC Commission would have been authorized to hold a closed session to discuss Reed’s professional competency, Iowa Code expressly provides that “[n]othing in [Section 21.5] requires a governmental body to hold a closed session to discuss or act upon any matter.” Iowa Code § 21.5(6). Thus, it was within the CIJDC Commission’s discretion to continue in open session, regardless of whether a closed session would have been permissible. Because of this, there is no violation of Iowa Code chapter 21. 

Conclusion

Iowa Code § 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint. Following a review of the allegations on their face, it is found that this complaint does not meet those requirements.

The CIJDC Commission was not required to withhold its Report as confidential under Chapter 22, nor was it required to move into closed session to discuss the complainant’s professional competency under Chapter 21.

IT IS SO ORDERED:  Formal complaint 24FC:0119 is dismissed as legally insufficient pursuant to Iowa Code § 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 December 19, 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.