Date:
04/17/2025
Subject:
Cliff Williams/City of Keomah Village - Probable Cause Report and Order
Opinion:
The Iowa Public Information Board
In re the Matter of: Cliff Williams, Complainant And Concerning: City of Keomah Village, Respondent |
Case Number: 25FC:0011 Probable Cause Report and Order
|
|---|
COMES NOW, Erika Eckley, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Probable Cause Report:
On February 1, 2025, Cliff Williams filed formal complaint 25FC:0011, alleging the City of Keomah Village (City) violated Iowa Code Chapter 22.
The IPIB accepted this Complaint on February 20, 2025.
Facts
Keomah Village is a small town in Mahaska County, Iowa. The underlying dispute between the parties in this case is the installation of public toilets at neighboring Lake Keomah State Park, near the home of the complainant, Cliff Williams.
On January 18, 2025, Williams submitted a Chapter 22 request for all records received or sent by any City official between August 2022 and the present with any of the following keywords: “304,” “306,” “Cliff,” “Williams,” or “Toilet.” The City’s initial response provided a projected fee of $500 to $750 to comply with this request.[1]
On February 1, 2025, Williams filed formal complaint 25FC:0011, alleging the City had violated Iowa Code § 22.3 by charging an unreasonable fee. IPIB accepted this complaint based on facial review.
During the course of informal resolution, Williams agreed to partially narrow the scope of his request, and the City provided a revised estimate of actual costs incurred. Ultimately, a final fee of $287.50 was reached for 575 pages of responsive records. According to the City, this number reflects the collective time spent by the city clerk, mayor, each member of the city council, and three former officials who had records in their possession which were not otherwise accessible to the City. The City also charged for printing, citing technological limitations which required records to be printed and scanned before they could be compiled into the final records packet to be delivered to Williams.
Following the final cost breakdown provided by the City explaining how the revised fee was calculated, Williams stated that he was comfortable with the $287.50 figure.
Applicable Law
“The fee for the copying service as determined by the lawful custodian shall not exceed the actual cost of providing the service. Actual costs shall include only those reasonable expenses directly attributable to supervising the examination of and making and providing copies of public records. Actual costs shall not include charges for ordinary expenses or costs such as employment benefits, depreciation, maintenance, electricity, or insurance associated with the administration of the office of the lawful custodian. Costs for legal services should only be utilized for the redaction or review of legally protected confidential information.” Iowa Code § 22.3(2).
Analysis
Iowa Code § 22.3(2) provides that reasonable expenses based on “actual costs” incurred by the government body may be charged to a requester as a condition of production. Such a fee is limited to the actual, direct costs of responding, including the hourly rates of employees assigned to the task and the cost of materials, such as paper and ink, if physical copies are provided. See 22AO:0003, Reasonable Fees for Producing Records Requests.
The surrounding circumstances of this case are relevant. At 0.08 km2, Keomah Village is the smallest city in Iowa by land area, and several individuals involved with the request were required to travel between cities, as the printed records were compiled and reviewed by an outside city attorney in Oskaloosa. Furthermore, while it is not best practice, city officials and employees do not maintain separate city email accounts or government devices, meaning that each individual with potentially responsive records (including three former officials) had to respond for themselves. Five-hundred and seventy-five pages of records were eventually produced, requiring between ten and twelve hours of total response time, plus an additional hour spent by the outside county attorney and his staff, who compiled and scanned the printed records to be delivered to the complainant.
While the process employed by the City of printing and scanning records collected from numerous different sources was not necessarily the most efficient possible option, it appears likely from the evidence that the $287.50 figure does not exceed the actual, direct costs reasonably incurred by the City in responding to the request at issue. To the extent that the original $500 to $750 estimate was unreasonable under Iowa Code § 22.3(2), the issue was remedied through the informal resolution process, and the parties have both indicated that they are comfortable with $287.50 as the final fee to be charged to the complainant for his request.
IPIB Action
The Board may take the following actions upon receipt of a probable cause report:
a. Redirect the matter for further investigation;
b. Dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation has occurred;
c. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, but, as an exercise of administrative discretion, dismiss the matter; or
d. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, designate a prosecutor and direct the issuance of a statement of charges to initiate a contested case proceeding.
Iowa Admin. Code r. 497-2.2(4).
Recommendation
It is recommended the Board dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation has occurred. After working with the parties in informal resolution, a revised fee was reached which appears to reflect the actual costs incurred by the City in responding to the request, in compliance with Iowa Code § 22.3. Both parties have accepted the revised fee as reasonable.
By the IPIB Executive Director
Erika Eckley, J.D.
[1] In the City’s initial response following the acceptance of this complaint, it was suggested that this was a projection and not necessarily the final estimate. Included in this number was the expected cost of retaining a third party IT specialist, which was ultimately never required.
Under Iowa Admin. Code r. 497-2.2(4) the Board takes the following action:
- a. Redirect the matter for further investigation;
- b. Dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation has occurred;
- c. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, but, as an exercise of administrative discretion, dismiss the matter; or
- d. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, designate a prosecutor and direct the issuance of a statement of charges to initiate a contested case proceeding.
By the Board Chair
___________________________________
Monica McHugh