25FC:0013 Kevin Kilgore/Department of Management - Dismissal Order

Date:
03/20/2025

Subject: 
Kevin Kilgore/Department of Management - 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 February 5, 2025, Kevin Kilgore filed formal complaint 25FC:0013, alleging the Department of Management violated Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22.

Facts

Kevin Kilgore alleges the Department of Management violates Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22 because he believes an online excel spreadsheet provided by the Department does not align with the statutory changes mandated by legislation in determining the levy rates for property taxes set by local governments. His complaint involves his analysis of this online spreadsheet provided and seeks corrections he asserts are needed to comply with Iowa Code § 331.423. He further argues the online budget form is not capable of auditing the budgets for noncompliance or inaccuracies.

He argues a chapter 21 violation has occurred because the Department’s administrative rules do not have a complaint mechanism for him to submit his assessment that the Department’s spreadsheet does not align with his interpretation of Iowa Code § 331.423. He also argues that the Department violated chapter 22 because portions of the spreadsheet are password protected, and the Department is in violation because it cannot prevent access to a public record merely because it is part of a data processing software.[1]

Kilgore supplemented his complaint multiple times and provided additional documentation including the instructions for completion of the county budgeting online requirements from the Department, the county levy calculation instructions, and email responses from the Department.

Law

“Upon receipt of a complaint alleging a violation of chapter 21 or 22, the board shall do either of the following:

1. Determine that, on its face, the complaint is within the board’s jurisdiction, appears legally sufficient, and could have merit. In such a case the board shall accept the complaint, and shall notify the parties of that fact in writing.
2. Determine that, on its face, the complaint is outside its jurisdiction, is legally insufficient, is frivolous, is without merit, involves harmless error, or relates to a specific incident that has previously been finally disposed of on its merits by the board or a court. In such a case the board shall decline to accept the complaint. If the board refuses to accept a complaint, the board shall provide the complainant with a written order explaining its reasons for the action.” Iowa Code § 23.8

Analysis

Kilgore couches his complaint as a violation of Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22, but he provides no evidence there have been any violations of either of these chapters.

Kilgore alleges the Department’s lack of a mechanism for his complaint regarding the budgetary spreadsheet provided to local governments is a violation of Iowa Code chapter 21. However, nothing within Iowa Code chapter 21 requires a complaint mechanism exist within an agency’s administrative rules. Iowa Code chapter 21, instead, requires notice and other requirements when a government body holds a meeting. 

Iowa Code § 21.2(2) states a “‘Meeting’ means a gathering in person or by electronic means, formal or informal, of a majority of the members of a governmental body where there is deliberation or action upon any matter within the scope of the governmental body’s policy-making duties. Meetings shall not include a gathering of members of a governmental body for purely ministerial or social purposes when there is no discussion of policy or no intent to avoid the purposes of this chapter.” Iowa Code § 21.2(3) states an “‘Open session’ means a meeting to which all members of the public have access.”

Nowhere within Iowa Code chapter 21 is a requirement for and agency to adopt administrative regulations outlining a “complaint mechanism” for the public’s interpretation of the statutory requirements of a budgeting worksheet provided by the state agency or any other type of assistance and administration within the agency’s powers. Kilgore advances no specific allegation beyond his desire for a complaint mechanism outside the emails he sent to the Department. He points to no specific provision within Iowa Code chapter 21 he alleges was violated. Despite his multiple filings, he has provided no evidence of any violation of Iowa Code chapter 21.

In regards to Kilgore’s complaint the budgeting spreadsheet violates Iowa Code chapter 22 because the spreadsheet contains password-protected provisions, there is also no actual violation alleged. Documentation provided by Kilgore shows the Department was responsive to his questions regarding the spreadsheet and promptly provided the information from the document he requested. Again, he points to no specific provision within Iowa Code chapter 22 to bolster his belief that the Department’s online form should allow full review and manipulation of all cells and formulas. His allegation does not align with the requirements of Iowa Code chapter 22. He requested the public information. He received the public information requested. There is no violation of Iowa Code chapter 22.

Despite couching the complaint as violations of Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22, Kilgore’s actual complaint is his belief the Department’s spreadsheet does not comply with his interpretation of Iowa Code § 331.423 as amended by legislation in 2024. Interpretation of Iowa Code § 331.423 and its application within a spreadsheet provided to local governments to comply with their budgeting responsibilities is outside the jurisdiction of IPIB. IPIB is limited to addressing complaints within the jurisdictional authority granted by Iowa Code chapter 23 only, so this complaint must be dismissed.

Conclusion

Iowa Code § 23.8 requires 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.

There are no violations of Iowa Code chapters 21 or 22 alleged in the complaint. The remaining issues regarding the statutory interpretation of Iowa Code § 331.423 are outside IPIB’s scope and jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED:  Formal complaint 25FC:0013 is dismissed as it is legally insufficient, without merit, and frivolous 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 March 20, 2025.  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.

[1] He alleges this is related to a complaint he previously filed regarding the legislature’s failure to have a revised Iowa Code on the legislative website in a timely fashion. (This complaint is currently on appeal with the district court for IPIB’s failure to adjudicate the complaint as outside its jurisdiction granted under Iowa Code chapter 23.)