25FC:0039 Kevin Howard/Department of Administrative Services - Investigative Report and Probable Cause Order

Date:
05/15/2025

Subject: 
Kevin Howard/Department of Administrative Services  - Investigative Report and Probable Cause Order

Opinion:

The Iowa Public Information Board

COMES NOW, Erika Eckley, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Investigative Report: 

On April 7, 2025, Kevin Howard filed formal complaint 25FC:0039, alleging that the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) violated Iowa Code Chapter 22. IPIB accepted this complaint.

Facts

In March 2025, Kevin Howard, filed a series of public information requests seeking bond records – specifically containing the surety bond number, insurance policy number, bonding company name, and coverage amount – for four public officials, including the Johnson County Attorney, the Johnson County Clerk of Court, a particular named judge, and the Director of the Iowa Department of Revenue.

On April 7, 2025, Howard filed formal complaint 25FC:0039, alleging undue delay and/or failure to provide responsive records. Four separate government bodies were named in the complaint: 1) the Johnson County Attorney’s Office, 2) the Johnson County Clerk of Court, 3) the DAS, and 4) the Department of Revenue. 

Howard subsequently restricted his complaint to only two entities, the County Attorney’s Office and the DAS, as the clerk, judge, and Revenue Director were all purportedly covered by a state policy administered by the DAS.[1]

On April 18, 2025, Howard voluntarily withdrew the portion of complaint relating to the Johnson County Attorney, as he was able to obtain the records he was seeking without IPIB’s involvement.

After being referred to the DAS, Howard was able to obtain a single record, referred to as the FY25 Blanket Bond Policy. This PDF contained the details of a crime insurance policy with Travelers, an insurance company. In his complaint, Howard alleged that this was not the record he was looking for and that there should be additional bonding information available for each state employee, as state law requires them to carry bonds.

Following acceptance of the complaint, counsel for DAS explained the Travelers insurance policy was obtained in lieu of a bond for all state officials covered by the policy, DAS does not secure bonds for individual state officials, and there were no additional records responsive to Howard’s request. An additional document (the Certificate of Liability Insurance) was included with their response to substantiate this.

Applicable Law

“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.” Iowa Code § 22.2(1).

Analysis

The allegations in this complaint implicate Chapter 64, which provides certain requirements for public officers to obtain bonds. Iowa Code § 64.6 states as follows: “State officials are not required to obtain bonds, but may be covered under a blanket bond for state employees. The blanket bond purchases shall be made in an amount and with the level of assumption of risk by the state that is determined by the department of administrative services. The state shall pay the reasonable cost of bonds under this section.”

Aside from the Johnson County Attorney, against whom this complaint has been withdrawn, each of the individuals named in the complainant’s Chapter 22 request appears to be covered by this blanket insurance policy, consistent with Iowa Code § 64.3 (permitting insurance policies in lieu of bond requirements). By providing the blanket policy, the DAS appears to have fully complied with the records request by releasing all public records in their possession responsive to the complainant’s request. This record includes a policy number (No. 10563782), the insurance company’s name (Travelers), and the coverage amount.

Because there is no evidence to suggest the existence of further undisclosed records responsive to the complainant’s request, there is no probable cause to find a violation of Chapter 22, as the DAS has fully complied with its obligation to release the responsive records actually in its possession.

IPIB Action

The Board may take the following actions upon receipt of an investigative 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. Because the facts provided in this case suggest that no additional responsive records exist, there is no probable cause to find that the DAS has violated Chapter 22.

By the IPIB Executive Director

_________________________

Erika Eckley, J.D.

[1] Notably, IPIB could not have opened a complaint against the clerk of court in any case, as Iowa Code § 23.12 provides that IPIB lacks jurisdiction over the state judicial branch and its officers or employees.

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