25FC:0205 John Johnson v. Hancock County - Investigative Report and Probable Cause Order

The Iowa Public Information Board

COMES NOW, Charissa Flege, Deputy Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (“IPIB”), and enters this Investigative Report:

On December 8, 2025, John Johnson (“Complainant”) filed formal complaint 25FC:0205, alleging that Hancock County (“Respondent”) violated Iowa Code Chapter 22.

The Iowa Public Information Board accepted this complaint at its meeting on January 15, 2025.

Facts

On November 15, 2025, Complainant submitted a public records request to the auditor for the following information:

“…[A]ccess to and copies of public records solely related to the physical attendance of the elected County Treasurer in the courthouse and in the Treasurer’s Office. This request applies to the timeframe January 1, 2025 through the present.

1. Attendance / Presence Records for the Elected Treasurer:

Please provide all records documenting the Treasurer’s physical presence in the courthouse or Treasurer’s Office, including timesheets or time-reporting records, daily attendance logs, sign-in/sign-out sheets (if used), and any electronic timekeeping entries.

2. Building / Office Access Records:

Please provide any records showing the Treasurer entering or accessing county facilities or the Treasurer’s Office, including key-card or fob entry logs, door access logs, security system access records, or any county system used to track building entry.

3. County Computer Login Records (Only to Establish Presence or Absence):

Please provide county computer login or network-access records for the Treasurer only to show whether she was working from the courthouse or remotely, including computer login timestamps, VPN login logs (if applicable), and network authentication logs indicating location (office vs. remote).

4. Policies or Expectations for Physical Attendance:

Please provide any county policy, handbook language, HR rule, directive, guidance, or communication establishing expectations for the Treasurer’s physical presence in the courthouse, along with any acknowledgment indicating she received such policies. This request is limited strictly to attendance-related documents.

5. Internal Communication Regarding Attendance:

Please provide any correspondence (emails or memos) between the Treasurer, county supervisors, the Auditor, HR, or Treasurer’s Office staff specifically discussing the Treasurer’s physical presence or absence during the timeframe above.”

The information was forwarded to the county attorney on November 17th. Respondent provided several emails to IPIB detailing the county’s work to search for requested emails, consulting with counsel. On December 3, 2025, the county attorney responded directly to Complainant addressing each of the five types of requests submitted. Requests 1, 3, 4, and 5 did not exist or were not maintained as a record by the county. Respondent explained request 2 was confidential based upon 22.7(50) as security information. Respondent also stated in that email the county believed this completed the records request.

Complainant never responded to that email. He filed this complaint five days later. Upon IPIB opening of this complaint, but not upon our request, Respondent worked with their IT department to create a new record (a calendar) that reflected fob information for the treasurer without including confidential information that could jeopardize security.

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. Unless otherwise provided for by law, the right to examine a public record shall include the right to examine a public record without charge while the public record is in the physical possession of the custodian of the public record. The right to copy a public record shall include the right to make photographs or photographic copies while the public record is in the possession of the custodian of the public record. All rights under this section are in addition to the right to obtain a certified copy of a public record under section 622.46.” Iowa Code § 22.2(1).

“The 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:…Information and records concerning physical infrastructure, cyber security, critical infrastructure, security procedures, or emergency preparedness developed, maintained, or held by a government body for the protection of life or property, if disclosure could reasonably be expected to jeopardize such life or property. (a). Such information and records include but are not limited to information directly related to vulnerability assessments; information contained in records relating to security measures such as security and response plans, security codes and combinations, passwords, restricted area passes, keys, and security or response procedures; emergency response protocols; and information contained in records that if disclosed would significantly increase the vulnerability of critical physical systems or infrastructures to attack.” Iowa Code § 22.7(50)(a).

Analysis

The evidence presented to IPIB staff shows the county ran the requested searches and turned up no records matching the request for emails. The evidence also shows that the IT manager was involved in determining whether the other records were maintained and existed in the county’s possession. No evidence was presented to IPIB that indicated the county was not honest about the existence of the records.

As to the security information that was withheld on confidentiality grounds, the information requested for the treasurer’s entry and exits into a secure building using their individualized key fob (“key-card or fob entry logs, door access logs, security system access records, or any county system used to track building entry”) are exactly the type of information included in 22.7(50)’s description of confidential “information and records”. Information about what fobs are used, when they are used, and at what secured entrances is the kind of information that if disclosed could put the safety of governmental employees at serious risk. Nevertheless, the county went above and beyond to try to share information about the days the fob was used in a fashion that protected information that could pose a threat. IPIB has repeatedly found that governmental entities are not required to create a record that doesn’t exist. See 24AO:0003, Data and Public Records Requests. The county’s actions went above and beyond to try to comply with the submitted public records request.

For these reasons, there appears to be no violation of Chapter 22.

IPIB Action

The Board may take the following actions upon receipt of an Investigative Report:

1. Redirect the matter for further investigation;

2. Dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation has occurred;

3. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, but, as an exercise of administrative discretion, dismiss the matter; or

4. 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

Because the county completed the public records request and is not required to create records that do not exist, no violation of Chapter 22 has occurred, and it is recommended the Board dismiss for a lack of probable cause.

By the IPIB Deputy Director,

_________________________

Charisa Flege, J.D.

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

This document was sent on February 13, 2026, to:

John Johnson, Complainant

Hancock County, Respondent

The Iowa Public Information Board

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

___________________________________

Catherine Lucas

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

This document was sent on February 20, 2026, to:

John Johnson, Complainant

Hancock County, Respondent