The Iowa Public Information Board
COMES NOW, Charlotte Miller, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order:
On January 4, 2026, Rebecca Bianchi (Complainant) filed formal complaint 26FC:0004 alleging Mitchellville City Councilperson Turner (Respondent), violated Iowa Code chapter 22.
Facts
This matter relates to content posted on a personal political social media page maintained by a public official not by a government body.
On January 4, 2026 IPIB received the complaint alleging the following:
[Respondent] posted her video from the town hall meeting on 12/30/25. Then 16 minutes later she states her video is an unedited version. Then the next day after she was called out by several residents that her video was edited compared to the Vlogger's video she went out on 12/31/25 and updated her post again. As a council member she's states she is transparent and accountable. Making a post on her council page and then changing her post several times is wrong. I have screenshots that I can email.
On February 11, 2026, IPIB staff sent Complainant two key clarifying questions — whether the video was posted on a personal or official city social media page, and whether she was actually denied access to town hall records.
On March 12, 2026, after two follow-ups, Complainant confirmed the video was on Respondent's personal politician social media page, and that she had not been denied any records.
Applicable Law
“Upon receipt of a complaint alleging a violation of chapter … 22, the board shall do either of the following:
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.
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
Complainant alleges Respondent has acted improperly by stating that the video posted to the Respondent’s social media page was unedited was violating public record requirements under Chapter 22. Complaint does not provide any instances of a records requests being denied or produced. Applying the test from Advisory Opinion 25AO:0002, the posts didn't meet the threshold for government records. Respondent’s use of a personal political social media page is outside of the jurisdiction of IPIB to investigate. Therefore, this complaint must be dismissed.
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 facts alleged are outside IPIB’s jurisdiction to review.
IT IS SO ORDERED: Formal complaint 25FC:0163 is dismissed as it is legally insufficient pursuant to Iowa Code § 23.8(2) and Iowa Administrative Rule FC: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 May 21, 2026. Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.
By the IPIB Executive Director,
Charlotte Miller, J.D.
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
This document was sent on May 15, 2025, to:
Rebecca Bianchi