26FC:0044 Rachelle Santora v. Des Moines County Sheriff’s Office - Dismissal Order

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 22, 2026, Rachelle Santora filed formal complaint 26FC:0044, alleging that the Des Moines County Sheriff’s Office (Sheriff’s Office) violated Iowa Code Chapter 22.

Facts

On January 16, 2026, the complainant, Rachelle Santora, alleges that her sixteen-year old child was searched, detained, and incarcerated by law enforcement in Burlington, Iowa. Following this incident, Santora contacted the Des Moines County Sheriff’s Department with a demand letter and preservation notice for all records related to her son. According to Santora, the Sheriff’s Office responded to her request by asserting confidentiality under Chapter 22 and refused to consider parental access provisions in Chapter 232.

On January 22, 2026, Santora filed formal complaint 26FC:0044, alleging a failure to provide access to juvenile justice records under Iowa Code § 232.149A.

Applicable Law

“The [Iowa Public Information Board] shall have all of the following powers and duties:

4. Receive complaints alleging violations of chapter 21 or 22, seek resolution of such complaints through informal assistance, formally investigate such complaints, decide after such an investigation whether there is probable cause to believe a violation of chapter 21 or 22 has occurred, and if probable cause has been found prosecute the respondent before the board in a contested case proceeding conducted according to the provisions of chapter 17A.” Iowa Code § 23.6(4).

Analysis

Iowa Code § 23.6(4) limits IPIB’s jurisdiction to alleged violations of Chapter 21 and Chapter 22. In this case, the complainant acknowledges that the Sheriff’s Office has responded to her request under Chapter 22, but she alleges that she is entitled to disclosure as the parent of the minor child referred to in the requested juvenile justice records under Iowa Code § 232.149A.

Chapter 232 is outside of IPIB’s jurisdiction, and IPIB lacks the authority to enforce any special access which Chapter 232 may provide for the complainant based on her particular relationship to the subject of the records. The complainant does not argue that these records should have been released as non-confidential public records under Chapter 22.

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.

Any special access to juvenile justice records the complainant may be entitled to based on Iowa Code § 232.149A would be outside of IPIB’s statutory jurisdiction to enforce.

IT IS SO ORDERED: Formal complaint 26FC:0044 is dismissed as outside IPIB’s jurisdiction 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 February 19, 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 J.M. Miller, J.D.

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

This document was sent on February 12, 2026, to:

Rachelle Santora, Complainant