Chapter 22 Frequently Asked Questions

Chapter 22 is Iowa's public records law, which provides a general policy of public access to the official records of the government, though the law also allows for several categories of confidential records not subject to disclosure. Chapter 22 does not create a basis for general requests for information not contained in existing records, and nothing in the chapter requires the government to create records which do not already exist in response to request or conduct research to answer questions. Additionally, while other areas of the code may include retention requirements, Chapter 22 itself does not require a record to be kept for any specific amount of time.

No. Iowa Code § 22.4 allows requests to be made in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic means. A government body is required to provide options for making requests through any of these four routes.

It depends. Chapter 22 does not allow government bodies to require that individuals make records requests though one communication method versus another, but it does permit reasonable conditions, so long as these do not prevent requesters from exercising their rights. For example, a custodian may ask for clarification if it is unclear which records are being requested or, for security reasons, require a request received over email to be stated in the body of the email itself, rather than in a downloadable attachment or link. Additionally, while a requester cannot be required to narrow the scope of their request as a condition for access, a custodian may recommend changes and work with a requester for the purpose of lowering fees or decreasing response times.

A government body may not prevent access to records by requiring that requesters identify themselves or state their purpose for making a request.

No. Although other areas of the law may have other requirements, Chapter 22 only provides for the disclosure of existing public records. If a record does not exist, the government body is not required to create or modify a record to answer a request.

For this reason, Chapter 22 does not cover general requests for information if that information is not contained in an existing public record. As an example, Chapter 22 would allow a member of the public to request a copy of a new city ordinance or emails from city officials related to that ordinance, but it would not cover a request for a list of properties affected by that ordinance (unless it was contained in an existing record).

Iowa Code § 22.2(2) states that a government body shall not prevent the examination or copying of a public record by contracting with a nongovernment body to perform any of its duties or functions. If the government is the lawful custodian for requested records, it is still responsible for disclosure even if the records are in the possession of a third party.

Chapter 22 does not set a specific time requirement for responding to records requests, and more time is generally permitted for broader requests or requests involving requiring significant redaction to protect confidentiality. Whether a delay is “unreasonable” is highly fact-specific, but Iowa courts have found that an unreasonable delay may be interpreted as an implied refusal to make records available.

From the lawful custodian’s perspective, unreasonable delay may be avoided through communication with the requester. Factors considered in whether a delay was reasonable include whether the government promptly acknowledged the initial request, whether there was any communication or explanation about expected delays, whether the government produced records as they became available (“rolling production”), and whether updates were provided to alert the requester to new developments which would change the predicted production date.

For further guidance, see Advisory Opinion 24AO:0010.

Because minutes are never confidential and should be readily available for public inspection, a request for minutes (or other exhibits considered by a government body in open session) should generally be responded to within a few business days of receipt by the lawful custodian.

Yes, although police investigative files may be confidential, subject to the qualified privilege of Iowa Code § 22.7(5). This qualified privilege requires a three-part balancing test, which includes a consideration of whether public interest would suffer by disclosure. Records relating to ongoing investigations are more likely to be confidential, but this is not the only deciding factor.

Iowa Code § 22.7(5) does not extend to the date, time, specific location, and immediate facts and circumstances of a crime or incident, meaning that records with this information are not confidential except in unusual circumstances where disclosure would “seriously jeopardize” an investigation or pose a “clear and present danger” to any person’s safety.

Chapter 22 also applies to electronic records. Where an electronic public record is requested, the record may be released in the format in which it is readily accessible to the government body if that format is useable with commonly available data processing or database management software. In some cases, this may require the government to perform some type of manipulation in order to make existing data readable using commonly available software, but Chapter 22 does not require the government body to perform new calculations, run custom searches, or otherwise generate new data in order to answer a request.

Partially. Iowa Code § 22.7(11) provides confidentiality for personal information in confidential personnel records for public officials, officers, and employees. However, there are five categories of records which may nevertheless be sought under Chapter 22, including 1) the name and compensation of the individual, 2) the dates of their employment by the government body, 3) the positions the individual holds or has held with the government body, 4) records relating to educational institutions attended, diplomas and degrees earned, names of previous employers, positions previously held, and the dates of previous employment, and 5) the fact that the individual resigned in lieu of termination, was discharged, or was demoted as the result of a disciplinary action, along with the documented reasons and rationale for this action.

Other personal information in personnel records not covered by any of these five exceptions is likely to be exempt, including information like an employee's home address or personal phone number, demographic information like race, sex, or age, or the reasons given for taking sick leave. The standard for whether a record qualifies for confidentiality under this protection is based on the nature of the record, not its physical location, meaning that personal information in internal emails or disciplinary investigations could also be considered confidential.

Chapter 22 does not contain any retention requirements for government bodies, though other areas of the law may have their own requirements. Because of this, nothing in Chapter 22 prevents a government body from disposing of records which are not subject to an existing records request. Government bodies are encouraged to develop consistent policies to determine how their public records are maintained and disposed of.

Yes. While Chapter 22 says that the lawful custodian “shall make every reasonable effort to provide the public record requested at no cost other than copying costs for a record which takes less than thirty minutes to produce,” it does authorize fees for “reasonable expenses,” particularly for larger and more complicated requests.

Generally, routine requests for easily identifiable, non-confidential records should be provided for free, aside from any copying fees. For example, a digital copy of a recent set of meeting minutes should be released upon request without charging a fee.

If the lawful custodian charges a fee to respond to a records request, that fee must be based on actual, direct costs associated with making and providing copies. Actual costs may include considerations such as the cost of printing or the hourly rates of the employee(s) involved in responding to a records request, but it should not include indirect costs like electricity or insurance.

Actual costs may include the costs of legal services, but only for the limited purpose of reviewing or redacting legally protected confidential information. In other words, legal services should not be used to conduct the initial search for responsive records.

Not necessarily. It is the nature of a document, not its location, which determines whether something is a public record subject to Chapter 22. The personal records of a public official or employee may be exempt if they are not related to the individual’s official business, even if they are located on a government device or email account.

Yes. As with the previous question, it is the nature of the record which matters. If a public employee uses a personal email account to conduct public business or stores public records on their personal device, these records may still be sought under Chapter 22. For this reason, it is best practice for public employees to keep government and personal business separate through the use of separate accounts.

Under Chapter 22, all members of the public have the same right to access public records, meaning that confidentiality exceptions generally apply equally to everyone. Although a requester may have a unique interest in a particular record, this does not give them additional rights or require any exception to confidentiality, except where another state or federal law provides for special access.

You should always contact the specific state agency through its website, by mail, by email, or by telephone.  However, you may also try the State of Iowa website at https://iowaopenrecords.nextrequest.com/. A request to this link will be forwarded to the appropriate agency.

Any person may seek judicial enforcement of Chapter 22 against a government body in the district court for the county in which the government body has its principal place of business. Alternatively, IPIB is authorized as an independent agency to receive formal complaints of violations, using the “File a Complaint” form on our website.