|
VIRGINIA
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
ADVISORY COUNCIL
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
|
AO-20-03
July
14, 2003
Mr. C.R.
Suddith, Jr.
Treasurer, Page County
Luray, Virginia
The
staff of the Freedom of Information Advisory Council is authorized
to issue advisory opinions. The ensuing staff advisory opinion
is based solely upon the information presented in your email
of May 23, 2003.
Dear
Mr. Suddith:
You
have asked a question concerning the charges that a public
body may make for public records under the Virginia Freedom
of Information Act.
You
indicate that on April 8, 2003, you received a FOIA request
from two members of the Page County Board of Supervisors ("the
Board"), acting as private citizens, requesting a printed
copy of all emails received by and sent to you since January
2000 that mention the Board or five named Board members and
citizens. You responded that you would provide them with an
estimated cost, because you had more than 2,000 emails to
examine. You notified the requesters that you estimated that
the charges might be well over $200, but that the cost might
be less if you provided the emails in electronic format on
a disk instead of printing each email. You also offered to
let the requesters come into your office and review the emails
with you. The requesters responded that an electronic format
would be acceptable. You indicate that you found 377 emails
responsive to the request, which you copied onto four disks.
You charged the requesters $192.16 for the records, a figure
based on your base pay. You indicate that you did not charge
the requesters for the cost of the disks.
You
indicate that in light of the time it took to fill this request,
you copied all of the requested emails into a separate folder
on your computer and also created a backup compact disk ("CD").
You stated that you did this in case the requesters had any
problems reading the files (which, incidentally you note,
did happen) so that you would not need to search for the emails
again. Several days later, another citizen asked for a copy
of the records that had been provided in response to the FOIA
request described above. Because you now had the emails copied
to a CD, you offered to let the requester borrow the CD to
make a copy. You indicate that you allowed this because the
original emails were still on your computer. The requester
made the copy and returned the CD. You did not charge the
requester because you did not believe that you had incurred
any costs responding to the request.
You
indicate that the original requesters have accused you of
unfair treatment, because they had to pay nearly $200 for
the records, and the second requester did not have to pay
anything. The first requesters brought the situation to the
attention of the county attorney. The attorney stated that
the CD containing the copy of the emails was county property
and should not have been loaned to the requester; instead,
he asserts that the CD should have been made available for
inspection and copying in the office and that reasonable charges
should have been charged to the second requester. However,
the attorney did agree that it would not have been reasonable
to charge the second requester the nearly $200 it cost to
respond to the first request. You disagree with the county
attorney's interpretation, and ask if it was proper under
FOIA to allow the CD to be borrowed from your office, since
the original emails in question remained safely stored on
your computer. You assert that loaning out the CD made the
public records available without the expenditure of county
time or materials, and that it was proper under FOIA to not
charge for records when no actual cost was involved.
Subsection
A of § 2.2-3704 of the Code of Virginia provides that
[e]xcept as otherwise specifically provided by law, all
public records shall be open to inspection and copying. Subsection
F of § 2.2-3704 allows a public body to make reasonable
charges not to exceed its actual cost incurred in accessing,
duplicating, supplying, or searching for the requested records.
No public body shall impose any extraneous, intermediary or
surplus fees or expenses to recoup the general costs associated
with creating or maintaining records or transacting the general
business of the public body. A public body is not required
to charge a requester for the records; instead, this section
gives the public body the discretion to recoup the
actual costs incurred in responding to FOIA requests. As you
indicated, you charged $192.16 in response to the first request,
based on the time it took you to access and provide all of
the responsive emails as allowed by FOIA. It would not have
been proper to charge the second requester the same amount
for responding to his request. Because the emails had already
been compiled in response to the first request and a CD now
existed with all of the responsive emails, you did not need
to expend the same amount of time in response to the second
request. The charges allowed by FOIA must be incidental to
responding to the request at hand;1 once the records are assembled,
whether compiled in response to an earlier FOIA request or
simply as the result of an administrative task, you could
not charge for any costs not directly related to responding
to the particular FOIA request.
Your
question then rests on whether it was proper for you to loan
out the CD, rather than make a copy in your office. FOIA is
a procedural law, setting forth the minimum requirements for
responding to requests. At a minimum, FOIA requires that non-exempt
public records must be made available for inspection and copying
within five working days in the format specified by the requester,
so long as the requested medium is used by the public body
in the regular course of business. In making records available,
subsection A of § 2.2-3704 requires the custodian of
the records to take all necessary precautions for their
preservation and safekeeping. However, nothing in FOIA
prohibits a public body from taking additional steps to help
citizens access records, so long as these minimum requirements
are met.
In the
facts that you present, you possessed a CD containing all
of the requested emails, and the original records were safe
on your computer. You saw an opportunity to facilitate a citizen's
access to public records by allowing him to make a copy of
the CD himself, instead of having to wait for you to make
the copy. The charges involved, had you decided to make the
copy yourself, would have been minimal. It would likely only
take a matter of minutes for you to copy the CD, and as you
indicated in the facts, you did not charge the first requesters
for the costs of the actual disks. Even if you had made the
copy yourself, the law would not have required you to charge
the requester.
In conclusion,
FOIA does not require you to loan the CD to the requester
for him to make a copy himself, nor does FOIA require you
to lend out records for people to copy themselves if they
requested to do so in the future. However, your actions in
this instance were not prohibited by FOIA, were reasonable
in light of the FOIA requirement for safekeeping the records,
and were in furtherance of the policy of FOIA to provide ready
access to public records.
Thank
you for contacting this office. I hope that I have been of
assistance.
Sincerely,
Maria
J.K. Everett
Executive Director
1
See also Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Opinion
5 (2002).
|