June 21, 2024

Case Name: Request for Review 2024 PAC 81170
Body: Office of the Attorney General, State of Illinois
Case Number: 2024 PAC 81170
Decision Date: June 21, 2024

Introduction

The controversy arises from a FOIA request submitted by Ms. Sasha Mothershead on behalf of the HOPE Fair Housing Center to the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) on March 15, 2024.

The request sought an Excel file containing information on each CHA Scattered Site property, including “Unit Address” and “Unit Status.” CHA responded by partially denying the request, redacting most of the street addresses citing section 7(1)(v) of FOIA. Ms. Mothershead contested this redaction, leading to this review.

Relevant dates include March 15, 2024 (initial request), March 29, 2024 (extension by CHA), April 5, 2024 (response with redactions), April 15, 2024 (request for reconsideration), and April 24, 2024 (submission of Request for Review)

Relevant FOIA Rules

The specific FOIA rules which are relevant to this case include:

• Section 3(e)(vi): Allows for an extension of the response time by five business days under certain circumstances, which CHA invoked on March 22, 2024. 5 ILCS 140, Section 3(e)(vi).
• Section 7(1)(v): Exempts from disclosure records related to vulnerability assessments, security measures, and response policies or plans if their disclosure could reasonably be expected to jeopardize their effectiveness or safety. CHA cited this exemption to justify redacting the street addresses. 5 ILCS 140, Section 7(1)(v).
• Section 9(b): Requires that when a request for public records is denied, the denial notice must specify the exemption claimed and provide a detailed factual basis for the denial. CHA’s initial response failed to provide a detailed factual basis for its redactions. 5 ILCS 140, Section 9(b).

Analysis and Findings

The FOIA rules were applied to assess the actions of the defendants as follows:

• Applying the FOIA rules to the facts, the Attorney General’s office found that CHA improperly redacted the street addresses.
• CHA argued that the redaction was a security measure to prevent illegal activities such as squatting. However, the addresses themselves do not constitute vulnerability assessments, security measures, or response plans as defined by section 7(1)(v) of FOIA.
• Thus, the redactions did not meet the threshold requirement under this section.
• Previous cases cited by CHA, including Chicago Sun-Times v. Chicago Transit Authority and Lucy Parsons Labs v. City of Chicago, were distinguished as they involved records that directly depicted security measures, which the street addresses did not

Conclusion

The Attorney General concluded that CHA violated FOIA by improperly redacting the street addresses. CHA was directed to provide Ms. Mothershead and the HOPE Fair Housing Center with the full street addresses of the vacant units. The decision is considered a final decision of an administrative agency and may be subject to judicial review

For a detailed review, you can access the full document here.

Home: FOIA.law