June 28, 2024

Case Name: Public Access Opinion 24-009
Body: Office of the Attorney General, State of Illinois
Case Number: Request for Review 2024 PAC 81336
Decision Date: June 28, 2024

Introduction

The controversy arose from a FOIA request submitted by Mr. Peter T. Sadelski, on behalf of Ed Fox & Associates, Ltd., to the Village of Lyons. The request, dated April 12, 2024, sought records concerning a named individual and any employee of the Village Police Department from January 1, 2010, to the date of the request.

The Village failed to respond to the FOIA request, leading Mr. Sadelski to file a Request for Review with the Public Access Counselor on May 9, 2024. Despite multiple follow-ups by the Public Access Bureau, the Village did not provide a response, prompting the issuance of this binding opinion.

Relevant FOIA Rules

The relevant FOIA rules applicable to the issue discussed in the document are derived from the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (5 ILCS 140), they include:

• Section 1.2 (Presumption): All records in the custody or possession of a public body are presumed to be open for inspection or copying. The burden of proof lies with the public body to show that a record is exempt from disclosure 5 ILCS 140/1.2.
• Section 3(a) (Inspection and Copying of Records): Public bodies must make all public records available for inspection or copying, except as otherwise provided in Sections 7 and 8.5 5 ILCS 140/3(a).
• Section 3(d) (Response Time): Public bodies must respond to FOIA requests within 5 business days, either by complying, denying, or extending the time for response under certain conditions. Failure to respond within the prescribed time is considered a denial 5 ILCS 140/3(d).
• Section 3(e) (Extensions): Allows for a single extension of up to 5 business days under specific conditions, such as the need to locate records, the volume of records requested, or the need for consultation 5 ILCS 140/3(e).
• Section 9(a) (Denial Notice): If a request is denied, the public body must provide a written notice stating the reasons for the denial, the exemption claimed, and the right to review by the Public Access Counselor 5 ILCS 140/9(a).
• Section 11 (Judicial Review): Individuals denied access to records may file suit for injunctive or declaratory relief in circuit court 5 ILCS 140/11.

Analysis and Findings

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

• Presumption of Openness: The records requested by Mr. Sadelski are presumed open to inspection and copying under Section 1.2.
• Failure to Respond: The Village’s failure to respond to the FOIA request within the 5 business days, as required by Section 3(d), constitutes a violation of FOIA.
• No Extension: The Village did not seek a permissible extension under Section 3(e), nor did they reach a written agreement with Mr. Sadelski for an extended response time.
• Violation and Remediation: Under Section 9(a), the Village’s failure to provide a written denial with the necessary details further violated FOIA. The Public Access Counselor’s office attempted multiple times to get a response from the Village, but the Village did not comply.

Conclusion

The Attorney General concluded that the Village of Lyons violated Section 3(d) of FOIA by not responding to Mr. Sadelski’s request within the statutory period. The Village was directed to immediately comply by providing the requested records or issuing a proper denial with permissible redactions under Section 7. This opinion is considered a final decision of an administrative agency for the purposes of administrative review. The Village is precluded from treating the request as unduly burdensome or imposing copying fees due to their non-compliance with the statutory requirements.

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

Home: FOIA.law