§84 of FOIL, the “Legislative declaration”, clearly indicates the intent of that statute and provides in part that “It is incumbent upon the state and its localities to extend public accountability wherever and whenever feasible”. Based on that direction, it has been consistently advised that there may be no supportable or valid reason for delaying disclosure of records that are clearly public and readily retrievable.
The circumstance associated with the delay, staff limitations, does not involve an agency’s “inability” to respond to requests promptly, but a failure to allocate sufficient resources to enable the agency to give effect to the spirit, if not the letter, of the law.
As the Court of Appeals unanimously held in 1979, “Meeting the public’s legitimate right of access to information concerning government is fulfillment of a governmental obligation, not the gift of, or waste of, public funds” (Doolan v. BOCES, 48 NY2d 341, 347).
YES, AND ONCE AGAIN THE COURT IS ON THE SIDE OF THE PEOPLE
Posted on FB March 22, 2019:
Brian Lamica “I will chime in on this myself. FOIL is to obtain information by the public as part of open government. However when some use FOIL in an effort to harass local government officials and to over state and misuse the FOIL system it only diminishes the purpose of the reason forhis procedure. When instead of attending an OPEN meeting and obtaining the information by use of a FOIL request only proves the point. When an employee spends hours a week preparing FOIL requests at tax payers expense and sending them out at tax payers expense, is that good use of our tax payers money or the best use of our employees who are then unable to complete other tasks. It’s not just one request we speak of, it’s 5 or 6 requests on one FOIL request form. It’s NOT just one a month, it’s people who send in 5 or 6 of these per week. It only serves to harass local officials and employees and cost our village tax payers. This Village Board as well as those who sat before us support open government and will provide information as required by law we have that responsibility. Those who are chronic in requesting information by use of a FOIL are only doing so for self interest not for the public good. Those people have a responsibility not to abuse this system. Should we hire a clerk to only complete FOIL requests ? Partially because of these FOIL request abuses we have lost 7 Village Clerks in less than 5 years. I expect that I will see you at the next Village Board Meeting on Wednesday night, 6:00 Budget Hearing and 6:30 Meeting. Oh wait instead you will just FOIL the information.
Ilion is a great community. Stop complaining and start looking at the positive.
Stated on Ilion Community of by and for the People’
This statement contains many false statements that have been levied against, me. The mayor, an as he represents of the Ilion board, the reality is the entire board will be accountable.
Unfortunately, it is not just me whose rights are being abused...……All citizens suffer, if they will do this to one, they will do it to others. It doesn’t take much, dare to question them, have your own independent opinion, stand tall and fight to protect your rights
An article 78 is an option, it is not required. As this involves many violations of the Constitution, criminal actions, and violation of NYS Penal Laws other legal avenues can be persued.
ATTORNEY FEES LEGISLATION
On December 13, 2017, the Governor signed legislation, approved with overwhelming support by both houses of the State Legislature, to amend the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) in a manner that encourages agencies to better comply with that statute. In short, a court now has discretionary authority to award attorney fees to a member of the public when the court finds that s/he has substantially prevailed and the agency failed to respond to a request or appeal within the statutory time, and an award of attorney fees would be mandatory when the petitioner has substantially prevailed and the court finds that the agency had no reasonable basis for denying access. The amendment to FOIL, codified as Chapter 453 of the Laws of 2017 reads as follows:
“Section 1. Paragraph (c) of subdivision 4 of section 89 of the public officers law, as amended by chapter 492 of the laws of 2006, is amended to read as follows:
(c) The court in such a proceeding: (i) may assess, against such agency involved, reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred by such person in any case under the provisions of this section in which such person has substantially prevailed, [when: i. the agency had no reasonable basis for denying access; or ii.] and when the agency failed to respond to a request or appeal within the statutory time; and (ii) shall assess, against such agency involved, reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred by such person in any case under the provisions of this section in which such person has substantially prevailed and the court finds that the agency had no reasonable basis for denying access.
§2. This act shall take effect immediately.”
The intent of this amendment is not to penalize the government for incidental or inadvertent behavior. On the contrary, the goal is to encourage compliance with FOIL and discouraging unlawful behavior, thereby diminishing the need for or likelihood of litigation due to a failure to comply in a manner consistent with law.
Comments