ARTICLE I
Public Access Adopted 10-8-1974 by resolution
181-1. Statutory authority.
The Board of Trustees of the Village of Ilion, New York, hereby promulgates this set of rules in accordance with Chapter 578 of the Laws of 1974.
Fantastic demonstration of officials living in the past, no updates since 1974.....antiquated is an understatement.
181-2. Records access officer. •
The Village Clerk is hereby designated as the records access officer of the Village of Ilion.
181-5. Removal of records prohibited.
No records shall be removed from the lawful custody of any public office charged with the duty of maintaining such records.
181-8. Access denials.
In the event that any person is denied access to any public records in violation of the law, that person shall advise the Board of Trustees of such denial, in writing, and set forth the records requested, the reason for denial and the fact that the fees for such records were, in fact, tendered.
181-9. Provisions to be temporary. •
These regulations shall be temporary and considered as such until the state guidelines are promulgated and until more comprehensive regulations can be prepared.
181-10. Purpose.
The purpose of such regulations shall be to maintain the spirit of the law and to recognize that the concept of open records is consistent with the purpose of this Board of Trustees.
It obvious it is the Board living in the past, they are still in the temporary stages of FOIL !!! FOIL HAS BEEN LAW FOR FORTY FIVE YEARS …. and public servants have no knowledge nor care to follow laws. One thing for sure they intentionally prevent you from exercising your rights.
Established here in VILLAGE CODE (LAW) the Village Clerk is the records access officer and the Board of Trustees is the Appeal officers. So simply, even a 3rd grader would understand.
COOG OPINION:
FOIL-AO-18937
August 10, 2012
The staff of the Committee on Open Government is authorized to issue advisory opinions. The ensuing staff advisory opinion is based solely upon the facts presented in your correspondence.
Dear : Thank you for your July 12, 2012 correspondence, in which you express concerns with respect to the Princetown Town Board appointing itself for the purpose of responding to appeals made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law.
In this regard, we note relevant provisions of §89 of the Freedom of Information Law, which provide for such option, as follows:
“4. (a) Except as provided in subdivision five of this section, any person denied access to a record may within thirty days appeal in writing such denial to the head, chief executive or governing body of the entity, or the person therefor designated by such head, chief executive, or governing body, who shall within ten business days of the receipt of such appeal fully explain in writing to the person requesting the record the reasons for further denial, or provide access to the record sought.” The corresponding regulation, 21 NYCRR §1401.7(a) states in relevant part that:
“The governing body of a public corporation or the head, chief executive or governing body of other agencies shall determine appeals or shall designate a person or body to hear appeals regarding denial of access to records under the Freedom of Information Law.” In sum, according to these provisions, in the absence of any designation of appeals officer, the town board shall determine appeals regarding the denial of access to records.
Although it is statutorily authorized, we agree that perhaps it is not the wisest decision to appoint the entire board to the FOIL appeals board position. Due to the requirement that an appeal be determined within ten business days, it would be the responsibility of the Town Board to meet within that time and fully respond to the appeal in writing, either providing or denying access to the records. There may be occasions when it may not be possible to gather a quorum of the board within the ten business day period, and as you note, it may not be sufficient for the board to address the issue at its monthly meeting.
Some municipalities designate counsel to determine appeals, some designate the town supervisor, and while there may be provisions of a local code of ethics that would modify that designation in practice, we know of no law that would prohibit the handling of an appeal by any particular person, except the person designated as the records access officer. (See 21 NYCRR §1401.7(b).)
Section 89(4)(b) of the Freedom of Information Law states that a failure to determine an appeal within ten business days of the receipt of an appeal constitutes a denial of the appeal. In that circumstance, the appellant has exhausted his or her administrative remedies and may initiate a challenge to a constructive denial of access under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules.
We hope that this is helpful.
Sincerely,
Camille S. Jobin-Davis Assistant Director CSJ:sb cc: Town Board
FOIL-AO-18937
FEBRUARY 27, 2019
• FOIL Request Log: FOIL request logs containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review.
• Mayor Lamica reports he spoke with Robert Freeman and NYCOM concerning repetitive/extensive FOIL requests.
Mayor Lamica will be including the names and responsible department for every FOIL that is requested at Village Board Meetings.
o John Mazzarella – Codes o Missy Peets – Police Reports o MaryLou Sapori – Police Reports o Catherine Macera – Minutes/Board Reports o Catherine Macera – Appeal Minutes/Board Reports.
Mayor claims to reached out to Mr. Freeman of COOG, yet supplies NO advice received from the Mr. Freeman. And NYCOM, a mere association of mayors across the state, but again, the mayor offers no statements that were provided. The board doing nothing more then trying to through out names, to try and intimidate the public, to thinking it is wrong/illegal to FOIL OR APPEAL, very sophomoric.
MARCH 13, 2019
• FOIL Request Log: All FOIL requests containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review.
o C. Trevor – Court Reports o J. Mabbett- Water Reports o Felt Evans, LLP – Codes o C. Macera – Codes/Minutes o J. Weston – Court Reports o B. Helmer – Police Reports
MARCH 27, 2019
• FOIL Request Log: FOIL request logs containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review.
o J. Weston – Court Reports o B. Helmer – Police Reports o D. Maxwell – Court Reports o J. Lombardo – Police Reports
o D. Murray – Village Clerk
APRIL 10, 2019
• FOIL Request Log: All FOIL requests containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review. o D.Annatone – Police Reports o Colonial Manor- Police Reports o Colonial Manor – Police Reports o R. Tubia – Court Reports o P McGrath – Police Reports
APRIL 23 2019
• FOIL Request Log: FOIL request logs containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review.
o B.Lindig – Police Reports o D. Annatone – Police Reports o American Trans – Treasury Reports o D. Murray – Clerk
o D. Murray – Clerk
MAY 8, 2019
FOIL Request Log: All FOIL requests containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review. o Barclay Damon – Police Reports o D. Murray - Clerk
MAY 22 2019
• FOIL Request Log: FOIL request logs containing the most recent requests were given to the Board for their review.
o S. Stewart – Police Reports
o T.Korner – Police Reports
As you can see, Lamica fails to keep his word:
"Mayor Lamica will be including the names and responsible department for every FOIL that is requested at Village Board Meetings."
Like everything else, this board gives less and less information to the public, what the do provide, is proof of criminal activity and deceit.
This the FOIL LOG, this document was created during the leonard term, remember that term they tabled everything, held more "special meetings " many under Codes E 360, yet actually did more official business, but failed to produce Agenda documents as well. Deceit of the people has a long history. The one this term did not do was actually enter the information in minutes. At first, glance this document appears to more about a trust issue with trusting clerks, and is an attempt to make sure they were doing their job.
This term lameica term, they use against the people, intending to dissuade the public from exercising their rights, and according to minutes (which are to be held as records PERMENATELY) less and less requests or appeals. The fact is, the Board has chosen to manipulate these public records, simply to deceive into thinking they have stopped me from FOILING! The measures they will take against all of you.
I have provided ALL FOILS AND APPEALS on this blog site, note these dates :
3/15/19 appeal, 3/20/19 appeal , 3/27/19 appeal #2, 3/28/19 FOIL request, 4/1/19 Appeal #2, 4/4/19 FOIL request, 4/24/19 appeal,4/25/19 appeal, 4/29/19 appeal, 5/14/19 FOIL request and most recent 6/6/19 FOIL request TBA (to be appealed)
Review the Minutes of meetings concerning the above dates, you will not find any discussions regarding Appeals, as appeals must be done be a full quorum, and full quorum constitutes a public meeting, and the appeal is a document that requires a decision. Thus the board provides the proof of intentional deceit against the public.
I have exhausted my administrative remedies, the filing of an Article 78 is optional, it is NOT PART OF THE ADMINISTRIVE REMEDY PROCESS.
There a few forms of Article 78 filings, but this regarding FOILS the filing fee alone is about $305, per violation, this does not include attorney Fees.
NYS Legislation passed in 2017 the following:
“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.
Public servants of Ilion are the poster children of why the Legislation amended this section, and yet here these servants are intentionally defying law.
We must seriously question, in full force, should these 5 public servants even be in any decision making regarding our tax dollars, our health or safety? We all, even those that would like me to leave the area, DESERVE BETTER, MUST DEMAND BETTER AND HOLD THE SERVANTS ACCOUNTABLE.
NYS Penal law 175.25
A person is guilty of tampering with public records in the first degree when, knowing that he does not have the authority of anyone entitled to grant it, and with intent to defraud, he knowingly removes, mutilates, destroys, conceals, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any record or other written instrument filed with, deposited in, or otherwise constituting a record of a public office or public servant.
Tampering with public records in the first degree is a class D felony.
NYS Penal law 175.30
A person is guilty of offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree when, knowing that a written instrument contains a false statement or false information, he offers or presents it to a public office or public servant with the knowledge or belief that it will be filed with, registered or recorded in or otherwise become a part of the records of such public office or public servant.
Offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.
The Village Clerk, does have a little saving Grace:
NYS Penal law 175.15
In any prosecution for falsifying business records, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant was a clerk, bookkeeper or other employee who, without personal benefit, merely executed the orders of his employer or of a superior officer or employee generally authorized to direct his activities.
Comments