Q&A: How to figure out who owns a cemetery near the former Joliet Army Ammunition Plant?

Q.  My grandparents sold their property to the Joliet Army Ammunition Plant in the early 1940's. Midewin Prairie has since taken over some of the land that people sold for the Joliet Army Ammunition Plant. They say they don't own the cemetery where my grandparents and other family members are buried, and I am trying to locate the present owner. Who do I contact to get this information?  I have been to the Will County Recorders Office, and they say they don't have any information on the land transfer to the Government in the early 1940's. The name of the cemetery is the Chicago Road Cemetery or sometimes called the German Evangelical Cemetery in Florence Township. I suspect it is still owned by the U.S. Government, but Midewin says they don't know.

A.   According to a report written by the Department of the Interior in the mid-1980s, the property purchased for the Joliet Army Ammunition Plant included six cemeteries.  See report here (reference 3).  Although the report identifies only one of the cemeteries by name (Reed Cemetery), your suspicion that the Chicago Road Cemetery might be owned by the federal government is certainly plausible.  I am skeptical, however, that submitting formal requests for records dating back to the 1940s will be the most efficient way for you to learn who owns the cemetery.  As an initial matter, if you have not done so already, I would suggest contacting the congressperson who represents the district in which the cemetery is located, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, as well as your elected state, county, or village/town officials (listed here).  Additionally, you may wish to contact the Joliet Arsenal Development Authority, whose mission is to adapt and transform the land formerly used by the U.S. Army. 

If you wish to request records from the U.S. Department of the Army, you may send your request by regular mail to Alecia Bowling, FOIA Contact, Freedom of Information Act Office, Suite 144, 7701 Telegraph Road, Room 150, Alexandria, VA 22315-3905, or via email at usarmy.belvoir.hqda-oaa-aha.mbx.rmda-foia@mail.mil, or via the following online form.  If you wish to make a FOIA request to the USDA's Forest Service, which operates the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, please follow the instructions set forth here.  Tips about making Freedom of Information Act requests can be located here. 

You may also be interested in the following guidance concerning abandoned cemeteries from the State of Illinois Comptroller. 

I hope this information is useful.   

Court opinions issued April 23, 2015

Consumers Council of Mo v. HHS (E.D. Mo.) -- Dismissing Complaint as moot where plaintiff conceded that it had received all requested information in full after lawsuit was filed; rejecting plaintiff's contention that similar requests in the future would likely be subjected to delayed responses and again evade judicial review. 

See complete case list for April 2015 here.

FOIA News: Quarterly agency reports due today

Today is the deadline for agencies to make available their reports for the second quarter of FY 2015.  The FOIA quarterly reporting focuses on four key statistics:

• the number of requests received during the reporting period,
• the number of requests processed during the reporting period,
• the number of requests in an agency’s backlog at the end of the reporting period, and
• the progress being made to close the agency’s ten overall oldest pending FOIA requests from the prior fiscal year.

Click here to locate the reports.

FOIA News: Sixth Circuit considers en banc review of mug shot case; guidance from FOIA Ombudsman on providing estimated dates of completion

En Banc Review Possible for MI Mug Shot Case

By Kevin Koeninger, Courthouse News Service, April 23, 2015 

CINCINNATI (CN) - A 6th Circuit panel seemed open on Wednesday to a possible en banc review of case law regarding the release of mug shots under the Freedom of Information Act.

The Detroit Free Press Inc. - which has been litigating the issue for over two decades - tried to convince the panel during oral arguments to keep the status quo, which allows for the release of mug shots if certain criteria are met.

The U.S. Department of Justice, however, seeks a full court review of the issue, and its attorney stressed that a person undoubtedly has "a non-trivial privacy interest in [his or her] mug shot."

Remainder of story here.

Audio of oral argument here. 

Let's Talk About Estimated Dates of Completion

Office of Government Information Services, April 23, 2015

In 2007 Congress added a provision into the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that requires agencies to provide a requester with an estimated date by which the agency expects to complete work on a request, when the requester asks for one. This requirement helps the requester better understand the agency’s FOIA process and gives the requester a more accurate picture of when he/she will receive a response.

 We’ve previously discussed how important it is for an agency to provide an estimated date of completion if the agency wants to avoid a lawsuit and we’ve even given agencies a couple of tips on how they can come up with an estimated date of completion.

While it is clear that providing estimated dates of completion is a good idea – both from a compliance and customer service standpoint – we understand that actually coming up with a date can feel like a moving target. Further, we hear from some FOIA professionals that they are hesitant to provide an estimated date of completion because requesters might treat the estimate like a firm deadline.

Read more here.

FOIA News: Commentary on suit against SEC concerning Wal-Mart bribery probe

Why the SEC is keeping the public in the dark on Wal-Mart

By Eleanor Bloxham, Fortune, April 22, 2015

The public is entitled to an investor protection agency that boosts trust in the capital markets. Too often, the plaintiff’s bar has to step in when the SEC fails.

There’s been a lot of hullabaloo lately about the release of records by presidential candidates like Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. In certain circles, the notion of spreading some sunshine—offering transparency and open access to public records—has garnered major support. An ongoing lawsuit in middle Tennessee U.S. district court, filed by law firm Robbins Geller against the SEC, represents just how important such access can be.

The lawsuit seeks documents that the SEC has refused to provide as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. The investor protection agency says it can’t release the documents because they are part of an ongoing investigation and release of the documents would impede their efforts. SEC spokesperson John Nester told me that the SEC couldn’t comment on the investigation or the case beyond the court filings.

Government agencies routinely attempt to brush off public requests for documents. But in this case, the documents concern the alleged Wal-Mart Mexico bribery scandal, which I wrote about twice for Fortune in May 2012 following the New York Times investigation and articles.

Remainder of article here.

FOIA News: DOJ pays $40k to settle FOIA suit

The Department of Justice has agreed to pay $40,000 to settle a FOIA lawsuit seeking access to records about Lesa Gail Bridges, who practiced law without authorization while working as an Assistant United States Attorney in Arkansas.  A copy of the settlement agreement filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is available here.  The Courthouse News Service reported about government setbacks in the case in September 2014 and January 2015.   

Q&A: How to appeal a denial by the California DMV?

According to the First Amendment Coalition, which answered a similar question in 2012:  

Unlike the federal Freedom of Information Act, and other state public records laws, the California Public Records Act does not establish any system of administrative appeal, neither within the agency itself nor with any other body of the state government.  Rather, the only way formally to challenge a determination that a record is exempt from the Public Records Act is to file a lawsuit.  Cal. Govt. Code sections 6258, 6259.

Read more here.  Procedures adopted by the California's DMV do not address appeals of agency responses to information requests.  See DMV manual here.  The First Amendment Project Society of Professional Journalists (Nor. Cal.) nonetheless suggests appealing if your request is denied.  See pocket guide here.

Q&A: FOIA Advisor's organization

Q.  Is FOIA Advisor a business?

A.   No.  We do not solicit or represent clients, nor are we funded by any organization.  This is an independent, educational endeavor.

Court opinions issued April 21, 2015

Madel v. DEA (8th Cir.) -- The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reverses and remands district court's decision that Exemption 4 protected in full five documents pertaining to the sale of oxycodone in Georgia by private companies.  The court holds that the Drug Enforcement Administration demonstrated that "substantial competitive harm is likely" from disclosure.  The agency failed to show, however, that certain information from the documents could not be segregated and released.  

Arrowgarp v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- Granting the government's unopposed motion for summary judgment where the FBI, EOUSA, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs sufficiently explained their searches and withholdings in response to pro se prisoner's request for agencies' investigation files concerning him.  

See complete case list for April 2015 here.

FOIA News: Pentagon Mum on $40 Billion Missile System

By Matt Reynolds, Courthouse News Service, April 21, 2015

LOS ANGELES (CN) - The Department of Defense asked a federal judge to dismiss an L.A. Times request for information on a $40 billion counter-ballistic missile system, claiming the information is exempt from disclosure.

The Times in January asked the court to order the Pentagon to release records of bonuses and incentives it paid contractors for delivering the missile system - the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System , or GMD.

In an answer filed Friday, the Pentagon asked the court to throw out the case.

The Department of Defense claims that the records are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, called the request "defective," and said that the Times had not "exhausted their administrative remedies."

"Defendant denies that plaintiff has withheld any 'records' sought by the FOIA request," the April 17 response states. "Further, defendant avers that by letter of March 31, 2015, defendants provided a response, which more than fully satisfied defendant's obligations to respond to the defective FOIA request at issue."

Remainder of story here.