Q&A: financial records concerning Camp Wonder Hands, Columbia, SC

Q.  How can I use the FOIA to receive the financial report for Camp Wonder Hands since 1998?  

A.  As you probably know, Camp Wonder Hands is sponsored by Palmetto Health Children's Hospital and funded by the hospital and through private, civic, and corporate contributions, including from the Palmetto Health Foundation. The Children's Hospital is part of Palmetto Health, a nonprofit public benefit corporation.  The North Carolina Public Records Law applies to "every public office, public officer or official, institution, board, commission, bureau, council, department, authority or other unit of government of the state or of any county, unit, special district or other political subdivision of government." G.S. 132-1. In 1981, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that the expense accounts of the president and board of directors of  the Wake County Hospital System were required to be disclosed under public records law.  News and Observer Pub. Co. v. Wake County Hospital System, 284 S.E.2d 542, 55 N.C.App. 1 (N.C. App. 1981).  Therefore. you might wish to submit a Public Records Law request to the above-referenced entities. 

Note that if you are interested in the Palmetto Health Foundation's financial statements, they can be located on its website here:  http://www.palmettohealthfoundation.org/body-NoRightMenu.cfm?id=48&oTopID=53.  On page 27 of the following document, for example, you'll see a line item for Camp Wonder Hands:  http://www.palmettohealthfoundation.org/documents/Foundation/YE%2009-30-2014%202013.pdf.

Court opinion issued July 30, 2015

Gosen v. U.S. Citizenship & Immgration Serv. (D.D.C.) -- determining that requested records pertaining to plaintiffs' asylum applications fell within the deliberative process privilege, but requiring agency to reassess records and release any segregable, non-exempt factual material. 

Summaries of all cases since April 2015 are available here.

FOIA News: Round three of Clinton emails

State emails offer glimpse into Hillary Clinton's world

By Rachael Bade, POLITICO, July 31, 2015

Hillary Clinton was sensitive to photos of herself, enjoyed Kennedy Center perks and had to deal with more than one Democratic Senator pestering her and top staff about cushy jobs for family or acquaintances.

Those are just a few things gleaned from the State Department’s third drop of emails Friday afternoon from Clinton’s time as Secretary of State.

Story Continued Below

State has been ordered by a federal judge to release her emails on a rolling basis. Clinton used a home-brewed email system while she led the department, sidestepping government rules that require officials to use government addresses to ensure official records are kept.

No bombshells surfaced from the document dump, but they offered a glimpse into from Clinton’s State Department world.

Here are some greatest hits from Friday’s posts:

Read more here:

Q&A: may Dep't of Labor withhold names and addresses of physicians?

Q.  I just received a response from the DOL Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation in which it denied releasing the names and address of doctors performing impairment evaluations of former employees.  I understand that the names and address information of the former employees would remain private.  In this case, aren’t the doctors acting as contractors for the agency?  And it’s not their personal information but their business addresses that are at issue.

A.  I assume that DOL cited Exemption 6 of the FOIA (personal privacy) as the basis for withholding the records you requested.  Balancing the privacy interests of individuals against the public interest in disclosure can be a challenging process and reasonable individuals can disagree about the outcome even when the facts are undisputed.  Having said that, I can tell you that at least one district court has decided in favor of DOL in a case involving the identifying information of examining physicians   See Brown v. Perez (D. Colo. 2014).  I hope this is helpful.

FOIA News: Judge explodes over Hillary email delays

Judge explodes over Hillary email delays

By Rachel Bade, Politico, 7/29/15

A district court judge says he can't understand why the State Department dragged its feet responding to Freedom of Information Act requests.

An irritated federal judge Thursday put the Hillary Clinton email scandal into stark terms, grilling the State Department on a pattern of delayed document releases that has turned a possible bureaucratic logjam into a major problem for the leading Democratic presidential contender.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon, known for his blunt manner, said he simply did not understand why the State Department has dragged its feet on responses for emails in requests to the Freedom of Information Act.

“Now, any person should be able to review that in one day — one day,” the judge said, examining a request for just over 60 emails. “Even the least ambitious bureaucrat could do this.

Read more here.

Court opinions issued July 24 & July 28, 2015

July 28, 2015

Smart-Tek Serv. Corp. v. Internal Revenue Serv. (S.D. Cal.) -- ruling that plaintiff maintained ability to sue IRS to obtain tax records even though it was a dissolved corporation.

Granat v. U.S. Dep't of Agric. (E.D. Cal.) -- finding that case was moot becase agency had produced all nonexempt records; rejecting plaintiff's argument that agency had engaged in pattern of delaying in responding to requests. 

July 24, 2015

Beam v. Internal Revenue Serv. (M.D. Pa.) -- dismissing case because plaintiff's administrative appeal to IRS was filed after the agency's 35-day deadline.

Summaries of all cases since April 2015 are available here.

FOIA News: DHS proposes revisions to FOIA regulations

Per today's notice in the Federal Register, the Department of Homeland Security has proposed to revise its FOIA regulations in order to "eliminate the provision for 'brick and mortar'’ public reading rooms, amend DHS rules for third-party requests for records, and add information about proactive DHS disclosures."

FOIA News: State Dep't proposes amendments to FOIA regulations

The Federal Register notice published today is available here.  Comments may be submitted by September 28, 2015.   

Q&A: access to names of federal job applicants

Q.   Can a requester request the names of candidates that were interviewed for a position/job in the federal government? I know that when a requester requests the names of individuals who are on the job certificate, they only see their name/information and no one else.  

A.  Courts consistently have found that agencies may withhold information about unsuccessful applicants on the grounds that their privacy interests outweigh the public interests in disclosure.  See, e.g., Neary v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. (D.D.C. 2015) (ruling that agency properly withheld identifying information of rejected interviewees under Exemption 6 of the FOIA).

Q&A: bid information from University of Florida

Q.   I  requested bid information from the University of Florida and received no response within the time limit.  What are my options?

A.    As you may know, the Florida Public Records Act does not identify the specific number of days within which a public entity must respond to a public records request.   If a response in unreasonably delayed, however, you may seek mediation through the Office of the Attorney General Open Government Mediation Program, file a complaint with your local state attorney, or file a lawsuit in court.

Please note that certain bid information is exempt from disclosure.  See statutory text below:

119.071 General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records.—

(1) AGENCY ADMINISTRATION.—

(a) Examination questions and answer sheets of examinations administered by a governmental agency for the purpose of licensure, certification, or employment are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. A person who has taken such an examination has the right to review his or her own completed examination.

(b)  1. For purposes of this paragraph, “competitive solicitation” means the process of requesting and receiving sealed bids, proposals, or replies in accordance with the terms of a competitive process, regardless of the method of procurement.

2. Sealed bids, proposals, or replies received by an agency pursuant to a competitive solicitation are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision or until 30 days after opening the bids, proposals, or final replies, whichever is earlier.

3. If an agency rejects all bids, proposals, or replies submitted in response to a competitive solicitation and the agency concurrently provides notice of its intent to reissue the competitive solicitation, the rejected bids, proposals, or replies remain exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision concerning the reissued competitive solicitation or until the agency withdraws the reissued competitive solicitation. A bid, proposal, or reply is not exempt for longer than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all bids, proposals, or replies.

4. This paragraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2016, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.

(c) Any financial statement that an agency requires a prospective bidder to submit in order to prequalify for bidding or for responding to a proposal for a road or any other public works project is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.