Recent Illinois FOIA Decisions: Insights and Implications

INTRODUCTION AND EXEMPTIONS UNDER FOIA

The Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is intended to promote transparency and accountability in government. It grants the public the right to access records from public agencies, thereby fostering an informed citizenry.

Under the Act, all “public records” in the custody or possession of a public body are presumed to be open to inspection or copying. The Act defines “public records” as “all records, reports, forms, writings, letters, memoranda, books, papers, maps, photographs, cards, tapes, recordings, electronic data processing records, recorded information, and all other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, having been prepared or having been or being used, received, in the possession of or under the control of any public body”. However, because legitimate governmental and private interests could be harmed by the release of certain types of information, the Act provides several exemptions under which FOIA requests can be denied, or redacted.

The Illinois Attorney General has issued several recent binding opinions on FOIA exemptions. Understanding these decisions is important crucial for both public officials and citizens looking to navigate this law effectively. Below are a few:

RECENT DECISIONS

1.  Binding Opinion 24-008 emphasizes that the Illinois Supreme Court interprets FOIA exemptions narrowly to uphold the Act's purpose. In this instance, the Attorney General (AG) reviewed the Chicago Housing Authority's (CHA) claim that the Act’s exemption for “security measure” plans per section 7(1)(v) justified providing only partial addresses to a requester, citing concerns about community safety and potential illegal activities.

The AG disagreed, asserting that the “security measure” exemption did not apply. For a record to qualify for this exemption, it must specifically include a vulnerability assessment, security measure, response policy, or response plan, as is specifically stated in the Act. Previous opinions have found that details like police district assignments, officer attendance records, and emergency response times were improperly redacted under this exemption because they did not meet the necessary criteria as specifically stated in 7(1)(v).

The CHA's rationale for redacting the addresses was framed as a security measure. However, the AG concluded that the addresses themselves do not constitute or depict any security measure aimed at preventing or responding to threats. The exemption cannot be used to create a security measure plan, but only to withhold existing security plans.

2. Binding Opinion 22-013 addressed the FOIA exemption when federal or state laws prohibit such disclosure. In this case, an attorney's letter regarding settlement negotiations was withheld on the basis that both federal and state rules of evidence prevent the disclosure of settlement negotiations. However, the AG found that the City did not adequately demonstrate that the letter met the criteria for FOIA exemption under these rules. The AG noted that Federal courts have clarified that the Federal FOIA statute, which the Illinois Act is based upon, and discovery processes in litigation serve different purposes and have different standards. Likewise, the applicability of discovery rules and the requirement concerning relevance to court proceedings in Illinois does not apply to FOIA requirements. The AG concluded that the Department's reliance on evidentiary rules to deny FOIA records mischaracterizes their intent, which is to ensure fairness and transparency in legal proceedings.

3. Better Government Association v. City Colleges of Chicago. On September 19, 2024, the 1st district appellate court held that records may be exempt from FOIA disclosure when state or federal statutes explicitly indicate that public access is not intended. Specifically related to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the court acknowledged that while FERPA does not explicitly prohibit the release of education records, it was designed to protect records containing personally identifiable information. City Colleges argued that the records were redacted in accordance with FERPA and FOIA § 7(1)(a) to safeguard such information. The court agreed and ordered a remand to the circuit court to perform an in-camera inspection of the records and ensure that any personally identifiable information was appropriately redacted before disclosure.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

These recent opinions highlight the evolving landscape of FOIA’s exemptions in Illinois. Key takeaways include:

• The importance of clarity in FOIA requests to avoid ambiguities.

• The role of public agencies in ensuring compliance and transparency.

• The ongoing need for citizens to advocate for their rights under FOIA.