Expert: Seaton not bound by FOIA to turn over recordings to Augusta County BOS
This article highlights a significant legal ambiguity surrounding open data and public records when individual government officials hold personal copies of official meetings. The core issue is determining who qualifies as the legal custodian of these recordings: the individual board member who created them or the government body itself. This distinction matters because it dictates whether the records are subject to standard public access laws or if they are trapped in a legal gray area where officials can withhold them without immediate statutory consequence. The Board of Supervisors’ attempt to claim exclusive custody of all records related to closed sessions, including those personally held by a member, raises novel questions about the scope of government control over individual actions. If boards could assert ownership over all related documents held by individual members, it would centralize record-keeping but potentially complicate individual accountability. The current stalemate, where one member refuses to release recordings without a court order, demonstrates how unclear custody definitions can lead to protracted legal battles and hinder transparency. For the open data community, this case underscores the critical need to clarify that the format of a record does not change its status as public information. Whether handwritten notes or digital audio files, materials created during public business should remain accessible. The resolution of this dispute will set a precedent for whether open government rights can bypass bureaucratic hurdles, ensuring that citizens and journalists can access vital information regardless of which individual official currently possesses it.
Source: augustafreepress.comPublished on 2023-08-08