I was just made aware of a public official obtaining checks from a local government that were paid to a vendor. Here’s the odd part for me: all of the amounts and reasons for payment on the checks are redacted. Is that legal? It’s not one check. It’s probably at least more than a dozen, maybe more. I haven’t seen all of them.
In our opinion, there would be no basis for the amount of a government check, or the reason for the check, to be redacted. The account number on the check could be redacted.
Below is an older opinion from the Committee on Open Government, which has this in it:
“It is also noted that decisions have been rendered under the Freedom of Information Law in which it was held that records indicating payment by a village to its attorney are available [see Minerva v. Village of Valley Stream, Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., August 20, 1981; Young v. Virginia R. Smith, Mayor of the Village of Ticonderoga, Supreme Court, Essex County, Jan. 9, 1987]. In Minerva, supra, the issue involved a request for copies of both sides of cancelled checks made payable to a municipality’s attorney. Although the court held that the front sides of the checks, those portions indicating the amount paid to the attorney, must be disclosed, it was found that the backs of the checks could be withheld, for disclosure might indicate how the attorney ‘spends his paychecks.’”
