Real questions from New Yorkers, answered by the coalition. Search first, your question may already be here.
I do Phase 1 Environmental Assessments on properties for work, and I occasionally have to FOIL documents from town clerk offices. A town in the Capital District is asking for a driver’s license or other government photo ID on their request form. Is this legal, or can I simply request FOIL access without sending them a copy of my ID?
I am a parent of two Buffalo Public School students and, given the Buffalo Board of Education’s recent issues, have recently begun paying closer attention to how our schools are being led. I’ve attended a couple of meetings and have been trying to educate myself about the Board’s governance, which I’ve found challenging based on the information available on its website. That led me to learn more about the requirements of New York’s Open Meetings Law.
I’ve noticed what appears to be a pattern in which the Board enters executive session without first being in an open meeting. More recently, the Board appears to have voted during one of those sessions on a matter involving the use of public funds. I’m trying to better understand whether these practices are consistent with the requirements of the Open Meetings Law and, if not, what steps I should take to bring attention to the matter.
Additionally, it’s unclear whether the bylaws the Board currently posts on its website (which are listed under “Policies”) are complete and up to date. There are a number of other practices that also raise questions about transparency and adherence to the Board’s own published policies.
If a village mayor receives an enforcement letter from the EPA or DEC regarding a wastewater treatment plant, is she required to include the letter in the monthly meeting minutes or agenda available to constituents?
If so, when must it be included? Or is disclosure optional?
I’m concerned about how our local Board of Education handled its recent budget process. At a March 6 meeting, the business manager gave a budget presentation that wasn’t included with the agenda posted online or available at the meeting. When I asked for a copy, I was told it would be posted “tomorrow.” A slideshow was shown during the meeting, but it was hard to follow in real time.
The board plans to vote on the 2025–2026 budget at its next meeting on April 3. When I asked when the public could see the proposed budget, I was told it would only be available after the board adopts it. Is that legal? Doesn’t the agenda – posted at least 24 hours before the meeting – need to include key materials like a proposed budget?
Another concern: the public hearing on the budget is scheduled for May 6 – over a month after it’s adopted. That seems to undermine the purpose of the hearing. If the budget can’t be changed after adoption, how can the public meaningfully weigh in?
Also, I noticed the board has been entering executive session to discuss budget cuts. I reviewed the legal reasons for holding executive sessions, but I’m not sure budget decisions qualify. Can a board legally go into executive session to talk about cuts to positions—without naming individuals?
I’m researching a situation where a local resident was charged with violating a town code ordinance. The town judge dismissed the case as facially insufficient. When I requested the judge’s name and a copy of the ruling from the town court, the clerk said the case was sealed due to the dismissal and that she could not share any information.
This raises a few questions:
What is the public purpose behind sealing a dismissed case?
Is it true that if the judge had ruled in favor of the town, the case might not have been sealed?
Are court records completely off-limits under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL)? Or are there other ways the public can access information about the justice system?
I’d appreciate any insight into how transparency and privacy intersect when it comes to local court proceedings.
Not sure if you’ve seen it, but the Niagara Falls City Council recently adopted new public speaking rules. I know there’s no legal requirement for councils to allow public comment—that’s not my concern here.
What I’m asking about is their practice of calling a “recess,” as mentioned in the article below. The council has done this a few times recently. It’s not an executive session—they specifically call it a recess. During that time, they leave the room with the city attorney and later return to resume the meeting.
What are the rules, if any, around this? Is it allowed? Under what circumstances?
Here’s a potentially relevant section of the Niagara Falls City Charter:
C. All meetings of the Council shall be open to the public, and public notice of such meeting and the agenda shall be posted as provided by law. The Council at a regular or committee-of-the-whole meeting may recess in a closed or executive session as provided by law. Convening of an executive session shall be by majority vote of the Council and the yeas and nays shall be recorded in the Journal.
From my reading, it sounds like they “may recess,” but only under conditions allowed by law—presumably the state’s executive session rules. Am I interpreting that correctly?
At a recent legislative committee meeting, the city’s law department and council members stated that a Charter Review Commission is not a public entity subject to Open Meetings Law. They claimed that state law—specifically home rule provisions—prevents the city from requiring the commission to follow Open Meetings Law.
But how is that the case? Even if state law does not explicitly mandate open meetings for a Charter Review Commission, it does not appear to forbid such a requirement either. Shouldn’t Open Meetings Law take precedence?
According to the law:
“Any provision of a charter, administrative code, local law, ordinance, or rule or regulation affecting a public body which is more restrictive with respect to public access than this article shall be deemed superseded hereby to the extent that such provision is more restrictive than this article.”
If Open Meetings Law applies broadly to public bodies, wouldn’t that include a Charter Review Commission? I’d appreciate any legal insights on this issue.
Are governments and government agencies required to maintain a log of all FOIL requests they receive and process? Is this mandated by any state law?
I’m asking because a municipality has informed me that it neither keeps a log of FOIL requests nor is required to do so. Is this accurate?
Our city council has changed its agendas to include only basic information, with more detailed details—such as preferred vendors—available only in a separate memo posted online.
I recently reviewed the minutes from a December 2024 meeting to see if they included any of the more detailed information found in the memos. They did not. The minutes simply reflect the language from the agenda without additional details.
For example, Item 2 in the minutes states that a contract was awarded to four successful bidders for an animal shelter project valued at just over $4 million. However, the minutes do not name the vendors—this information appears only in the separate memo.
Here is a link to the minutes:
Council Meeting Minutes – December 18, 2024
My questions:
As a reporter, am I entitled to access a recent settlement between a town and an insurance or bond company?
The case involves a municipality that terminated a garbage collection contract, leading the contractor to sue for damages. The insurance company held the bond for the garbage services and was involved in the settlement.
Would this type of settlement be considered a public record under Freedom of Information laws? If so, what steps should be taken to obtain it?
I’m a reporter working on a story about a federal lawsuit involving a state university and could use some advice on obtaining records from both the university and the state Office of the Attorney General.
Case Background:
The case, Doe v. State University of New York at Geneseo et al. (U.S. Civil Court for the Western District of New York, Case No. 6:24-cv-06272-EAW), involves a student who sued the university, alleging that officials failed to follow proper procedures in handling a sexual assault case and wrongfully found him guilty. The validity of his claims is unclear since the alleged victim is not a party to the federal case. However, the university opted for an out-of-court settlement just eight days after the complaint was filed.
There are few publicly available documents on the case due to its quick resolution, but I can provide them if needed to avoid PACER charges.
My Reporting Process & FOIL Requests:
Since I started covering this story, I’ve been trying to uncover additional details beyond just reporting that the case existed and was settled. I assumed that while settlement details would likely remain confidential, legal expenses and financial records related to the case should be publicly accessible.
I submitted multiple FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) requests, but have faced significant delays and denials:
In addition to these requests, I have been trying for over a month to arrange a meeting with the university’s spokesperson, but have received no response. Attorneys for both sides have also been unresponsive.
My Questions:
Any advice you can share would be incredibly helpful. Thanks!
I live in a small city in New York State where public meetings at City Hall are not live-streamed. This means that many residents—such as disabled individuals, senior citizens, housebound residents, and those without transportation—have no way to watch meetings or provide input.
According to the mayor’s office, a proposal to fund live streaming was included in this year’s budget discussions but was voted down. Additionally, the mayor has stated that the city lacks IT staff to implement the service. This issue has been raised multiple times over the years but has repeatedly been rejected.
My question is: Are there funding sources available to help bring live streaming to my city? Many residents remain uninformed about important decisions until after they are made, with little opportunity for input. Without live streaming, only those who can physically attend meetings have access to discussions that affect the entire community. Most of us only learn about decisions after they are posted on the city’s website.
Are there grants or other resources that could help ensure greater transparency and public participation?
As a local newspaper editor, I regularly submit FOIL requests to the village. A number of these have resulted in “scoops” that were sometimes embarrassing or at least inconvenient for the Village Board of Trustees.
Until recently, the records access officer was our village clerk, and the appeals officer was our village manager. Recently, the Board of Trustees voted to make itself the appeals body, citing the rationale that the village manager could now assist the village clerk in making decisions about what to release. Admittedly, like in most government bodies, not enough staff are assigned to handle FOIL requests, which can be burdensome for our clerk—a nice person who is already stretched thin.
In reviewing the law, I see nothing that explicitly prohibits this change. However, the village manager—who works closely with the Board and reports directly to the mayor—already had significant conflicts of interest in deciding which documents to withhold. This new arrangement seems likely to increase the number of redactions and outright denials, which has been an ongoing issue over the past year. (Not surprisingly, none of my appeals have been upheld.)
I have a question about City Council meetings.
Is it normal for a council to recess a meeting to allegedly approve an employment application for a government position and also decide they made a mistake in calculating how much a developer owes the city during the same recess? To clarify, the council was progressing through agenda items, then paused to go behind closed doors to make these decisions. I’m unsure if the developers’ lawyers joined them, but I did notice the lawyers left the room where we were watching the meeting.
Is this standard governmental practice? Additionally, the lawyers were with the councilors and mayor behind closed doors before the meeting even started.
Are there any regulations requiring a Town Supervisor to involve and keep Town Board members informed of communications regarding issues that fall under the responsibility of the Board as a whole?
I’m not sure if the term “ex parte communication” applies here, since, theoretically, the Town Board does not consist of “opposing” parties. However, a lack of transparency, failure to share information, and excluding certain factions of the Board from decision-making processes would seem contrary to good governance.
What, if any, guardrails are in place to prevent such issues?
Someone I know recently submitted a FOIL request for records related to the investments backing the state retirement system.
The state comptroller denied the request, claiming it is a trade secret—a term that, as far as I can tell, is defined in case law in reference to “businesses” or “commercial enterprises.” Have you ever seen a government invoke the trade secret exemption for information not originating from a private corporation but from the government itself?
I work at a nonprofit in NYC and closely follow the Procurement Policy Board (PPB) to understand government technology procurement.
This morning, I learned that PPB meetings will now be in-person only. Additionally, they violated the Open Meetings Law (OML) in September by providing only two days’ notice for a meeting and voting on a rule change we had testified against in August. We are currently considering all of our options. Regarding the September meeting, I reached out to the Committee on Open Government (COOG) for an advisory opinion, but they recommended pursuing the matter in court.
I would appreciate a conversation on how to best address and enforce these OML violations.
Do you know if a city can share personal information and disciplinary actions of an employee, including the employee’s address, via a FOIL request?
On October 23, 2024, I submitted a FOIL request to obtain the 2024 membership list of a union representing approximately 20 municipal employees in (omitted), New York).
On November 8, 2024, I received an email denying my request. It stated:
“As per the Union President, this requested information is an invasion of privacy and will not be produced. Your request contains information that, based on the Freedom of Information Law, Public Officer’s Law §87(2)(b), provides for denial of access to documents (or portions thereof) ‘if disclosed would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.’”
On November 14, 2024, I sought feedback from a former Town Board Supervisor, who shared the following perspective:
“No, it is not an invasion of privacy. Being a public employee, you should expect no privacy. Since when does the President of a government union have the right to deny a FOIL request? Shame on the Town Clerk for even asking him. The Town Clerk is the FOIL officer and should’ve just provided the information. She already had it.”
I am seeking input to strengthen my appeal and argue for the release of the Union membership list. How can I counter the privacy exemption claim and obtain the requested information?
Send it to us and we will answer it, free. Selected questions are published here to help the next person.
