Resources

Lawsuit Examples

Coming soon.

Sunshine Brigade

In honor of Sunshine Week 2010, the First Amendment Foundation has created the Sunshine Brigade, a loosely-organized coalition of open government and citizen activists who have been chosen for membership because of their commitment to government oversight and holding government accountable for its actions.

We asked Foundation members to nominate local citizen activists for induction into the Brigade and currently there are Brigaders from all over Florida. Below you can read a short profile of each member with a brief description of the types of open government issues most important to each. For those Brigaders with blogs, we have included a link to the blog and will soon provide a link that will allow anyone wanting help or assistance to e-mail Brigade members.

If you have a comment or question you'd like to post to the Sunshine Brigade, please email This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Sheila Anderson

A graduate of the University of Miami, Sheila and her husband, Professor John Robert Anderson, now deceased, lived in southern Florida until 2006 when they moved to Ocala.

Sheila was the only non-lawyer on the committee that wrote Miami Zoning Code 11000, and authored the "gross lot" definition used throughout the Code to determine Floor Area Ratios. Since 1992, she's provided administrative tax appeal services at Value Adjustment Boards (VAB) throughout Florida. She worked to revise the Department of Revenue's VAB petition form to benefit taxpayers, and other efforts resulted in an Attorney General opinion clarifying that VAB special magistrates are governed by Florida's sunshine law, s. 286.011, F.S.

Anderson is particularly interested in sunshine law issues, and has repeatedly expressed concerns that government accountability is compromised when there isn't time on Cabinet meeting agendas for public comment. She has made it a point to bring this to the attention of the Florida Cabinet and its staff.

Sheila currently lives in Ocala, FL. Read her blog here.

Michael J. Barnes

Michael is currently a human resources consultant and mediator. He was raised primarily in Okaloosa County, Florida. Michael graduated from Lakenheath American High School in Suffolk, United Kingdom. He possesses a Bachelor of Science Degree in Accounting from Tuskegee University and obtained a Masters in Public Administration from the University of Oklahoma. Michael received his commissioned as a Second Lieutenant (USAF) at Tuskegee University—a Distinguished Military Graduate. His military career spanned over 20 years as a logistician at the tactical, operational and strategic levels to include a NATO staff officer position. He served a quarter of his military career assigned to the Pentagon before retiring as an Evaluator in the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Defense (DoDIG), in Washington, DC as a Lieutenant Colonel. He led several local community service organizations to include Board President of Okaloosa Citizens Alliance. His trademarks are holding elected and public officials accountable and helping to maintain an efficient government. He strongly believes the public trust mandates unquestionable ethics in our public servants. Michael resides in Fort Walton Beach, FL.

Sharon Barnett

Sharon Barnett, a sole practitioner litigating public interest issues, was born in Washington, D.C., and is a graduate of Wake Forest University and Vanderbilt University Law School. Before entering private practice, Sharon served as Assistant General Counsel to the Florida Department of Banking and Finance and as law clerk to U.S. Magistrate Thomas G. Wilson, Middle District of Florida.

Sharon is active in her community and has served on the Florida Bar Standing Committee on Advertising and on the boards of the League of Women Voters, the Northwest Florida Ballet, the West Florida Mental Health Association. She was also a citizen board member of the Pensacola News Journal.

Sharon and her husband, Russell Edgar, have three children and live in Pensacola, FL.

Mark Benson

Mark Benson sold Benson's Inc., a community association management company, in 2006 and retired a year later. He served as chair of Governor Crist's Florida Community Association Living Study Council of the Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes. Mark has been honored with various other legislative and gubernatorial appointments, including a seat on the Regulatory Council of Community Association Managers and the Advisory Council on Condominiums.

Benson is a member of the Fort Myers News-Press "Team Watchdog," an advisory and investigative group working as a public service, and has over 30 years experience in participation, administration, and management of community associations. He lives in Fort Myers, FL.

Michael Butler

Michael Butler has worked for a major US-based distribution company for more than 18 years in various capacities. In his current position, he is the East Region Vice President for Food Processing.

He is an active member of several local community organizations, including Leadership Broward (Class XXVII), the City of Hallandale Beach Planning and Zoning Board, and the Golden Isles Homeowner’s Association Board of Directors.

In addition, Mr. Butler manages www.ChangeHallandale.com, a website dedicated to disseminating information to tax payers and residents regarding the city's use of tax dollars. As a result of one of his public records request, the city sued him. While the Broward Circuit Court judge ruled in favor of the city, the case is currently under appeal in Florida's 4th District Court of Appeals.

The Broward New Times named Mike Butler the 2011 "Gadfly of the Year" with the following:

Enter any discussion about Hallandale Beach's city government and you'll find yourself surrounded by bickering. Taxes are going up and parks are going to ruin while the city manager makes a cool half-million a year. Mayor Joy Cooper is a polarizing figure, to put it nicely (she's one of the loudest boosters for red-light cameras), and Commissioner Keith London seems bent on making her life hell. Into all this enters Mike Butler, a soft-spoken, well-tanned resident who looks like he wandered off a yacht and into City Hall, where he relentlessly questions the city's business deals and posts damning information on his blog. "Mike Butler doesn't shoot from the hip; he shoots the facts," quips London, who often circulates Butler's posts at City Commission meetings. He doesn't look like your typical gadfly, and he doesn't shout like your typical Hallandalian. Which is, all in all, for the best.

Mike Butler holds a BBA degree in International Business with German and Biology minors from James Madison University.

Jerry D. Couey

Jerry Couey, a "simple man very much like Howard Beale," was born and raised in Milton, FL, and has worked offshore for an energy company for the past 30 years. A citizen activist, Jerry operates a community website, www.santaraosaspeaks.com, and has his own cable television show, Mediacom Santa Rosa Week.

Working with Brigade member Alan Isaacson, Couey fought to ensure that the local economic development agency, TEAM Santa Rosa, complied with Florida's sunshine laws, and filed a complaint with the state's attorney which resulted in an investigative report finding that TEAM Santa Rosa was subject to both the public records law and the open meetings. Jerry is also credited with changes in email and social networking policies in both Santa Rosa County and Escambia County which prohibit the use of private email and social networking sites can’t be used for public business. Couey continues to fight on, now working to bring change to Florida's open meetings law to specifically provide citizens with the right to speak at all public meetings.

Jerry, a proud member of the Sunshine Brigade, and his wife Carolyn live in Milton, FL.

Brian Creekbaum

Brian Creekbaum is a native and longtime resident of Ocala in Marion County. Brian headed an informal citizens group that received the 2001 Intellectual Freedom Award of the Florida Library Association for its opposition to censorship of the public library collection in Marion County. He used Florida’s open government laws extensively in connection with this issue.

In 2009, Brian was an early, publicly vocal critic of the process the Marion County Board of County Commissioners used to hire a county administrator, a process that later resulted in a grand jury investigation and presentment without indictment in which the grand jury condemned the hiring process in "the strongest possible terms" for its inconsistency with the spirit of Florida’s Sunshine Law. The grand jury made recommendations for change.

In support of his citizen activism on numerous issues involving public agencies in Marion County, Brian has used Florida’s open government laws for meeting access and to obtain a wide array of public records concerning elections, government finance, judicial proceedings, law enforcement, public officers and employees, real property, and meetings of governing bodies and advisory boards.

Anna Current

A long-time resident of Jupiter, FL, and a graduate of Wake Forest University, Anna Current has been actively involved in keeping area property owners up-to-date on actions that affect their properties. "Sounding the alert" began in 1998, when the Town filed a "finding of slum and blight conditions" for the most valuable waterfront properties in Jupiter. The finding would have allowed the Town to take the waterfront property under eminent domain laws, but fortunately property owners were able to thwart the action and these properties became the first Community Redevelopment district (CRA) in Northern Palm Beach County.

In 2002, Anna founded Jupiter Citizens for Property Rights and became its Executive Director. Two years later, she challenged the Town's failure to follow statutorily-required advertising for zoning changes, representing herself pro se through most of the administrative hearing phase of the case. That same year, the Jupiter property rights group was successful in amending proposed regulations that would have had a draconian effect on properties over 50 years old.

For two years, the Institute for Justice invited Anna to attend the Castle Coalition Conference in Washington, DC. This nationwide property rights grassroots activism project teaches property and small business owners how to protect themselves and stand up to the greedy governments and developers.

Anna has been a volunteer Law Clerk for the Pacific Legal Foundation at the Atlantic Center in Stuart, Florida. It is the oldest public interest legal organization that fights for limited government, property rights, individual rights, and a balanced approach to environmental protection.

Ken Cyrus

Ken Cyrus is a retired attorney, having engaged in private practice in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and served as a district court special judge for Okmulgee County, Oklahoma. Cyrus was an attorney with The Upjohn Company in Kalamazoo, Michigan, and later worked for Pharmacia & Upjohn, successor to the Upjohn Company, in various capacities, including Executive Vice President and General Counsel and Secretary in Windsor, Great Britain.

Ken and his wife Shirley live in Bonita Springs, FL.

Mike Driscoll

Mike Driscoll was born and raised in New York City. He joined the Navy after graduating from high school and served over 33 years on active duty. One of his tours of duty brought him to Key West, and on retiring, Mike and his wife, Suzanne Runnels, returned to Key West where they live with their shelter-rescued German Sheppard, Turk the Wonder Dog.

Mike is a proud member of the Patriot Guard Riders, who show respect for our nation’s fallen heroes, their families, and Moore’s Marauders, an organization that conducts expeditions around the world looking for and finding remains of that have been declared missing in action.

Active in his community, Driscoll is a member of the First Amendment Foundation’ s Sunshine Brigade; Veterans of Foreign Wars; Disabled American Veterans; the Non- Commissioned Officers Association; Senior Enlisted Academy Alumni Association; and the Surface Navy Association. He also is a member of the Key West Military Affairs Committee, Key West Maritime Historical Society, Navy League, Fleet Reserve Association, and American Legion, and an associate member of the Fraternal Order of Underwater Swimmers School, Key West, Florida, and a City of Key West Ambassador.

Driscoll has earned a career certificate in Corrections and holds a Bachelors Degree in History/Government. He is a certified SCUBA diver and a licensed U.S. Merchant Marine Officer.

Casey Hewlett

Casey Hewlett graduated cum laude from the University of South Florida in 2001 with a B.A. in Anthropology. He received his M.A. in Communication (specializing in Rhetoric, Cultural Studies, and Performance Studies) from USF in 2003. He has spent much of his career performing various roles in the retail industry while attempting to land a position that would allow him to merge his creative talents with his analytical skills. In 2010, he completed a Certificate program at USF in Web Design.

In December 2010, Casey joined the Zephyrhills Chamber of Commerce (now the Greater Zephyrhills Chamber of Commerce) as an independent web designer. In February 2011, he completed his first commercial project for Sergio's Restaurant, of Zephyrhills, FL. He has established his own business enterprise, WebVellum Web Design and Marketing, and is currently working with small and mid-sized businesses to develop business web solutions. He has also volunteered his professional expertise on several occasions to assist the faculty and staff at Woodland Elementary School, located in Zephyrhills, and other not-for-profit organizations.

Casey’s blog can be found at hewlett0com.wordpress.com/.

Alan Isaacson

Alan Isaacson, an ordained Minister with the Assemblies of God and Senior Pastor of New Harvest Fellowship, became interested in open government issues after learning that two people who made the same public records request for documents related to a local option sales tax (LOST) referendum received different responses and decided to make his own request.

He asked the county attorney for the email correspondence of all county commissioners for a three month period, provided a disc and, having served as System Coordinator of a Navy's 80 million dollar computer system, offered to assist with fulfilling his own request. In obtaining the records, Isaacson found evidence of back door politics, misrepresentation to the citizens on how the LOST funds were to be utilized, and the use of taxpayer funding to assist a Political Action Committee efforts in support of the tax.

Since then, Alan has worked with the county attorney to streamline requests for public record emails, and along with his friend and fellow Sunshine Brigade member Jerry Couey, helped bring TEAM Santa Rosa, a local quasi-governmental entity established to direct economic development efforts for the county, into compliance with Florida’s sunshine laws.

Alan still remains active and has turned his attention toward other boards that may not fully be aware of their responsibilities concerning the state’s open government laws. With the help of the First Amendment Foundation and other Sunshine Brigade members, Alan is hopeful that other concerned citizens throughout the State can get the help needed to keep their local governments in the "Sunshine".

Alan and his wife Tina have two children and live in Pace, Florida.

Theo Karantsalis

Theo Karantsalis is a Miami area librarian who freelances for several newspapers, including The Miami Herald.

Theo has more than 20 years’ experience wrestling public records information from local, state and federal agencies which include the Pentagon, Department of Defense, and the Air Force.

Theo lives in Miami with his wife, Diana, and two boys, Demos and Spiro.

Fane Lozman

Fane Lozman has been fighting to uphold the Sunshine Law since 2003.

After college, Fane served a tour of duty as an officer and pilot in the United State Marine Corps. He then moved to Chicago and worked as a floor trader/broker at the three major Chicago commodity and options exchanges. While in Chicago, Fane invented and patented Scanshift, a financial display software program. As computers replaced floor trading, Fane moved to South Florida, purchased a floating home, and lived on it in a South Florida marina looking forward to a life of sun and fun. At this point, Fane became involved in a fight against corrupt elected officials, and his efforts resulted in the arrests of a number of public officials in North Bay Village, Florida, two for criminal violations of the Sunshine Law. Fane subsequently became an advocate for enforcing the Sunshine Law in the two communities where he lived, North Bay Village and then Riviera Beach.

In addition to the two criminal violations, Fane has had a number of successes in the civil area as well. Most significant was a legal action based on a failure to give reasonable notice of a City council meeting; the sunshine law violation was key in preventing the city of Riviera Beach from enforcing a contract that would have allowed the seizure of thousands of homes and businesses via eminent domain to give to a private developer – an action planned by the city to take place just one day prior to Governor Bush signing a new State eminent domain law that prohibited that action. He also won a case that made its way all the way to the 4th District Court of Appeals affirming that written minutes must be taken at any city council meeting. The city of Riviera Beach spent over $125,000 in legal fees arguing that written minutes of its council meetings were not required and that the Sunshine Law had been misinterpreted by every municipality except them. Fortunately, the Appellate Court scoffed at their argument and required that written minutes be taken.

Dave Miner

Dave “Watchdog” Miner, a Vietnam War Veteran, is an attorney licensed in Florida and Michigan. A former assistant city attorney, county attorney, and state attorney, Miner has been a solo practitioner in Bradenton since 1978. He has served on numerous boards, including president of the Amherst College Alumni Association of SW Florida; director of the Florida Coalition for Assessment Reform; governor, Region IV, of the Florida Association of School Advisory Councils; president of the Manatee Children’s Services; treasurer of Manatee County Healthy Start; and secretary of the Excelsior Education and Training Foundation.

A lifetime member of the VFW, Miner is also a member of the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, and the Marine Corps League. He received the Southern Christian Leadership Conference’s Drum Major for Justice award, and is the principal author of “Truth in Testing – Parents Right to Know Act” and “Taxpayers Right to Know Act.”

Dave lives in Bradenton, FL.

Sue Nelson

Sue lives in Polk County, FL.

Dave Parisot

Dave Parisot was born in Illinois, and enlisted in the U.S. Air Force after finishing college. He was on active duty with the USAF for 21 years, and after retirement, earned a master’s degree in business administration and became a small business owner. He and his wife, Chong (Kim), have three children, numerous grandchildren, and live in Shalimar, FL.

Active in his community, Parisot is a charter member of the Okaloosa Citizens Alliance, and was the recipient of OCA’s 2008 Special Service Award. A Life Charter Member of the Military Officers Association of American, Dave is also a member of the Okaloosa Republican Club and of the Greater Fort Walton Beach Chamber of Commerce. He is a volunteer at the Children in Crisis Center in Fort Walton Beach and is a volunteer at the Shalimar Library, where he served on the Board of Directors for four years.

Judy Putz

Judy has lived in Central Florida and has been a small business owner for over 30 years. She is active in her City and County governments; having served on the following City Boards: the Land Planning Agency, The Code Enforcement Board, and The Historic Preservation Board; and on the County Trails and Natural Lands Committee, and the Citizen's Advisory Committee to Metro Plan Orlando. She also has been an officer and past president of the Private Business Association of Seminole County, a group of small business owners who explore issues important to small businesses. In 2004 she earned the Key to The City in recognition of her contributions. Judy is married, has a degree in Business Administration from Governors State University, with graduate work at the University of Central Florida, and lives in Longwood, Florida. She believes strongly in citizen oversight of government and is a big fan of the First Amendment Foundation.

Bill Samples, Florida Marine Life Coalition

The Florida Marine Life Coalition is dedicated to the protection and preservation of all marine like and fishermen’s rights for harvesting, collecting, and distributing tropical marine life, and providing information to our industry.

The FMLC offers meetings and programs throughout the year to further the goals and ambitions of all commercially active tropical marine life collectors and distributors in South Florida, the United States, and around the world.

Mario Sánchez

Mario Sánchez is a life-long Florida resident, holds an M.S. and a Ph.D. in Computer Science and writes for the Marco Island Blog (marcoislandblog.blogspot.com).

As a citizen watchdog, Mario has documented the environmental problems on Marco Island, including the crushing, dumping, burial, and illegal removal of asbestos, and has recorded the pumping of millions of gallons of toxic effluent pumped into the waterways and Gulf of Mexico by the City. As part of his investigation of these potential crimes and in his attempt to bring those city staff, councilors, contractors, and conspirators at the FDEP to justice, he has made numerous public record requests. Sánchez has successfully sued the EPA under the federal Freedom of Information Act which led to the release of numerous documents proving the city of Marco Island violated the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act—for which the City was fined.

Sánchez lives on Marco Island, FL.

Carroll Swanson

Carroll Swanson, retired from the Defense Intelligence Agency, U. S. Department of Defense, lives in Fort Myers, FL, and served in the U.S. Army in Vietnam. He has experience in imagery analysis, automated systems design and implementation, administrative management, and budget planning and execution. With a Bachelor’s Degree in English from the University of Iowa and a Master’s Degree in Technology Management from American University, Carroll is interested in transportation issues and budget accountability and transparency. He also believes that personal responsibility and integrity are imperative for government officials and public employees.

Guidelines for Providing Public Records

MODEL GUIDELINES FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC RECORDS

1. Purpose

The [governmental entity] fully embraces the tenets set forth in the Public Records Law, chapter 119, Florida Statutes, governing the public's right to access records held by the agency. In support of the broad public right to access public records, [governmental entity] incorporates the following guidelines to inform agency staff about implementation of the Public Records Law within [governmental entity] and to provide uniformity within [governmental entity] in charging for access to public records.

2. Authority

Article I, section 24, Florida Constitution
Chapter 119, Florida Statutes

3. Scope

This document outlines policies, responsibilities, and describes procedures for providing access to public records. It should be applied to all activities which involve public records requests. These guidelines complement, but do not replace, the requirements under the Public Records Law.

4. Policies

The following policies are adopted:

Agency held records, except those specifically precluded from disclosure by statutory exemption, shall be available, in any form and format used by the agency, to all citizens for inspection or copying under the supervision of the records custodian or designee during normal business hours.
The widest possible access to existing public records is encouraged by making copies of those records available for a fee not to exceed the actual cost of duplication, and, if the nature or volume of public records requested to be inspected, examined, or copied requires extensive use of agency resources, the minimal additional cost to cover such extensive use of agency resources.
Innovative practices to enhance the public's right of access to public records shall be encouraged.
[Governmental entity] shall assure that future information technology resources used to manage, store, or maintain public records adequately provide for the rights of the requester to access public records under chapter 119, Florida Statutes.

5. Responsibilities

Divisions, Districts, and Offices shall:
1. identify the public records for which they are custodians. When these public records are shared such that a single custodian cannot clearly be identified, the custodian most responsible for maintaining access to these public records shall have custodial responsibility; and
2. identify the types of public records and public record information under their custody which are exempt from inspection, examination, and copying under the Public Records Law.
Managers and supervisors shall:
1. be knowledgeable of the public access activities occurring within their responsible areas;
2. develop methods of calculating the extensive costs incurred when their information technology resources, clerical or supervisory staff or both are extensively used to respond to public records requests, unless such methods are already established by this directive;
3. ensure actual cost of duplication and/or extensive use charges are applied to public records requests only when it is cost-effective to do so; and
4. provide adequate staff training in the requirements of the Public Records Law and the policies set forth in these guidelines, with particular attention to staffs responsibility for maintaining the confidentiality of exempt information or records.
A cost benefit analysis shall be conducted to determine whether the benefit of collecting fees for providing access to public records outweighs the cost to [government entity] of processing such fees. Records custodians and other providers of public records are responsible for collecting actual cost of duplication fees and/or extensive use charges from the requester only when such fees/charges have been supported by the requisite cost/benefit analysis.

6. Public Records Requests

Providers should accept requests for public records in writing, by electronic mail, by telephone, by facsimile, or in person. If the request is insufficient to identify the records sought, the provider should help the requester clarify,' the request. The provider may ask the requester to complete forms to assist in defining or documenting the facts necessary for completing records requests; however, the requester is not obligated to complete these forms as a condition for obtaining the public records requested. Requests for records should be accepted and records made accessible for inspection or duplication during [governmental entity]'s normal business hours.

7. Public Records Fees and Charge

The Public Records Law allows government agencies to collect the actual cost of material and supplies used to duplicate public records for requesters. Agencies may also collect a reasonable service charge, in addition to actual cost fees, when a request for public records requires the extensive use of information technology resources and/or clerical or supervisory assistance. [Governmental entity] considers records requests taking more than [unit of time] to locate, copy, or otherwise make available the requested material as a diversion of resources which is susceptible to extensive use service charges. The following fee/charge standards and guidelines are designed to ensure that [governmental entity] is consistent in its application of rules which allow the recovery of actual and extensive use costs.

Actual Cost of Duplication - The custodian is responsible for determining the actual cost of duplication when public records requests are produced using a material other than those listed below.
1. Paper Copies - Paper copies up to 8 1/2in x 14in in size shall be provided at a cost of not more than 15 cents per one-sided copy and 20 cents for a double-sided copy, and for all other copies, upon payment of the actual cost of duplication of the record. The cost of providing a certified copy of a public record shall be no more than 1 dollar.
2. Printer Paper - The charge for computer printer paper shall be no more than [actual cost] per printed page of letter or legal size, and for all other paper sizes, the actual cost of duplication.
3. Shipping - U.S. postage, commercial shipping carriers, or other costs incurred in the delivery of public records shall be included in the actual costs charged to the requester.
Extensive Use Charges - Extensive use charges shall not be randomly or automatically applied. Rather, each public records request must be evaluated to determine if extensive use charges are warranted. Extensive use charges shall be applied in conformity with the definition set forth on page 5 of these guidelines.
1. Labor Time - When extensive clerical and/or supervisory labor time is spent in the inspection or production of a public records request, a service charge for labor should be applied by computing the actual cost of providing such labor. The Labor Costs Table at Attachment 1 [to be attached by governmental agency] shall be used to determine applicable labor charges.
2. Information Technology Resources - Providers shall use the documented fee/charge methods established by their division, district, or office when charging for the extensive use of information technology resources and a copy of such documented method shall be provided upon request. Service charges shall be based on the actual cost incurred for such extensive use.
Fee Collection
1. When all allowable fees/charges applicable to a particular public records request can be calculated in advance, they should be collected prior to the provider investing significant information technology resources and/or clerical or supervisory assistance.
2. Where actual costs and extensive use fees cannot be immediately determined due to the nature of the request, the provider shall give an estimated cost for producing the records and inform the requester that the actual cost may vary, but will not exceed the original estimate by more than an additional 25%. Providers should ensure estimates are accurate within 25% of the actual cost. The requester accepts the cost estimate, and then the provider may fill the public records request. Once the records are ready, the provider shall notice the requester of the cost and furnish the public records upon receipt of payment.
3. Should the requester fail to pay the actual costs and/or extensive use charges incurred to produce the request, the provider shall refer the non-payment to [appropriate financial office].
4. No sales tax is to be charged for a public records request.
5. All checks should be made payable to [governmental entity]. [Appropriate routine for collecting and documenting cash and checks, and for invoicing requesters.]
Charges Waivers - Fees or charges may be waived between [governmental entity] and other government agencies, by agreement between management, when the recurring exchanges or data sharing between agencies negates the need to apply these fees.

8. Public Records Exemptions

The [governmental entity] is responsible for protecting information defined as confidential or as otherwise prohibited from public inspection or copying under the Public Records Law. All exemptions to the Public Records Law can be found in the Florida Statutes. A list of [governmental entity] records presently exempt from public inspection, examination, and copying is found at Attachment 2 [to be compiled and attached by governmental entity]. Any exemption in existence or hereafter enacted shall not be deemed waived or otherwise void or unenforceable simply because it is not included in this list. The Florida Statutes should be consulted for a more complete understanding of a particular exemption.
The following standards and controls should be followed to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized release of confidential and exempt information:

Confidential information shall be redacted (extracted) from records prior to public release or examination of the nonexempt portions.
Future data processing Systems which are expected to maintain or provide access to confidential or sensitive records shall be designed with redaction capabilities so that only nonexempt portions of records can be extracted and made available to a public records requester. Redaction capability shall be a component in the redesign of existing systems.
Providers are responsible for informing the requester when requests cannot be filled due to an exemption which prevents disclosure. Upon request, the provider must provide the basis for this exemption and its statutory citation.

9. Definitions

For the purpose of this directive, the following terms are defined:

Confidential or Sensitive Records - Records which are presently provided by law to be confidential or which are prohibited from being inspected by the public by either general or special Jaw.
Extensive Use of Resources - When the nature or volume of the public records requested to be inspected, examined, or copied requires the use of [governmental entity] information technology resources and/or labor time required of clerical or supervisory employees exceeds [unit of time], the particular use of such resources is considered extensive.
Provider - The individual within [governmental entity], usually the public records custodian or designee, who makes public records available to a requester for inspection, examination, or copying.
Public Record - All documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, or other material, regardless of physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency.
Requester - A person, firm, association, joint venture, partnership, estate, corporation, or any other group or combination who has made a public records request to inspect, examine, copy, or receive copies of documents in the custody or control of the [governmental entity] pursuant to chapter 119, Florida Statutes.

Responsible Office: [appropriate office within governmental entity]

ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Labor Costs Table
Attachment 2: [Governmental entity] Public Records Exemption List

Requesting Public Records

Ten practical tips for the Public Records Act requester

Florida has a well-deserved reputation for allowing the public access to most government records. But that reputation does not mean the right of access is always easy to assert. Here are ten practical tips that can help open up public records:

About Open Government in Florida

Pursuant to the Florida Constitution and Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes and Article I, section 24 of the Florida Constitution, a public agency must provide access to its records. The definition of a public record is very broad. Section 119.011(11), F.S., defines "public records" to include:

all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing software, or other material, regardless of the physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency.

Upon request, access to public records must be promptly provided. An agency only may deny access to records or portions of records if a specific statutory exemption applies that makes such records exempt, or confidential and exempt, from public disclosure. Only those portions of the record in which an exemption applies should be redacted (deleted).

Although the law does not require that a public request be made in writing, you may consider doing this to maintain an accurate record of the request. If you make your request in writing, that request also becomes a public record that provides evidence of your request. Please feel free to modiify and use the FAF sample public records request located on our website which cites the relevant language of the public records law and asks the agency to cite the statutory exemption in writing.

Below are Frequently Asked Questions about Open Government and The Sunshine Law. Click on a topic to reveal the answer.

What is a public record?

The definition for public records is quite broad and includes all materials made or received by an agency in connection with official business used to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge. This means public records are not limited to traditional written documents, but that tapes, photographs, films, and sound recordings, for example, are also considered public records. There is both a statutory and a constitutional right of access to government records (Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and Article I, Section 24, of the Florida Constitution).

Can an agency impose restrictions on requesting public records?

NO. Without specific statutory authority, an agency cannot require that a request for public records be made in writing or in person, but you may wish to make your request in writing to ensure there is an accurate record of what was requested. Unless the requested information is confidential and exempt, a custodian of public records must honor a request for records, whether it is made in person, over the telephone, or in writing. In general, a requestor cannot be required to disclose the reason for the request. As a general rule, then:
You don't have to show identification.
You don't have to make your request in writing.
You don't have to give reason for your request.

What can I do if my public records request is denied?

If your request for records is denied, ask that the denial be made in writing, including the exact statutory citation for the exemption authorizing the denial and a specific statement citing the reason(s) for concluding that the record is exempt or confidential.
A custodian of a public record who contends that the requested record or part of the record is exempt from inspection must state the basis for that exemption, including the statutory citation, and when asked, the custodian must put the denial of a public record request in writing. If a record contains both exempt and non-exempt information, the records custodian can only redact that portion of the record which is exempt and must provide access to the remainder.

How much can an agency charge for public records?

Generally, there is no charge for inspection of a public record. The custodial agency can charge a fee for copies of a public record up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for paper copies that are 8 1/2 x 14 inches or less. For all other copies, the custodial agency can charge the actual cost of duplication.

If the nature and volume of the records to be copied requires extensive use of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance, or both, the agency may charge a reasonable service charge based on the actual costs incurred. Extensive use is not defined in the statutes, so each agency must determine what is an extensive use of its resources.

TIP: If an agency cites an extensive use fee, ask the agency to detail the costs in writing.

What happens if the request is wrongfully denied?

If your request for access is denied, first call the First Amendment Foundation. Options for enforcement include: mediation through the Office of the Attorney General Open Government Mediation Program, file a complaint with your local state attorney, or file suit in civil court.

What are the penalties?

A knowing or intentional violation is a 1st degree misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and a jail term not to exceed one year. An unintentional violation is a non-criminal infraction, punishable by a fine up to $500. A public officer who intentionally violates the public records law is subject to suspension or removal from office. Attorney's fees and court costs are available to the requestor that prevails in a civil suit for access.

What is the sunshine law?

Florida's Sunshine Law provides a right of access to governmental proceedings at both the state and local levels. The Sunshine Law generally applies to any gathering, whether formal or casual, of two (2) or more members of the same board or commission meeting to discuss some matter on which foreseeable action will be taken.

Article I, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution: "All meetings of any collegial body of the executive branch of state government or of any ... county, municipality, school district, or special district, at which official acts are to be taken or at which public business ... is to be transacted or discussed, shall be open and noticed to the public ..."

Chapter 286, Florida Statutes: "All meetings of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision, except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, at which official acts are to be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, and no resolution, rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such meeting. The board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all such meetings."

When does the sunshine law apply?

The Sunshine Law applies to "any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation or political subdivision." It applies equally to elected or appointed boards or commissions such as school boards and special districts and virtually all state and local collegial public bodies are covered by the open meetings requirements.

Does the sunshine law apply to private entities?

The Sunshine Law generally does not apply to private entities. However, there are some instances where a private entity may be subject to the open meetings law. A private entity created pursuant to law or by a public agency, such as certain nonprofit organizations, is subject to open meetings requirements. Also, when a private entity is "acting on behalf of "a public agency, the Sunshine Law may apply. Consider whether the private entity is merely providing services to a public agency versus rendering services in place of the agency.

Does the sunshine law apply to the judiciary and legislative branches of government?

The Judiciary and the state legislature are not subject to the Sunshine Law, but each has its own constitutional provision relating to access. The Florida Legislature is bound by the requirements of Article III, s. 4(e), Fla. Con., which says that meetings between more than two (2) members of the Legislature must be reasonably open to the public.

Similarly, Florida courts are not bound by the meetings requirements in Article I, section 24(b), Fla. Con. However, the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution gives a criminal defendant a right to a public trial, and thus, the public's right to access the criminal court proceedings is a well-settled area of law. On the other hand, there is no case law, Florida or Federal that has directly addressed the application of the First Amendment as it relates to public access for civil proceedings.

When are meetings not subject to the sunshine law?

Generally, the Sunshine Law does not apply to social events, fact-finding meetings, or meetings where there is an applicable statutory exemption.

-Social Events: Members of a public board are not prohibited under the Sunshine Law from meeting together socially, provided that matters which may come before the board are not discussed at such gatherings.

-Fact-finding meetings: Meetings for the purposes of merely gathering information where no recommendations are made, public business is not discussed or votes are not taken are not subject to the Sunshine Law.

-Meetings where a specific statutory exemption applies: The law provides a presumption of openness, which means that all meetings between two or more members of the same board or commission are presumed open to the public unless there is a specific statutory exemption. There are a limited number of exemptions which would allow for the closure of a meeting. Some examples include certain discussions with the board's attorney over pending litigation and portions of collective bargaining sessions.

In addition, specific portions of meetings of some agencies may be closed when those agencies are making probable cause determinations or considering confidential records. However, an agency cannot close a meeting simply to discuss records that are exempt from public disclosure - there must also be a specific statutory exemption allowing for the closure of the meeting. (See the First Amendment Foundation website for a searchable database of the 1,000+ exemptions at www.floridafaf.org.)

TIP: If denied access to a meeting, request the statutory citation authorizing closure of the meeting.

What are the procedural requirments of the sunshine law?

There are four (4) simple requirements:

Meetings of boards or commissions must be open to the public.
Reasonable notice of such meetings must be given.
Minutes of meetings must be taken.
Venue must be accessible.

A public agency cannot hold a meeting at any facility which discriminates based on age, race, etc., nor can a public agency unreasonably restrict public access. It must hold meetings in an accessible facility of sufficient size so as to accommodate the anticipated turnout.

What is reasonable notice?

"Reasonable" is not defined in the Florida Statutes, but the courts have said notice of public meetings must be "sufficient so as to inform" members of the public who may be interested in attending the meeting. This means that such notice must be reasonable under the circumstances. Also, the required notice must be reasonable in terms of content, timing, and placement.

What is the general rule relating to public participation?

Generally, the public has an "inalienable right to be present and to be heard" at most public meetings. But a government agency can adopt reasonable rules which require orderly behavior and allow for the orderly progression of public meetings. This includes limiting the amount of time an individual can speak when a large number of people attend and wish to speak. The Sunshine Law requires that meetings of public boards or commissions be "open to the public at all times."

This means public board members should not pass notes during a meeting in lieu of having an open discussion before the public, and all conversations between members must be audible.

When can a meeting be closed to the public?

There is a general presumption of openness, meaning that a meeting of two or more members of the same collegial body is presumed open unless there is a specific statutory exemption. Only the Legislature can create an exemption to our constitutional right of access. Currently, there are over 1,000 exemptions to the public records and open meetings law, and many of the meetings exemptions have strict limitations, requiring tape recordings, limiting who may attend the closed meeting, etc.

TIP: When provided a statutory citation authorizing closure of a public meeting, be sure to read the exact statutory language to determine whether the exemption contains limitations.

What is a cure meeting?

No resolution, rule, regulation, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken at an open meeting. Action taken in violation of the Sunshine Law is void ab initio, as if it never happened. Action - but not violations - can be cured when the offending agency takes "independent final action in the sunshine."

This means an agency must re-create the meeting that violated the Sunshine Law - engage in the same discussions, debate, and voting.

How is the sunshine law enforced?

If denied access to a public meeting, first call the First Amendment Foundation. Options for enforcement include: mediation through the Office of the Attorney General Open Government Mediation Program, file a complaint with your local state attorney, or file suit in civil court.

What are the penalties for a sunshine law violation?

An unintentional violation of the Sunshine Law is a non-criminal infraction punishable by a fine of up to $500. A knowing or intentional violation is a 2nd degree misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $500 and/or a jail term of not more than 60 days. Any public official who intentionally violates the provisions of the Sunshine Law may be subject to suspension or removal from office. Attorney's fees and court costs are available to the requestor that prevails in a civil suit for access.