Access to Information Orders
Decision Information
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Simcoe County Roman Catholic Separate School Board (the Board) receiveda request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection ofPrivacy Act (the Act ). Part of the request was for access to theminutes of a closed Board meeting held on January 10, 1996. The requester waspresent for part of the closed meeting, at which the Board, sitting as aCommittee of the Whole, discussed a grievance which the appellant had filedagainst the Board. The Board responded to this portion of the request by advising the requesterthat no such records exist. Access to records responsive to the remainingportions of the request was granted. The requester (now the appellant) appealed the Board's decision because hebelieves that minutes of the closed Board meeting exist. A Notice of Inquiry was sent to the Board and the appellant soliciting theirsubmissions on whether the search undertaken by the Board for records which areresponsive to the request was reasonable. Representations, including anaffidavit from the individual who conducted the searches, were received from theBoard. The appellant did not submit representations, instead, he chose to relyon the submissions which he made in his request and letter of appeal. PRELIMINARY MATTER: In its representations, the Board relies on the exemptions contained insections 6(1)(b), 11(c), 11(d) and 14 of the Act to deny access to anyresponsive record, if they exist. It further claims that, under section 52(3),any responsive record would fall outside the scope of the Act . Becauseof the manner in which I have disposed of the appeal below, it is not necessaryfor me to consider the application of these sections of the Act , whichwould only be necessary if responsvie records could be located. DISCUSSION: REASONABLENESS OF SEARCH In its decision letter, the Board advised the requester that "... thereare no Board minutes kept of closed sessions, save and except the reports whichare brought into public session. A copy of the Official Board Minutes of themeeting of January 10th, 1996 is attached." The Board has submitted an affidavit from one of its employees who alsoserves as its Recording Secretary. She states that: .... when the Trustees of the Board meet as the Committee of the WholeBoard in Private Session, the conclusions of the Committee deliberations arereflected in a Report to the Board. Except for the motion represented at theconclusion of such meetings to "Rise and Report", minutes ofsuch meetings are not maintained . [emphasis added] The motion relating to the appellant's grievance is recorded in the OfficialBoard Minutes for January 10, 1996 (a copy of which has been provided to me) asitem #4 on page 11 under the section entitled Reports from the Committee ofthe Whole . A copy of these minutes has been provided to the appellant. Hehas requested, however, copies of minutes of the January 10, 1996 meeting of theCommittee of the Whole [the name the Board assumes when it is meeting inprivate], which then reported to the Board at its public meeting on that date. In his letter of appeal, the appellant claims that "On two occasions,[the Recording Secretary] confirmed to me that there are indeed minutes kept ofthese sessions [i.e. the private sessions], though they are not available to thepublic." However, in her affidavit, the Recording Secretary states that: In a casual conversation in the month of September, 1996, I responded tothe general question [of the appellant] that, as Recording Secretary, I keptminutes of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole Board in Private Session.He did not ask, nor did I understand that he might have been seeking, a detailedexplanation of precisely what records are maintained by the Board at suchmeetings. I believe that [the appellant] must have misunderstood my responses, andthat, despite facts and assurances to the contrary, he has concluded that theminutes of Private Sessions of Board Meetings are more extensive than they arein reality." In view of the information contained in the affidavit provided by the Board,I am satisfied that there was a misunderstanding between the Recording Secretaryand the appellant regarding the nature and extent of the minutes of closed Boardmeetings taken by the recording Secretary. I note that the appellant has indicated in his letter of appeal that hewishes to receive any record kept of the Board's closed session, meaning "...any written material pertaining to the closed session of January 10, whether itconsists of formal minutes, personal notes or any other form of record." This differs from the appellant's original request to the Board in which hesought access only to the minutes of the closed session. Consequently, if theappellant wishes to obtain records, other than minutes, relating to the January10th closed meeting, he must submit a new request for this information to theBoard. With respect to the search for responsive records, the Recording Secretaryattests that she: ... undertook searches of files, both paper and electronic, with respectto: general files, the Leadership Identification Program files, Memoranda toPrincipals and Staff, Official Board minutes and backup documentation, and inparticular, the minutes of the Board and its Committees with reference toproceedings of the Board held on 10 January 1996 in all places in which such records might bestored in order to determine what records were in the possession of the Board inresponse to the request. Where a requester provides sufficient detail about the records that he orshe is seeking and the Board indicates that further records do not exist, it ismy responsibility to ensure that the Board has made a reasonable search toidentify any records which are responsive to the request. The Act does not require the Board to prove with absolute certainty thatfurther records do not exist. However, in my view, in order to properlydischarge its obligations under the Act , the Board must provide me withsufficient evidence to show that it has made a reasonable effort to identify and locate records responsive to the request. I am satisfied that the Board has taken all reasonable steps to identify andlocate the records responsive to the appellant's request. ORDER: I find that the Board's search was reasonable and dismiss the appeal. Original signed by: Donald Hale, Inquiry Officer April 24, 1997
Decision Content
ORDER M-930
Appeal M_9600368
Simcoe County Roman Catholic Separate School Board
NATURE OF THE APPEAL:
The Simcoe County Roman Catholic Separate School Board (the Board) received a request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act). Part of the request was for access to the minutes of a closed Board meeting held on January 10, 1996. The requester was present for part of the closed meeting, at which the Board, sitting as a Committee of the Whole, discussed a grievance which the appellant had filed against the Board.
The Board responded to this portion of the request by advising the requester that no such records exist. Access to records responsive to the remaining portions of the request was granted.
The requester (now the appellant) appealed the Board’s decision because he believes that minutes of the closed Board meeting exist.
A Notice of Inquiry was sent to the Board and the appellant soliciting their submissions on whether the search undertaken by the Board for records which are responsive to the request was reasonable. Representations, including an affidavit from the individual who conducted the searches, were received from the Board. The appellant did not submit representations, instead, he chose to rely on the submissions which he made in his request and letter of appeal.
PRELIMINARY MATTER:
In its representations, the Board relies on the exemptions contained in sections 6(1)(b), 11(c), 11(d) and 14 of the Act to deny access to any responsive record, if they exist. It further claims that, under section 52(3), any responsive record would fall outside the scope of the Act. Because of the manner in which I have disposed of the appeal below, it is not necessary for me to consider the application of these sections of the Act, which would only be necessary if responsvie records could be located.
DISCUSSION:
REASONABLENESS OF SEARCH
In its decision letter, the Board advised the requester that “... there are no Board minutes kept of closed sessions, save and except the reports which are brought into public session. A copy of the Official Board Minutes of the meeting of January 10th, 1996 is attached.”
The Board has submitted an affidavit from one of its employees who also serves as its Recording Secretary. She states that:
.... when the Trustees of the Board meet as the Committee of the Whole Board in Private Session, the conclusions of the Committee deliberations are reflected in a Report to the Board. Except for the motion represented at the conclusion of such meetings to "Rise and Report", minutes of such meetings are not maintained.
[emphasis added]
The motion relating to the appellant’s grievance is recorded in the Official Board Minutes for January 10, 1996 (a copy of which has been provided to me) as item #4 on page 11 under the section entitled Reports from the Committee of the Whole. A copy of these minutes has been provided to the appellant. He has requested, however, copies of minutes of the January 10, 1996 meeting of the Committee of the Whole [the name the Board assumes when it is meeting in private], which then reported to the Board at its public meeting on that date.
In his letter of appeal, the appellant claims that “On two occasions, [the Recording Secretary] confirmed to me that there are indeed minutes kept of these sessions [i.e. the private sessions], though they are not available to the public.” However, in her affidavit, the Recording Secretary states that:
In a casual conversation in the month of September, 1996, I responded to the general question [of the appellant] that, as Recording Secretary, I kept minutes of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole Board in Private Session. He did not ask, nor did I understand that he might have been seeking, a detailed explanation of precisely what records are maintained by the Board at such meetings.
I believe that [the appellant] must have misunderstood my responses, and that, despite facts and assurances to the contrary, he has concluded that the minutes of Private Sessions of Board Meetings are more extensive than they are in reality.”
In view of the information contained in the affidavit provided by the Board, I am satisfied that there was a misunderstanding between the Recording Secretary and the appellant regarding the nature and extent of the minutes of closed Board meetings taken by the recording Secretary.
I note that the appellant has indicated in his letter of appeal that he wishes to receive any record kept of the Board’s closed session, meaning “... any written material pertaining to the closed session of January 10, whether it consists of formal minutes, personal notes or any other form of record.” This differs from the appellant’s original request to the Board in which he sought access only to the minutes of the closed session. Consequently, if the appellant wishes to obtain records, other than minutes, relating to the January 10th closed meeting, he must submit a new request for this information to the Board.
With respect to the search for responsive records, the Recording Secretary attests that she:
... undertook searches of files, both paper and electronic, with respect to: general files, the Leadership Identification Program files, Memoranda to Principals and Staff, Official Board minutes and backup documentation, and in particular, the minutes of the Board and its Committees with reference to proceedings of the
Board held on 10 January 1996 in all places in which such records might be stored in order to determine what records were in the possession of the Board in response to the request.
Where a requester provides sufficient detail about the records that he or she is seeking and the Board indicates that further records do not exist, it is my responsibility to ensure that the Board has made a reasonable search to identify any records which are responsive to the request. The Act does not require the Board to prove with absolute certainty that further records do not exist. However, in my view, in order to properly discharge its obligations under the Act, the Board must provide me with sufficient evidence to show that it has made a reasonable effort to identify and locate records responsive to the request.
I am satisfied that the Board has taken all reasonable steps to identify and locate the records responsive to the appellant's request.
ORDER:
I find that the Board’s search was reasonable and dismiss the appeal.
Original signed by: April 24, 1997
Donald Hale
Inquiry Officer