SIGNATURE INFORMATION SOLUTIONS v. Aston, 1311 C.D. 2009.
Decision Date | 26 May 2010 |
Docket Number | No. 1311 C.D. 2009.,1311 C.D. 2009. |
Citation | 995 A.2d 510 |
Parties | SIGNATURE INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, LLC, Appellant v. ASTON TOWNSHIP. |
Court | Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court |
Craig J. Staudenmaier, Harrisburg, for appellant.
M. Elizabeth Naughton Beck, Media, for appellee.
BEFORE: PELLEGRINI, Judge, BUTLER, Judge, and FRIEDMAN, Senior Judge.
OPINION BY Senior Judge FRIEDMAN.1
Signature Information Solutions, LLC, (Requester) appeals from the May 27, 2009, order of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County (trial court), which reversed the Final Determination of the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records (OOR) directing Aston Township (Township) to supply Requester with information it requested pursuant to the Right-to-Know Law (Law).2 We reverse.
On January 28, 2009, Requester submitted a standard right-to-know request form to the Township, seeking (R.R. at 5a; Findings of Fact, Nos. 1-2.)
The Township denied the request because the information "is available through publicly accessible electronic means by accessing www.co.Delaware.pa.us, see Section 704 of the Act."3 (1/29/09 Letter, R.R. at 6a; Findings of Fact, No. 4.) The Township advised, "Should Requester require a certification of the tax status for the property identified, a written request can be submitted to the Tax Collector for Aston Township, along with the requisite fee...." (1/29/09 Letter, R.R. at 6a.)
On February 11, 2009, Requester filed an appeal with the OOR, stating, in part, as follows:
We are aware of the county site and do research information from the county on a regular basis with no issue. Our request was focused on the information maintained by the tax collector. Township employees have been upholding the argument that they ... would need to obtain a certification from the tax collector. We were simply ... requesting the information from the open records officer.
(R.R. at 7a.) By letter dated February 11, 2009, the OOR notified the parties that it would assign an Appeals Officer to review the case and that the parties could submit additional information regarding the appeal within seven calendar days. (R.R. at 9a.)
The Township submitted nothing to the OOR within seven calendar days. On February 27, 2009, however, the Township submitted an "Explanation of Grounds for Denial of Request" (Explanation). The Township asserted that it denied the request pursuant to section 705 of the Law, which states that "an agency shall not be required to create a record which does not currently exist or to compile, maintain, format or organize a record in a manner in which the agency does not currently compile, maintain, format or organize the record." 65 P.S. § 67.705. Although the Township previously denied the request under section 704 of the Law because the printouts were available through the county web site, the Township now asserted that printouts with the requested information do not exist. (R.R. at 13a.)
(R.R. at 13a-14a) (emphasis added).
In a March 4, 2009, letter, the Appeals Officer advised the Township as follows:
(R.R. at 20a) (emphasis added).
In response, the Township filed a "Supplemental Explanation of Grounds for Denial of Request," asserting that it denied the request because "some or all" of the information is available on the Delaware County website.4 (R.R. at 21a.) The Township also attached the affidavit of its Tax Collector, which stated that "the information requested ... is not available in one single document or `printout' but must be assembled by me from a review of multiple documents and/or sources."5 (R.R. at 24a.)
In a Final Determination, the Appeals Officer concluded that: (1) the Township improperly denied Requester's request based on electronic availability because, under section 704(b)(2) of the Law, the Township is required to provide printouts of public records when a requester is not willing to access a public record electronically; (2) although the Township is not obligated to create a record under section 705 of the Law, the Township did not deny Requester access to the requested information on that basis; (3) the Township cannot convert a proper right-to-know request into a tax certification request, and any similarity between a tax certification request and the request here is irrelevant; and (4) (R.R. at 36a.)
The Township filed an appeal with the trial court, which reversed the OOR's Final Determination. The trial court stated that: (1) because the Appeals Officer could expand the record under section 1102(a) of the Law,6 the Township was not limited to its initial reason for denial of the right-to-know request; and, (2) under section 705 of the Law, the Township was not required to assemble the information requested from a review of multiple documents or sources. Requester now appeals to this court.
Requester argues that the trial court erred in concluding that section 1102(a) of the Law allowed the Township to assert a different reason for its denial of the right-to-know request. We agree.
We begin by pointing out that section 903(2) of the Law requires that a denial of a right-to-know request include the "specific reasons for the denial, including a citation of supporting legal authority."7 65 P.S. § 67.903(2). Section 1101(a)(1) of the Law states that an appeal to the OOR "shall address any grounds stated by the agency for ... denying the request." 65 P.S. § 67.1101(a)(1). Here, the Township's specific reason for its denial was the availability of the information on the county web site, citing section 704 of the Law as supporting legal authority for the denial. Requester's appeal addressed that issue.
Section 1102(a) of the Law provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial- Pa. State Educ. Ass'n v. Commonwealth
-
Commonwealth v. Ctr. Twp.
... ... citizens by affording them access to information concerning the activities of their government.” ... the waiver rule enunciated in Signature Information Solutions, LLC v. Aston Township, ... 548, 975 A.2d 591, 599 (2009) (Saylor, J. dissenting from dismissal of appeal ... ...
-
Levy v. Senate of Pa.
... ... Democratic caucus beginning January 1, 2009. The Senate Open Records Officer ... Officer and asserted the redacted information was not privileged. The Senate responded the ... However, relying on Signature Information Solutions v. Aston Township, 995 ... ...
- Levy v. Senate of Pennsylvania