Non-profit organizations and access to public information

Last updated

When government agencies outsource basic services to third-party non-profit contractors, one consequence is that the public may lose its access to information about the service that the public would have retained, had a government agency carried out the service directly.

Contents

A concern that previously public information will become privatized and inaccessible to the public when a government agency moves to contract out services to third-party vendors arises whether the third-party vendor is a non-profit organization or a for-profit organization. However, a number of key court cases in this area have arisen when non-profits have rebuffed requests for information under a state's right-to-know laws.

Key court cases (U.S.)

Friends of Piedmont Park v. The Piedmont Park Conservancy

The Piedmont Park Conservancy is a private non-profit that oversees and manages Piedmont Park. In 2007, when the organization moved forward with a plan to install a controversial parking structure, a group opposed to the plan—Friends of Piedmont Park—filed an open record request under Georgia Georgia's open records legislationn [1] for records of the Conservancy. The request was declined, and the Friends group sued. On September 12, 2007, a Georgia judge ruled that the records must be made public. [2]

The Times of Trenton v. Lafayette Yard Community Development Corp.

In this case, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously ruled in 2005 that Lafayette Yard CDC, a private non-profit, was subject to the provisions of New Jersey's open records (OPRA) legislation [1] because it issued city-backed bonds and the majority of its board was appointed by the city council of Trenton. The litigation arose because the board of Lafayette Yard CDC kicked a reporter for the Trenton newspaper out of a meeting on the grounds that, as a private non-profit, they were not subject to open records or open meetings laws. [3]

Gannon and Nichols v. the Board of Regents of the State of Iowa

In this 2005 case, the Iowa Supreme Court overturned a lower court and ruled that outsourcing a public function to a private board does not privatize the records of the private board. The court wrote, "In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether a government body may outsource one of its core functions to a private corporation, making that part of its operation nongovernmental and not subject to public scrutiny. We hold the Iowa State University Foundation, a recipient of such outsourcing, is performing a government function, and therefore its records are subject to disclosure." [4]

Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day

Fourteen cheerleaders sued Powers Management, a private company that ran a public stadium in Nashville, Tennessee, on the grounds that their privacy had been violated by two employees of Powers Management. Powers Management reached an out-of-court settlement with the cheerleaders. The Tennessean asked for a copy of the settlement from Powers, on the grounds that Powers was functionally a government agency. In 2006, a Tennessee appeals court agreed with The Tennessean, ordering Powers to turn over a copy of the settlement to the newspaper. [5]

Controversies

Downtown Vision in Jacksonville, Florida

Downtown Vision agreed in September 2007 that it falls under Florida's open records law. [6] Previously, the organization had stated that it was exempt because it is a private not-for-profit corporation. [7]

Charleston Area Alliance

The non-profit Charleston Area Alliance in West Virginia receives $100,000 annually from the Kanawha County Commission to provide economic development services to the county. However, the Charleston Area Alliance has refused to provide information about the salaries its officers receive, on the grounds that it is a private organization. [8]

Medicaid service non-profits in Connecticut

In Connecticut, the state Department of Social Services contracted with three for-profit companies and one non-profit company for Medicaid services. Each organization refused to respond to Connecticut open records requests [9] for information about how much they were paying doctors under the plans. The Connecticut Attorney General and Connecticut Freedom of Information Coalition ruled that the documents must be made public. [10]

New Mexico State University Foundation

In New Mexico, the non-profit New Mexico State University Foundation is claiming that because it is private, it does not have to release the names of donors, even though the donors are partially funding the salaries of employees at New Mexico State University. Basketball coach Reggie Theus is one recipient of a salary partially funded by undisclosed private donors. Since Theus has spoken at a public governmental hearing in favor of a private real-estate development, questions have arisen about whether he is receiving part of his salary from those real estate developers. [11]

Notes

  1. 1 2 "About WikiFOIA". WikiFOIA. Archived from the original on May 4, 2007.
  2. "Opinion". Atlanta Journal-Constitution. September 13, 2007.[ dead link ]
  3. "The Times of Trenton Publishing Corporation v. Lafayette Yard Community Development Corporation (A-22-04)". Rutgers Law. August 17, 2016.
  4. "Gannon and Nichols v. the Board of Regents of the State of Iowa - Supreme Court Opinion". February 4, 2005. Archived from the original on March 28, 2009.
  5. "Latest Opinions" (PDF). Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 20, 2006.
  6. "Florida". WikiFOIA.
  7. "JEDC agreement requires DVI to operate in the Sunshine". Jacksonville Daily Record - Jacksonville, Florida. September 20, 2007.
  8. "Carper wants group to reveal salaries". The Charleston Gazette. May 4, 2007. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007.
  9. "Connecticut". WikiFOIA.
  10. Jonathan O'Connell (May 26, 2012) [May 14, 2007]. "Contractors Working To Keep Trade Info From Public". Hartford Business. Archived from the original on January 9, 2015.
  11. "Heath Haussamen on New Mexico Politics: Endorsement of developer's project raises further questions about how Aggie coach is being paid". Hartford Business. June 2007. Archived from the original on September 19, 2008.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nonprofit organization</span> Organization operated for a collective benefit

A nonprofit organization (NPO), also known as a nonbusiness entity, nonprofit institution, or simply a nonprofit, is a legal entity organized and operated for a collective, public or social benefit, as opposed to an entity that operates as a business aiming to generate a profit for its owners. A nonprofit organization is subject to the non-distribution constraint: any revenues that exceed expenses must be committed to the organization's purpose, not taken by private parties. Depending on the local laws, charities are regularly organized as non-profits. A host of organizations may be nonprofit, including some political organizations, schools, hospitals, business associations, churches, foundations, social clubs, and consumer cooperatives. Nonprofit entities may seek approval from governments to be tax-exempt, and some may also qualify to receive tax-deductible contributions, but an entity may incorporate as a nonprofit entity without having tax-exempt status.

Freedom of information laws allow access by the general public to data held by national governments and, where applicable, by state and local governments. The emergence of freedom of information legislation was a response to increasing dissatisfaction with the secrecy surrounding government policy development and decision making. In recent years Access to Information Act has also been used. They establish a "right-to-know" legal process by which requests may be made for government-held information, to be received freely or at minimal cost, barring standard exceptions. Also variously referred to as open records, or sunshine laws, governments are typically bound by a duty to publish and promote openness. In many countries there are constitutional guarantees for the right of access to information, but these are usually unused if specific support legislation does not exist. Additionally, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16 has a target to ensure public access to information and the protection of fundamental freedoms as a means to ensure accountable, inclusive and just institutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of Information Act (United States)</span> 1967 US statute regarding access to information held by the US government

The Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, is the United States federal freedom of information law that requires the full or partial disclosure of previously unreleased or uncirculated information and documents controlled by the U.S. government upon request. The act defines agency records subject to disclosure, outlines mandatory disclosure procedures, and includes nine exemptions that define categories of information not subject to disclosure. The act was intended to make U.S. government agencies' functions more transparent so that the American public could more easily identify problems in government functioning and put pressure on Congress, agency officials, and the president to address them. The FOIA has been changed repeatedly by both the legislative and executive branches.

Judicial Watch (JW) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit American conservative activist group that files Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to investigate claimed misconduct by government officials. Founded in 1994, Judicial Watch has primarily targeted Democrats, in particular the administrations of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as Hillary Clinton's role in them. It was founded by attorney Larry Klayman, and has been led by Tom Fitton since 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fundraising</span> Process of gathering donations

Fundraising or fund-raising is the process of seeking and gathering voluntary financial contributions by engaging individuals, businesses, charitable foundations, or governmental agencies. Although fundraising typically refers to efforts to gather money for non-profit organizations, it is sometimes used to refer to the identification and solicitation of investors or other sources of capital for for-profit enterprises.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charitable organization</span> Nonprofit organization with charitable purpose

A charitable organization or charity is an organization whose primary objectives are philanthropy and social well-being.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Security Archive</span> Advocacy and journalism nonprofit

The National Security Archive is a 501(c)(3) non-governmental, non-profit research and archival institution located on the campus of the George Washington University in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1985 to check rising government secrecy. The National Security Archive is an investigative journalism center, open government advocate, international affairs research institute, and the largest repository of declassified U.S. documents outside the federal government. The National Security Archive has spurred the declassification of more than 15 million pages of government documents by being the leading non-profit user of the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), filing a total of more than 70,000 FOIA and declassification requests in its over 35+ years of history.

Public records are documents or pieces of information that are not considered confidential and generally pertain to the conduct of government.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press(RCFP) is a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that provides pro bono legal services and resources to and on behalf of journalists. The organization pursues litigation, offers direct representation, submits amicus curiae briefs, and provides other legal assistance on matters involving the First Amendment, press freedom, freedom of information, and court access issues.

Public Citizen Litigation Group is a public interest law firm in the United States.The group is the litigation arm of the non-profit consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen. Its attorneys work on cases involving health and safety regulation, consumer rights, separation of powers, access to the courts, class actions, open government, and the First Amendment.

A 501(c)(3) organization is a United States corporation, trust, unincorporated association or other type of organization exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of Title 26 of the United States Code. It is one of the 29 types of 501(c) nonprofit organizations in the US.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sunshine Review</span>

Sunshine Review was an American nonprofit organization that advocated for increased government transparency.

The Climate Science Legal Defense Fund (CSLDF) is a not-for-profit organization established in 2011 to provide legal assistance to researchers and institutions engaged in climate science facing legal challenges from private entities such as think tanks and legal foundations.

Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) is a non-profit organization founded in 2012 to fund and support free speech and freedom of the press. The organization originally managed crowd-funding campaigns for independent journalistic organizations, but now pursues technical projects to support journalists' digital security and conducts legal advocacy for journalists.

MuckRock is a United States-based 501(c)(3) non-profit organization which assists anyone in filing governmental requests for information through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and other public record laws around the United States, then publishes the returned information on its website and encourages journalism around it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Illinois Freedom of Information Act</span> Public records law in Illinois

The Illinois Freedom of Information Act, 5 ILCS 140/1 et seq., is an Illinois statute that grants to all persons the right to copy and inspect public records in the state. The law applies to executive and legislative bodies of state government, units of local government, and other entities defined as "public bodies". All records related to governmental business are presumed to be open for inspection by the public, except for information specifically exempted from disclosure by law. The statute is modeled after the federal Freedom of Information Act and serves a similar purpose as freedom of information legislation in the other U.S. states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Illinois Public Access Counselor</span> Bureau under Illinois Attorney General

The Illinois Public Access Counselor (PAC) is an attorney in the office of the Illinois Attorney General who is responsible for enforcing the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Open Meetings Act (OMA). The PAC is the head of the Public Access Bureau, a group of more than one dozen attorneys who process complaints against public bodies and provide education to the public on Illinois' transparency laws.

<i>City of Champaign v. Madigan</i> Illinois court case concerning freedom of information

City of Champaign v. Madigan, 2013 IL App (4th) 120662, 992 N.E.2d 629 (2013), is a case decided by the Illinois Appellate Court in 2013 concerning the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The court ruled that messages sent and received by elected officials during a city council meeting and pertaining to public business are public records subject to disclosure, even when those communications are stored on personal electronic devices. It was the first court ruling in Illinois to hold that private messages were subject to public disclosure under FOIA.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse</span> Government data collection and research institute at Syracuse University

Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) is a nonprofit and nonpartisan data gathering, data research, and data distribution organization in the S. I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University.

Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, 141 S.Ct. 2373 (2021), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the disclosure of donors to non-profit organizations. The case challenged California's requirement that non-profit organizations disclose the identity of their donors to the state's Attorney General as a precondition of soliciting donations in the state. The case was consolidated with Thomas More Law Center v. Bonta. In July 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that California's requirement burdened the donors' First Amendment rights, was not narrowly tailored, and was constitutionally invalid.