Sarah M. Lucey, an environmental law fellow with Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP (Photo: Courtesy Photo)The California Supreme Court recently issued a ruling on the seemingly mundane issue of whether public agencies may charge Public Records Act (PRA) requesters for the costs of redacting exempt material from electronic records when responding to PRA requests. Although the decision clarifies that agencies must bear the cost of redacting exempt material from both paper and electronic records, it does not offer a bright line rule for a secondary, but crucial, issue in the case: What agency processes do, and do not, qualify as “data extraction,” the costs of which agencies may permissibly shift to requesters? The opinion does provide some “guideposts,” but does not offer entirely easy answers for public agencies trying to determine what—or whether-they may charge requesters when responding to electronic PRA requests.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.
Benefits of a Digital Membership:
- Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
- Access to the entire ALM network of websites
- Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
- Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
- Search by a wide range of topics
*May exclude premium content
Already have an account? Sign In Now
"Electronic" - Google News
June 04, 2020 at 07:45PM
https://ift.tt/36YeJU8
Agencies Bear Costs of Redacting Electronic Records, But Questions Remain in Recent PRA Decision | The Recorder - Law.com
"Electronic" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3dmroCo
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq
No comments:
Post a Comment