Did the Arkansas AG approve release of Officer Jason Harris's personnel records after he objected?

Plain-English summary

Officer Jason Harris asked whether Little Rock's decision to release his personnel and disciplinary records over his objection complied with the Arkansas FOIA. The city's notice proposed redacting personal information and withholding evaluation records unless they supported a final suspension or termination decision.

The AG said his request, including his objection, was virtually identical to the one answered in Opinion 2021-003. She referred him to that enclosed opinion for its analysis and conclusions. In Opinion 2021-003, the AG had not seen the requested records and had no information about the custodian's classification. She approved the proposed personal-information redactions. The city's evaluation-record position would be consistent with FOIA only if the other conditions of the four-part release test were also met. She could not resolve the specific objection in the three-day review because it required a factual inquiry; she noted that a court might provide a remedy.

For a custodian handling a similar request, Opinion 2021-003 calls for classifying each record before applying the relevant release test. Personnel records require a privacy balance; evaluation records require all four statutory conditions for release. This letter does not identify which of Harris's records belong in either category or direct release of any particular document.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2021. Verify current Arkansas law before relying on its rules or procedures.

Common questions

Did the AG decide that Harris's records should be released?
No. The letter refers to Opinion 2021-003, whose AG said she had not seen the records and could not decide whether any specific document was releasable.

Did the AG reject Harris's objection?
No. Opinion 2021-003 said a specific objection was too fact-intensive for the three-day advisory review and that a court might be able to hear the evidence and provide a remedy.

What parts of the city's proposed approach did Opinion 2021-003 address?
It found the proposed redaction of personal information consistent with FOIA. It treated the evaluation-record position as consistent only if the remaining conditions of the four-part test were met. It did not approve release of all personnel or disciplinary records.

How should a custodian assess an officer's disciplinary records?
The custodian must first classify each record. Opinion 2021-003 says personnel records and employee-evaluation records have different release tests; it did not classify the records requested here.

Background and statutory framework

Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(c)(3)(B)(i) allowed the subject of certain employment records to request AG review of a custodian's release decision. The AG referred Harris's request to Opinion 2021-003 because she said the legal analysis and its application were the same. That enclosed opinion left record-specific release and the officer's fact-specific objection unresolved.

Citations

• Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(c)(3)(B)(i) (Supp. 2019)
• Op. Att'y Gen. 2021-003 (enclosed analysis and conclusions)

Source

• Landing page: https://arkansasag.gov/divisions/opinions-foia/attorney-general-opinions-search/

Original opinion text

STATE OF ARKANSAS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
Opinion No. 2021-006
January 8, 2021
Jason Harris
c/o City of Little Rock Human Resources
500 West Markham, Suite 130W
Little Rock, AR 72201
Dear Officer Harris:
You have requested my opinion regarding the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"). Your request, which is made as the subject of the requested records, is based on Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(c)(3)(B)(i) (Supp. 2019). This subdivision authorizes the custodian, requester, or the subject of certain employee-related records to seek an opinion from this office stating whether the custodian's decision regarding the release of such records is consistent with the FOIA.

Your correspondence includes the notice you received from the City of Little Rock stating that the City has received a request under the FOIA for your personnel and disciplinary records. The City's custodian of records has determined that "this information is part of your personnel record and is releasable" after redacting "sensitive personal information such as address, date of birth, telephone number or social security number." The City has also informed you that "[e]valuations are not releasable unless they form the basis of a suspension or termination and only if they have reached their final administrative resolution." You object to the release of the records, and have asked for my opinion as to whether the custodian's decisions with respect to the records is consistent with the FOIA.

RESPONSE
Your request for my opinion regarding the custodian's decisions as to the classification and disclosure of your employment-related records, including your objections to those decisions, is virtually identical to the request I responded to in Op. Att'y Gen. 2021-003, published on Thursday, January 7, 2021. The legal analysis and its application to your request consequently are the same as in that previous opinion.

Therefore, I will not repeat the opinion herein, but instead refer you to the enclosed Opinion 2021-003 for the analysis and conclusions.

Sincerely,
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
Attorney General

Enclosure: Opinion No. 2021-003