Kenneth M Silberstein
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
No. 814, C.D. 2010
January 6, 2011
The Commonwealth Court ruled that emails on the personal computer or in the personal email account of a public official are not considered records of an agency under the Right to Know Law.
Background
Stacey MacNeal requested that York Township provide township commissioners’ emails involving a developer. The township granted the request, but only provided emails located on the township’s computers. Records located on the commissioners’ personal computers were not provided.
MacNeal appealed to the Office of Open Records, which granted the appeal finding that the records on the commissioners’ personal computers were “in the possession” of the township.
One of the commissioners appealed, and a trial court reversed, ruling that MacNeal failed to carry her burden of proving that the requested records were public.
MacNeal appealed to the Commonwealth Court.
Commonwealth Court Decision
The court determined that emails and documents on the commissioner’s personal computer were not “records” of the agency that must be disclosed under the RTKL.
The court concluded that the commissioner “is not a governmental entity. He is an individual public official with no authority to act alone on behalf of the township.”
The court reasoned that any email or document “personally and individually” created by a commissioner is not a “record” subject to the RTKL because it does not document a transaction or activity of the agency.
The court concluded, “unless the emails and other documents in [the commissioner’s] possession were produced with the authority of [the] township, as a local agency, or were later ratified, adopted, and confirmed by [the] township, said requested records cannot be deemed ‘public records’ within the meaning of the RTKL as [they] are not ‘of the local agency.’”
As such, the Commonwealth Court affirmed the decision of the trial court.