|
June 18, 1976
County Attorney for Fairfax County
74-75 576
This is in reply to your recent letter wherein you pose two
questions relating to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act:
"The [Fairfax County] Human Rights Commission in
resolving complaints within its jurisdiction is faced with the
question of whether complaints may be kept confidential until a
hearing is begun to resolve the complaint or the person complained
against waives confidentiality.
"Section 15D-6(B)(1) of the Fairfax County Code provides as
follows: .... Every complaint shall be held in confidence by the
Commission unless and until the complainant and the person
complained against consent in writing to its being made public or
a hearing is begun.
"My question is whether this provision conflicts with the
Virginia Freedom of Information Act, §2.1-340 et seq., Va.
Code Ann., wherein official records, as defined, are open to
inspection by any citizen of the state."
The related question posed by the [Fairfax County]
Tenant-Landlord Commission concerns the confidentiality of the
identities of tenants submitting complaints on rent increases to the
Commission staff. Under a proposed act of procedural guidelines by
which this Commission would compile and publish rent increase data,
the Commission would encode the names of complaining tenants in order
to avoid the disclosure of their identities to individuals other than
the Commission or its staff. It is unclear to me whether the proposed
encoding would conflict with the Freedom of Information Act
With respect to the Tenant-Landlord Commission, you indicate that
there is a County ordinance prohibiting disclosure of complaints
which is similar to the above-quoted ordinance relating to the Human
Rights Commission.
The Fairfax County Human Rights and Tenant-Landlord Commissions
are continuing governmental entities established by Fairfax County
and are, therefore, public bodies subject to the requirements of the
Freedom of Information Act. See §§2.1-341(a) and
2.1-341(e), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
Section 2.1-342(a), which governs disclosure of records by
governmental bodies, provides:
"(a) Except as otherwise specifically provided by law,
all official records shall be open to inspection and copying by
any citizens of this State during the regular office hours of the
custodian of such records. . . ." (Emphasis added.)
Complaints filed with the Human Rights Commission or the
Tenant-Landlord Commission are clearly "official records" within the
intendment of §2.1-341(b). In view of the explicit provisions of
§2.1-342(a), such complaints must be open for public inspection
unless specifically exempted by subsections (1)-(5) of
§2.1-342(b) or other provisions of law. None of the exemptions
set forth in §2.1-342(b) are applicable to complaints filed with
either Commission.
The language of §2.1-342(a) referring to exceptions
"otherwise specifically provided by law" does contemplate disclosure
exemptions provided for by provisions of law apart from those set
forth specifically in §2.1-342(b). Your letter recites the
language of § 15D-6(B)(1) of the Fairfax County Code providing
confidentiality to complaints filed with the Human Rights Commission
and refers to a similar proviso relative to Tenant-Landlord
Commission complaints. To interpret the above-quoted language of
§2.1-342(a) as encompassing county ordinances which provide
disclosure exemptions, would be subordinating a State statute to
local legislation. Carried to its logical conclusion, such an
interpretation would permit localities to exempt themselves totally
from provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. This result would
be wholly contrary to the obvious purpose and intent of the Act. In
this instance there are no other exemptions specifically provided by
State law. Thus, I am of the opinion that complaints filed with
either the Human Rights Commission or the Tenant-Landlord Commission
of Fairfax County are official records subject to the public
disclosure requirements of §2.1-342(a).
|