In a recent binding opinion, the Public Access Counselor (“PAC”) found that the Chicago Housing Authority (“CHA”) violated the Freedom of Information Act when it partially denied a request for information regarding CHA properties, specifically, unit addresses and vacancies.
A nonprofit organization submitted a FOIA request seeking a file containing certain information about CHA properties, including the unit addresses of each property. CHA provided a spreadsheet of information responsive to the FOIA request but redacted part of the street addresses. CHA asserted that it redacted partial addresses “as a security measure” because the CHA had faced problems with housing activities and others forcibly entering vacant units and squatting in them.
Section 7(1)(v) of FOIA exempts records that consist of or depict “[v]ulnerability assessments, security measures, and response policies or plans.” According to the PAC, however, street addresses were none of these. The PAC explained that public bodies cannot redact records as a security measure in and of itself—the records must consist of or depict a security measure. And a street address alone does not depict a security measure.
This opinion demonstrates the limits of the “security measures” exemption to FOIA. Even if providing certain information to the public could impose security concerns, that does not automatically exempt that information from disclosure pursuant to a FOIA request. When responding to a FOIA request that could require disclosure of sensitive security-related information, consider whether other exemptions could apply.
Please contact a member of our Board Governance/Corporate practice group with questions.
