|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
M-436
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Board of Education for the City of Hamilton
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: This is an appeal under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ). The appellant submitted a request to the Board of Education for the City of Hamilton (the Board). The request indicated that it only pertains to "... information related to [the appellant's] August 31, 1992 letter of complaint charging systemic discrimination ..." against her son by five Board employees. For ease of reference, I will refer to the appellant's letter of August 31, 1992 as "the complaint". In particular, the appellant wanted access to: (1) all records in the possession of the Board and the school relating to the inquiry and investigation by the Superintendent of Schools (Area 1) into the conduct of the five Board employees (this part of the request also refers to a meeting which occurred on September 3, 1992); (2) all records in the possession of the Board and the school relating to the inquiry and investigation by the former Director of Education into the conduct of the five Board employees (this part of the request also refers to a meeting which occurred on September 25, 1992); (3) all records in the possession of the Board relating to the inquiry and investigation by the Chair of the Board into the conduct of the five Board employees (this part of the request also refers to a letter to the Chair dated December 18, 1992); (4) all records in the possession of the Board and the school relating to the inquiry and investigation by the Board's former Superintendent of Human Resources into the conduct of the five Board employees (this part of the request also refers to a meeting which occurred on April 8, 1993--also mentioned in the request which led to appeal M-9400425 and the resulting Order M-435); (5) all records in the possession of the Board and the school relating to the inquiry and investigation by the Board's Superintendent of Human Resources into the conduct of the five Board employees (this part of the request also refers to a meeting which occurred on October 14, 1993--also mentioned in the request which led to Appeal M-9400364 and the resulting Order M-434); (6) all records in the possession of the Board and the school from any other person or department who may have an interest in or need to know about the complaint and the allegations contained in it; (7) a computer message created by a named Board employee, or, if there is no record of the message, a copy of the computer log which authorized its removal; (8) a copy of any affidavit sworn by the Board employee regarding the contents of the message referred to in item (7); (9) all records in the possession of the Board and the school relating to the inquiry and investigation by the Director of Education into the conduct of the five Board employees; and (10) all other records related in any way to the complaint. In addition, the appellant requested answers to the following questions: (11) whether the Superintendent of Schools (Area 1) interviewed the five Board employees referred to in the complaint, and if so, when the interview took place; (12) whether the former Director of Education interviewed the five Board employees referred to in the complaint, and if so, when the interview took place; (13) whether the Board's former Superintendent of Human Resources interviewed the five Board employees referred to in the complaint, and if so, when the interview took place; (14) whether the Board's Superintendent of Human Resources interviewed the five Board employees referred to in the complaint, and if so, when the interview took place; (15) whether the Board's Superintendent of Human Resources is related to another named individual; and (16) whether anyone requested an affidavit from the Board employee referred to in item (7) above, regarding the contents of the computer message. The Board's response to the request was sent to the appellant's authorized representative. The Board provided access in full to a number of responsive records. No exemptions were claimed. In addition, the Board advised the appellant that no affidavit of the type described in item (8), above, had ever been requested or produced. The appellant commenced an appeal of the Board's decision on the basis that additional records should exist. The sole issue in this appeal is whether the Board's search for records was reasonable in the circumstances. A Notice of Inquiry was provided to the appellant and the Board. Representations were received from the Board only. DISCUSSION: REASONABLENESS OF SEARCH Where a requester provides sufficient details about the records which he or she is seeking and the Board indicates that additional records do not exist, it is my responsibility to ensure that the Board has made a reasonable search to identify responsive records. While the Act does not require that the Board prove to the degree of absolute certainty that such records do not exist, the search which the Board undertakes must be conducted by knowledgeable staff in locations where the records in question might reasonably be located. The appellant has not submitted representations. However, her letter of appeal provides information about her reasons for believing that additional records should exist. She states that, given the extensive records kept by the Board with respect to other activities, it is not credible that more detailed records were not kept regarding her complaint. She also refers to the Board's response to her request, in which the Freedom of Information and Privacy Co-ordinator (the Co-ordinator) states that she consulted the Superintendent of Schools for Area 1 during her attempts to locate records. The appellant queries why the other Board employees and officers mentioned in her request, or others who might have been able to assist the Co-ordinator, were not contacted for their assistance. The Board's representations refer to previous and concurrent requests made by the appellant and her representative. The Board's representations go on to state that the Commissioner's office "... has determined through three prior orders that the Board has taken all reasonable steps to conduct searches to locate records which would respond to the appellant's requests". On this basis, the Board takes the view that the request which is the subject of this appeal is "frivolous and vexatious". As part of its representations, the
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
MFIPPA
-
22(1)(a)
-
22(1)(a)(ii)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Dec 16, 1994
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|