Can the City of Calico Rock release employee salary, hire date, position title, and name records under Arkansas FOIA?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2021. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Arkansas law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The City of Calico Rock received the same FOIA request many other small Arkansas cities received in mid-2021: salary, hire date, position titles, and names of all employees for 2020. The custodian classified the records as personnel records and decided to release them with sensitive personal information redacted. Polly Killian, as a subject of the records, asked the AG whether release was consistent with FOIA.
The AG agreed. Compensation records of public employees are personnel records subject to release under the Young v. Rice balancing test, which favors disclosure when the records shed light on government workings. The custodian's plan to redact sensitive personal information (address, date of birth, phone, social security) was correct.
This opinion is one of a sequence of similar opinions issued in June 2021 to small Arkansas cities receiving identical FOIA requests. The legal framework and result are uniform.
What this means for you
Public employees in Calico Rock and other small AR cities
Your name, salary, hire date, and position title are public information under Arkansas FOIA. You cannot block release by objecting. Standard sensitive personal information (home address, DOB, phone, SSN, banking, medical) is redacted before release.
City clerks and FOIA custodians
The standard procedure: classify as personnel records, apply Young v. Rice balancing, redact the sensitive personal information list, release the rest. Document the redaction list applied.
Citizens and journalists
Compensation data for public employees in Arkansas cities, including small cities, is public. Use this opinion as authority for that conclusion.
Common questions
Does small-city status matter?
No. The same FOIA framework applies in cities of any size in Arkansas. Compensation data is releasable.
What gets redacted?
Standard list: home address, personal phone, personal email, employee personnel number, marital status, dates of birth, social security numbers, medical information, undercover officer identifying information, driver's license, insurance coverage, tax withholding, payroll deductions, banking information.
Background and statutory framework
Personnel records under § 25-19-105(b)(12) are exempt only when release would be a "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Young v. Rice, 308 Ark. 593 (1992), supplies the balancing test, with the scale tipped toward disclosure. The AG has long treated salary, hire date, title, and name records as releasable personnel records (Op. 2009-204, Op. 2008-129).
Citations
- Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(b)(12) (personnel-records exemption)
- Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(b)(13) (required redactions)
- Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(c)(1) (evaluation-records exemption)
- Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(c)(3)(B)(i) (AG opinion procedure)
- Pulaski Cty. v. Ark. Democrat-Gazette, Inc., 370 Ark. 435 (2007)
- Young v. Rice, 308 Ark. 593 (1992)
- Stilley v. McBride, 332 Ark. 306 (1998)
- Thomas v. Hall, 2012 Ark. 66
Source
Original opinion text
Opinion No. 2021-043
June 11, 2021
Polly Killian
c/o Stacy Stanford, City Clerk/Recorder/Treasurer
City of Calico Rock
P.O. Box 370
Calico Rock, AR 72519
Dear Ms. Killian:
You have requested my opinion regarding the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"). Your request, which is made as a 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 indicates that the City of Calico Rock has received a request under the FOIA for "records regarding the salary/compensation, hire date, position titles and names of any and all employees for the year 2020." You have attached a memorandum from the custodian of the records in which she has determined that the requested records are personnel records that are releasable pursuant to the FOIA, but that "sensitive personal information, such as address, date of birth, telephone number, or social security information," is not releasable. As a subject of the requested records, you ask for an opinion as to whether the custodian's decision regarding the release of the records is consistent with the FOIA.
RESPONSE
Because I have not seen any records that would be responsive to the FOIA request, I cannot opine about the releasability of any specific document or the need to redact any specific piece of information from an otherwise releasable document. I can state generally, however, that the bulk of the information requested (salary/compensation, hire date, position titles, and employee names) is subject to inspection and copying under the FOIA. Additionally, the custodian has correctly decided that sensitive personal information is not releasable.
DISCUSSION
The custodian has classified the requested records as personnel records. I have no information to suggest that the custodian's decision to classify them as personnel records is incorrect. Records of employees' salaries, hire dates, position titles, and names likely constitute personnel records.
Personnel records under Ark. Code Ann. § 25-19-105(b)(12) are open to public inspection and copying except "to the extent that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Young v. Rice, 308 Ark. 593 (1992), provides the balancing test that weighs the public's interest against the individual's privacy interest, with the scale tipped in favor of disclosure. The custodian's decision to release the records with sensitive personal information redacted is consistent with the FOIA.
A FOIA requester's identity or motive for making the request is generally irrelevant to whether a record must be released.
Sincerely,
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
Attorney General
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2021 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Arkansas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.