2011 Government in the Sunshine Manual
My Florida Sunshine - B. Government in the Sunshine Law and Related Statutes
Page 1 of3
Home FAQs Sunshine Manual The "Sunshine" Law Sunshine Cases Additional Resources AG Opinions Press f~eleases
SIJNSHINE TRAINING
L
CONTACI' Us
address: Attorney General of Florida
The Capitol, PL-01
Tallahassee, FL 32399
phone: (850) 245-0179
website: www.mvfloridaleaal.com
online: Contact Form
news: Weeklv Newsletter
Search: (!) This Site IDWeb 1~~!,~L?~~~~~,~~i!~~i~
,,18
AU OPINIONS
June 9, 2011
Absten~ion from volin!:!
June 8, 2011
.!lr"Gor\j$. eGorW!1li,~;,,\!l!V&jQlillll!nj
iilll!QQY
May 27,2011
ReQorgs, Q1annsr of grQviding
~
GOVERNMENT-IN-mE-SUNSHINE MANUAL
Chapter updated,,' 01/1412011
B. GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAw AND RELATED STATUTES
288.011 Public meetings and records; publiC insp$ctlon; criminal and civil
penaltles.-.
(1) All meetings of any board or commission of any slate agency or authority or of any
agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation. or political subdivision, except
as otherwise provided in the Constitution, at which official acts are to be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the
public at all times, and no resolution. rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such meeting,
The board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all such meetings,
(2) The minutes of a meeting of any such board or commission of any such state agency or authority shall be promptly recorded,
and such records shall be open to public Inspection. The circuit courts of this state shall have jurisdiction to Issue injunctions to
enforce the purposes of this section upon application by any citizen of this state,
(3)(a) Any public officer who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a noncriminal infraction, punishable by fine not
exceeding $500.
(b) Any person who is a member of a board or commission or of any state agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation.
or political subdivision who knowingly violates the provisions of this section by attending a meeting not held in accordance with the
provisions hereof Is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided In s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(c) Conduct which occurs outside the state which would constitute a knowing violation of this section is a misdemeanor of the
second degree, punishable as provided In s. 775,082 or s. 775,083.
(4) Whenever an action has been filed against any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority
of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision to enforce the provisions of this section or to invalidate the actions of
any such board. commission, agency, or authority, which action was taken in violation of this section. and the court determines that
the defendant or defendants to such action acted in violation of this section, the court shall assess a reasonable attorney's fee
against such agency, and may assess a reasonable attorney's fee against the Individual filing such an action if the court finds It was
flied in bad faith or was frivolous. Any fees so assessed may be assessed against the individual member or members of such board
or commission; provided, that In any case where the board or commission seeks the advice of its attorney and suCh advice is
followed, no such fees shall be assessed against the individual f11ember or members of the board or commission, However, this
subsection shall not apply to a state attorney or his or her duly authorized assistants or any officer charged with enforCing the
provisions of this section,
(5) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal
corporation, or political subdivision appeals any court order which has found said board, commission, agency, or authority to have
violated this section. and such order is affirmed, the couri shall assess a reasonable attorney's fee for the appeal against such
board, cornmission, agency, or authority, Any fees so assessed may be assessed against the individual member or members of
such board or commission; provided, that In any case where the board or commission seeks the advice of its attorney and such
advice Is followed. no such fees shall be assessed against the individual member or members of the board or commission.
(6) All persons subject to subsection (1) are prohibited from holding meetings at any facility or location which discriminates on the
basis of sex, age, race. Creed, color. origin, or economic status or which operates in such a manner as to unreasonably restrict
public access to such a facility,
(7) Whenever any member of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county,
municipal corporation. or potitlcal subdivision Is charged with a violation of this section and is subsequently acquitted, the board or
commission Is authorized to reimburse said member for any portion of his or her reasonable attorney's fees,
(8) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or
authority of any county, municipal corporation. or political subdivision. and the chief administrative or executive officer of the
governmental entity, may meet in private with the entity's attorney to discuss pending litigation to which the entity Is presently a
pal1y before a court or administrative agency. provided that the following conditions are met:
(a) The entity's attorney shall advise the entity at a public meeting that he or she desires advice concerning the litigation,
(b) The subject matter of the meeting shall be confined to settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation
expenditures,
(c) The entire session shall be recorded by a certified court reporter. The reporter shall record the times of commencement and
termination of the session, all discussion and proceedings, the names of all persons present at any time, and the names of all
http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/sunmanual/73A5BCF3DE03161 0852566F300722F35 7/19/2011
My Florida Sunshine - B. Government in the Sunshine Law and Related Statutes
Page 2 of3
persons speaking. No portion of the session shall be off the record. The court reporter's notes shall be fully transcribed and filed
with the entitys clerk within a reasonable time after the meeting.
(d) The entity shall give reasonable pUblic notice of the time and date of the attorney..client session and the names of persons who
will be attending the session. The session shall commence at an open meeting at which the persons chairing the meeting shall
announce the commencement and estimated length of the attorney-client session and the names of lhe persons attending, At the
conclusion of the attorney-client session, the meeting shall be reopened and the person chairing the meeting shall announce the
termination of the session.
(e) The transcript shall be made part of the public record upon conclusion of the litigation,
Related sections read as follows:
286.0105 Notices of meetings and hearings must advise that a record Is required to appeal,,,.
Each board, commission, or agency of this state or of any political subdivision thereof shall include in the notice of any meeting or
hearing, if notice of the meeting or hearing is required, of such board, commission, or agency, conspicuously on such notice, the
advice that. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the board, agency, or commission with respect to any matter
considered at such meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he or she may
need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is to be based. The requirements of this section do not apply to the notice provided in s. 200,065(3),
288.0111 Legislative review of certain exemptions from requirements for public meetings and recordkeeplng by
governmental entities.--
The provisions of s, 119.15, the Open Government Sunset Review Act of 1995, apply to the provisions of law which provide
exemptions to s. 286,011, as provided in s. 119.15,
286.0113 General exemptions from public meetings..-
(1) That portion of a meeting that would reveal a security system plan or portion thereof made confidential and exempt by s.
119.071(3)(a) is exempt from S, 286,011 and s, 24(b), Art, I of the State Constitution.
(2)(a) A meeting at which a negotiation with a vendor is conducted pursuant to s, 287.057(1) is exempt from s. 286.D11 and s. 24
(b), Art, I of the State Constitution,
(b)1. A complete recording shall be made of any meeting made exempt in paragraph (a), No portion of the meeting may be held off
the record,
2. The recording required under subparagraph 1. is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such
time as the agency provides notice of a decision or intended decision pursuant to s, 120.57(3)(a) or until 20 days after the final
competitive sealed replies are all opened, whichever occurs earlier,
3. If the agency rejects all sealed replies. the recording remains exempt from s, 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art, I of the State
Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of a decision or intended decision pursuant to s. 120,57(3)(a) concerning
the reissued invitation to negotiate or until the agency withdraws the reissued invitation to negotiate, A recording is not exempt for
longer than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all replies.
(c) This subsection is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed
on October 2, 2011, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature,
286.0116 Access to local public officials; quasl.judicial proceedings on local government land use matters.--
(1)(a) A county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution removing the presumption of prejudice from ex parte
communications with local public officials by establishing a process to disclose ex parte communications with such officials
pursuant to this subsection or by adopting an alternative process for such disclosure, However, this subsection does not require a
county or municipality 10 adopt any ordinance or resolution establishing a disclosure process,
(b) As used In lhis subsection, the term "local public official" means any elected or appointed public official holding a county or
municipal office who recommends or takes quasi-judicial action as a member of a board or commission. The term does not include
a member of the board or commission of any state agency or authority,
(c) Any person not otherwise prohiblled by statute, charter provision, or ordinance may discuss with any local public official the
merits of any matter on which action may be taken by any board or commission on which the local public official is a member. If
adopted by county or municipal ordinance or resolution, adherence to the following procedures shall remove the presumption of
prejudice arising from ex parte communications with local public officials,
1. The substance of any ex parte communication with a local public official which relates toquasi.judlcial action pending before the
official is not presumed prejudicial to the action if the subject of the communication and the identity of the person, group, or entity
wilh whom the communication took place is disclosed and made a part of the record before final action on the matter,
2. A local public official may read a written communicalion from any person. However, a written communication that relates to quasi
-judicial action pending before a local publiC official shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action, and such written communication
shall be made a part of the record before final action on the matter,
3. Local public officials may conduct Investigations and site visits and may receive expert opinions regarding quasi.judicial action
pending before them. Such activities shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action if the existence of the investigation, site visit, or
expert opinion is made a part of the record before final action on the matter.
4. Disclosure made pursuant to subparagraphs 1., 2., and 3, must be made before or during the public meeting at which a vote is
taken on such matters, so that persons who have opinions contrary to those expressed in the ex parte communication are given a
reasonable opportunity to refute or respond to the communication. This subsection does not subject local public officials to part III
of chapter 112 for not complying with this paragraph.
(2)(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of subseclion (1), a county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution establishing
the procedures and provisions of this subsection for quasl.judicial proceedings on local government land use matters. The
http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/ sunmanual/73 A5BCF3 D E03161 08525 66F3 00722F3 5 7/19/2011
My Florida Sunshine - B. Government in the Sunshine Law and Related Statutes
Page 3 of3
ordinance or resolution shall provide procedures and provisions identical to this subsection. However, this subsection does not
require a county or municipality to adopt such an ordinance or resolution,
(b) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person who appears before the decisionmaking body
who is not a party or party-intervenor shall be allowed to testify before the decision making body, subject to control by the
decision making body, and may be requested to respond to questions from the decision making body, but need not be sworn as a
witness, is not required to be subject to cross-examination, and is not required to be qualified as an expert witness, The
decisionmaking body shall assign weight and credibility to such testimony as it deems appropriate, A party or party-intervenor in a
quasi-judicial proceeding on locai government land use matters, upon request by another party or party-Intervenor, shall be sworn
as a witness, shall be subject to cross-examination by other parties or party-intervenors, and shall be required to be qualified as an
expert witness, as appropriate.
(c) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local govemment land use matters, a person may not be precluded from communicating
directly with a member of the decision making body by application of ex parte communication prohibitions. Disclosure of such
communications by a member of the decision making bOdy is not required, and such nondisclosure shall not be presumed
prejudicial to the decision of the decision making body, All decisions of the decision making body in a quasi-judicial proceeding on
local government land use matters must be supported by substantial, competent evidence In the record pertinent to the proceeding,
irrespective of such communications,
(3) This section does not restrict the authority of any board or commission to establish rules or procedures governing public
hearings or contacts with local public officials.
286.012 Voting requirement at meetings of governmental bodies.--
No member of any state, county, or municipal governmental board, commission, or agency who is present at any meeting of any
such body at which an official decision, ruling, or other official act is to be taken or adopted may abstain from voting in regard to any
such decision, ruling, or act; and a vote shall be recorded or counted for each such member present, except when, with respect to
any such member, there is, or appears to be, a possible conflict of interest under the provisions of s, 112.311, s. 112,313, or s.
112.3143, In such cases, said member shall compiy with the disclosure requirements of s, 112.3143.
286.26 Accessibility of public meetings to the physically handlcapped.--
(1) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority, or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal
corporation, or other political subdivision, which has scheduled a meeting at which official acts are to be taken receives, at least 48
hours prior to the meeting, a written request by a physically handicapped person to attend the meeting, directed to the chairperson
or director of such board, commission, agency, or authority, such chairperson or director shall provide a manner by which such
person may attend the meeting at its scheduled site or reschedule the meeting to a site which would be accessible to such person.
(2) If an affected handicapped person objects in the written request, nothing contained in the provisions of this section shall be
construed or interpreted to permit the use of human physical assistance to the physically handicapped in lieu of the construction or
use of ramps or other mechanical devices in order to comply with the provisions of this section.
@ 2009 Office of the Attomey General of Florida Privacy Pqli\;y
http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/sunmanuaI173A5BCF3DE03161 0852566F300722F35 7/19/2011
My Florida Sunshine ~ Introduction
Page 1 of 1
Home FAQs Sunshine Manual 'The "Sunshine" Law Sunshine Cases Additional Resources AG Opinions Press ['(eleases
SIJNSHI.NE TRAINING
CONTACT Us
address: Attorney General of Florida
The Capitoi, PL-01
Tallahassee, FL 32399
phone: (850) 245.0179
web site: www.rnvfloridaleaal.com
online: Contt;lct Form
news: Weeklv Newsletter
Search: (41) This Site CD Web 1~~!::E~.::~r?t~.?ri,t:,~i~J GD
AG OPINIONS
June 9, 2011
Abstonsion from vo!inq
June 8, 2011
E@!;Qg!~.,,,~.~~mll.!l!ig.s!.@v.@Jm.lm~n!
;aQ~mcy
May 27,2011
B~2lrds. mannc,[ of providing
I\l.GQ.Cili!
GOVERNMENT~IN-THE~SUNSHINE MANUAL
Chapter updated: 01/1412011
INTRODUCI'ION
A Public Polley of Open Government
The Florida Constitution safeguards every Floridian's right of access to government
meetings and records. The comprehensive breadth and scope of our open government
laws have served for many years as a modet for the rest of the nation. In Florida,
disclosure is the standard, unless the Legislature concludes that the public necessity compels an exemption from our strong open
government laws.
The best way to ensure that government truly represents the people it serves is to keep the government open and accessible to
those people. For several decades now., Florida,has shown that openness is the key to building and maintaining publiC trust in the
institutions of government. The Attorney General's Office Is committed to maintaining and building upon this tradition of openness.
The Government in the Sunshine Manual is prepared on an annual basis by the Florida Attorney General's Office to serve as a
guide to those seeking to become familiar with the requirements of the open government laws. It is intended for both governmental
agencies and the citizens they serve.
This year's edition of the Manual incorporates court decisions, Attorney General Opinions, and legislation in place as of October 1.
2010.
Additional information about the Sunshine Law, including answers to frequently asked questions, is available through the Office of
the Attorney General's website: www.myflorldalegal.com.
Suggestions from users of this manual are welcomed and appreciated. Please forward comments to: The Office of the Attorney
General, The Capitol, PL-01, Tallahassee Florida 32399-1050; telephone number (850) 245-0140.
@2009 Office of the Attorney General of Florida Priv~cv~
http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/sunmanual/77137DF34AE7 A9B9852566F300539405 7/19/2011
, Inc. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
o
H
PART I
GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW
E
E
INE
? ... ... ... ...... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .......
c.
d.
c.
1 .
c.
E
o
1 .
c.
c.
In
c.
d.
e.
f.
h.
H.
? ... ... ... ... ... ..............
PART II
PUBLIC RECORDS
A. WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT? ..........................................
A
? ......... ......................................................................................................... ...
. 11
c.
ca s e s .........................................
ca s e s ..................................
c.
e.
f.
h.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
I.
f.
c.
e.
LI
or
1
1
1
1
1
c.
e
f.
g.
h.
I.
J.
k.
I.
11 .
c.
a.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
e.
f.
H.
I.
J.
L.
1
c.
11 .
d.
1
s ............... ...........................................................................
N.
NA
APPENDICES
o
.,... ... ... ... ....
N ....... .. ............................. ................ ...........
INDEX TO EXEMPTIONS
A Public Policy of Open Government
INTRODUCTION
The Florida Constitution safeguards every person's right of ac cess to public meetings
and records. The comprehensive breadth and scope of our open government laws have
served f or many years as a model f or the rest 0 f the nat ion. In Florida, di sclosure is the
standard, unless t he Legislature concludes t hat pub lic necessity compels an exemption
from our strong open government laws.
The best way to ensure that government truly represents the people it serves is to keep
the government open and accessible to those people. For several decades now, Florida has
shown that openness is the key to building and maintaining public trust in the institutions of
government. The Attorney General's Office is committed to maintaining and building upon
this tradition of openness.
The Government in the Sunshine Manual is prepared on an an nual basis by the Florida
Attorney General's Office to serve as a gui de to those seeking to become familiar with the
requirements of the open government laws. It is intended for both governmental agencies
and the citizens they serve.
This year's edition of t he manual incorporates court dec isions, Attorney General
Opinions, and legislation in place as of October 1 , 2010.
Additional information about the Sunshine Law, including answers to frequently asked
questions, i s available through t he 0 ffice of t he A ttorney General's website:
www.myfloridalegal.com .
Suggestions from users of this manual are welcomed and appreciated. Please forward
comments to: The Office of the Attorney General, The Capitol, PL-01, Tallahassee, Florida
32399-1050; telephone number (850) 245-0140.
Legislative Highlights
The following ar e some of the more significant ac tions which oc curred dur ing t he 2010 regular legislative
session relating to the public's right of access to meetings and records.
Credit History--Credit history information and credit scores held by the Office of Financial Regulation within
the Department of Financial Services f or pur poses of I icensing loan or iginators, mortgage brokers, and
mortgage lenders are exempt from disclosure except as provided therein. Chapter 2010-169, Laws of Florida,
amending s. 494.00125, F.S., to add a new subsection (3).
Examination techniques of Office of Financial Regulation--Information revealing examination techniques or
procedures used by the Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to Ch. 517, F .S., the Florida Securities and
Investor Protection A ct, is confidential a nd ex empt from di sclosure. Chapter 2010-65, Laws of Florida,
creating s. 517.2016, F .5.
Local Government's Ethics Investigations--Where a county or municipality has es tablished a local
investigatory process to enforce more stringent standards of conduct and disclosure requirements as provided
in s. 112.326, F.S., the complaint and records relating to the complaint or to any preliminary investigation are
exempt until the complaint is dismissed as legally insufficient, the alleged violator requests in writing that such
records and proceedings be made public, or the county or municipality determines that probable cause exists.
Chapter 2010-130, Laws of Florida, amending s. 112.324(2), F.S.
Public Defenders and Assistant Public Defenders, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel and
assistant counsel-- The ho me add resses, telephone num bers, and photographs of current or former public
defenders, assistant public defenders, criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, and assistant criminal conflict
and civil regional counsel as well as the home addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment of
the spouses and children of such defenders or counsel, and the names and locations of schools and day care
facilities attended by the children of such defenders or counsel are ex empt from di sclosure. Chapter 2010-
171, Laws of Florida, creating s. 119.071 (4)(d)1.j., F .5.
Public Transit Providers-- Personal identifying information held by a public transit provider for the purpose of
facilitating the prepayment of transit fares or the acquisition of a prepaid transit fare card or similar device is
exempt from disclosure. Chapter 2010-196, Laws of Florida, creating s. 341.3026, F .5.
Recordings of Closed Meetings--Several bi lis were enac ted into I aw requiring the recording of closed
meetings but providing that such recordings ar e ex empt from di sclosure as pr ovided t herein. See, e.g.,
Chapter 2010-76, Laws of Florida, amending s. 497.172, F.S. (closed meeting of the Board of Funeral,
Cemetery, and Consumer Services where licensure examination questions or answers are discussed, as well
as of a closed meeting of a probable cause panel of the board); Chapter 2010-40, Laws of Florida, amending
s. 383.412, F.S. (closed meetings of state child abuse death review committee or local committee); Chapter
2010-77, Laws of Florida, amending s. 1005.38, F.S. (closed meeting of a probable cause panel of the
Commission for I ndependent Education); Chapter 2010-89, Laws of Florida, amending s. 627.0628, F.S.
(closed meeting of the Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology or of a rate proceeding on
insurer's rate filing at which confidential and exempt trade secrets are discussed).
Stalking Victims--The names, addresses, and telephone num bers of stalking or aggravated stalking victims
held by the Office of the Attorney General or contained in voter registration records and voting records held by
the Department of State or the supervisor of elections are exempt from disclosure. Chapter 2010-115, Laws of
Florida, amending s. 97.0585, F.S., to add a new subsection (3).
PART I
GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW
A. WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE SUNSHINE LAW?
Florida's Government in the Sunshine Law, commonly referred to as the Sunshine
Law, pr ovides aright 0 f access tog overnmental pr oceedings of public bo ards 0 r
commissions at both the state and local levels. The law is eq ually applicable to elected
and a ppointed boar ds, and applies to a ny gathering of two or more members 0 f t he
same board to discuss some matter which will foreseeably come before that board for
action. There are three basic requirements of s. 286.011, F.S.:
(1) meetings of public boards or commissions must be open to the public;
(2) reasonable notice of such meetings must be given; and
(3) minutes of the meetings must be taken and promptly recorded.
The complete text of the Government in the Sunshine Law and related statutes may
be found in Appendix B.
A constitutional right of access to meetings of collegial public bodies is recognized in
Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const. See Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance Company v. Magaha, 769
So.2d 1012,1021 (Fla. 2000), noting that the Sunshine Law "is of both constitutional
and statutory dimension." Virtually all collegial public bodies are covered by the open
meetings mandate of this constitutional provision with the exception of the judiciary and
the state Leg islature, which has its own constitutional provision requiring access. The
only exceptions are those established by law or by the Constitution. The complete text
of Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., may be found in Appendix A of this manual.
B. WHAT AGENCIES ARE COVERED BY THE SUNSHINE LAW?
1. Are all public agencies subject to the Sunshine Law?
The Government in the Sunshine Law applies to "any board or commission of any
state ag ency or aut hority or of any ag ency or aut hority of an y county, municipal
corporation, or political subdivision." The statute thus applies to public collegial bodies
within this state, at the local as well as state level. City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245
So. 2 d 38 ( Fla. 1971). It i s eq ually appl icable t 0 el ected a nd appointed bo ards or
commissions. AGO 73-223.
Florida courts have stated that it was the Legislature's intent to extend application of
the Sunshine Law so as to bind "every' board or commission' 0 f the s tate, or 0 f any
county or political subdivision over which it has dominion and control." Times Publishing
Company v. Williams, 222 So. 2d 470,473 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969), disapproved in part on
other grounds, Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985).
And see Turner v. Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148, 155 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1980), affirmed and
remanded, 38 9 S o. 2 d 118 1 ( Fla. 1980) (legislative requirement that certain board
meetings must be open to the public does not imply that the board could meet privately
to discuss other matters).
Based upon t he specific terms 0 f t he statute and t he "dominion and control" test
approved by t he courts, t he following ar e some of t he entities which t he Attorney
General's Office has concluded are subject to the Sunshine Law:
civil service boards--AGOs 7 9-63, 73 -370, 71 -29 ( municipal) a nd 80 -27
(sheriff) ;
charter school personnel board--AGO 10-14;
county and municipal boards--AGOs 0 4-35 ( city risk management
committee), 8 5-55 ( downtown redevelopment t ask force), 83-43 (board 0 f
adjustment), 7 6-230 ( beautification committee), a nd 73-366 ( board of
governors of municipal country club);
interlocal agreement boards--AGOs 84-16 (five-county consortium created
pursuant to Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act), 82-66 (regional sewer facility
board), 76-193 (Central Florida Commission on t he Status of Women), and
Inf. 0 p. toN icoletti, November 1 8, 19 87 ( Loxahatchee Council 0 f
Governments, Inc.);
regulatory boards--AGOs 76-225 (accountancy), and 74-84 (dentistry);
special district boards--AGOs 7 4-169 (fire control di strict), and 73 -08
(mosquito control district).
2. Are advisory boards which make recommendations or committees established
only for fact-finding subject to the Sunshine Law?
a. Publicly created advisory boards which make recommendations
Advisory boards created pursuant to law or ordinance or otherwise established by
public agencies are subject to the Sunshine Law, even though their recommendations
are not binding upon t he entities that create t hem. See Town of Palm Beach v.
Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 ( Fla. 1 974) (citizen pi anning committee app ointed by city
council t 0 as sist i n revision of zoning or dinances subject t 0 Sunshine Law). The
Gradison court, concluding that the committee served as the alter ego of the council in
making tentative decisions, stated that "any committee established by the Town Council
to ac tin any type of adv isory capacity would be subject tot he pr ovisions 0 f t he
government in the sunshine law." Id. at 476. Accord Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc. v.
Centrust Savings Bank, 535 So. 2d 694, 695 (Fla. 3d D CA 1 988) (committee which
compiled a report that was perfunctorily accepted by the board made a significant ruling
affecting dec ision-making pr ocess a nd w as subject t 0 s. 286.011;" ad hoc adv isory
board, even if its power is limited to making recommendations to a public agency and
even i fit possesses no authority t 0 bi nd t he agency in any way, i s subject tot he
Sunshine Law"); Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 85 7,
869 ( Fla. 3d D CA 19 94) ( committee es tablished by county commission ton egotiate
lease agreement subject to s. 286.011: "the Sunshine Law equally binds all members of
governmental bodies, be they adv isory committee m embers or el ected officials"); and
Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (Sunshine Law applies to site
plan review committee created by county ordinance to serve in an advisory capacity to
the county manager).
The Attorney General's 0 ffice h as issued nu merous 0 pinions di scussing t he
application of the Sunshine Law to advisory committees. The following are some of the
advisory committees which have been found to be subject to the Sunshine Law:
community issues advisory bodies--AGOs 9 8-13 ( citizen adv isory
committee appointed by city council to make recommendations to the council
regarding city government a nd city services), 93 -41 ( criminal ju stice
commission es tablished by county or dinance t 0 develop and make
recommendations on criminal justice issues i n t he county), a nd 8 5-55
(community certification committee organized by city to ac ton its beh alf i n
seeking designation of city as a blue chip community under a Department of
Commerce program);
employee or personnel advisory bodies--AGOs 96-32 (employee advisory
committee established pursuant to special law), 92-26 (committee responsible
for making recommendations to city council on personnel matters), and 84-70
(grievance committees established pursuant to county personnel manual and
responsible f or bringing about "a fair an d eq uitable settlement 0 f the
complaint");
education advisory bodies--AGOs 0 3-28 ( business assistance center
advisory council created by community college boar d 0 f trustees), 01 -84
(school advisory councils created pursuant t 0 former s . 22 9.58 [now s .
1001.452], F .S.), and 74-267 (Council of Deans appointed by state university
president) ;
legislation implementation advisory bodies--AGOs 9 2-79 ( advisory
committee authorized by statute to assist state ag ency with t he
implementation 0 f I egislation), a nd 85-76 ( ad hoc committee appointed by
mayor for purpose of making recommendations concerning legislation);
planning or property acquisition advisory bodies--AGOs 0 5-07 ( lake
restoration council legislatively created to ad vise water management district
board), 0 2-24 ( vegetation committee created by city c ode to make
recommendations t 0 city council and planning department regarding
vegetation and proposed development), and 86-51 (land selection committee
appointed by water management di strict to create proposed land acquisition
list) .
The Sunshine Law applies to adv isory committees ap pointed by a single publ ic
official as well as those appointed by a collegial board. See, e.g., Wood v. Marston, 442
So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983) (Sunshine Law applies to ad hoc advisory committee appointed
by university president to screen applications and make recommendations for position
of law school dean as committee, in dec iding which appl icants tor eject from further
consideration, performed a pol icy-based, dec ision-making function); Silver Express
Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA
1997) (committee established by community college purchasing director to consider and
rank various contract proposals must meet in the Sunshine); and Krause v. Reno, 366
So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (Sunshine Law governs advisory group created by city
manager to assist in screening applications and tor ecommend several appl icants for
the position 0 f chief of police). Accord AGOs 05-05 ( fact th at advisory group w as
created by chief of police and not city commission and its recommendations were made
to police chief would not remove group from ambit of the Sunshine Law), 87-42 (ad hoc
committee appointed by mayor to meet with Chamber of Commerce and draft proposal
for transfer 0 f city pr operty); and Inf. 0 p. to La mar, August 2, 1993 (transition team
made up of citizens appoi nted by mayor tom ake recommendations 0 n city
government's reorganization).
b. Fact-finding committees
A limited exception to the applicability of the Sunshine Law to advisory committees
has been recognized for advisory committees established for fact-finding only. When a
committee has been established strictly f or, and conducts 0 nly, f act-finding activities,
i.e., strictly information gathering and reporting, the activities of that committee are not
subject to S. 286.011, F .S. Cape Publications, Inc. v. City of Palm Bay, 473 So. 2d 222
(Fla. 5t h DCA 1 985). Accord AGO 95-06 (when a group, 0 n behalf 0 f a public en tity,
functions solely a s a f act-finder or information gatherer with no dec ision-making
authority, no II board or c ommission" subject tot he Sunshine L aw i s created). "In
determining whether a committee is subject to the Sunshine Law, the actual function of
the committee must b e scrutinized t 0 determine whether I tis ex ercising par t 0 f t he
decision-making f unction by sorting through options and making recommendations to
the governmental body. II Inf. Op. to Randolph, June 10, 2010.
For example, the court in Bennett v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976),
held that a fact-finding committee appointed by a community college president to report
to him on employee working conditions was not subject to the Sunshine Law. And see
Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983); and Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785
(Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (Sunshine Law did not apply to informal meetings of staff where the
discussions were II merely informational, II w here no ne 0 f the individuals at tending t he
meetings had any decision-making authority during the meetings, and where no formal
action was taken or could have been taken at the meetings).
This 'fact-finding' exception, however, applies only to advisory committees and not to
boards that have" ultimate dec isionmaking aut hority." See Finch v. Seminole County
School Board, 995 S o. 2 d 1 068 (Fla. 5th D CA 20 08), hol ding that th e fact-finding
exception d id not a pply to a school board as t he ultimate dec ision-making aut hority;
thus the board could not take a fact-finding tour without complying with the Sunshine
Law even though school board members were separated from each other by several
rows of s eats, did n ot di scuss their pr eferences or opi nions, and no vote was taken
during the trip.
When a committee h as a dec ision-making function in ad dition to fact-finding, t he
Sunshine Law is applicable. See Wood v. Marston, supra at 938, recognizing that while
a II search a nd s creen" committee a ppointed by a university pr esident ha d a fact-
gathering role i n soliciting and compiling appl ications, the committee also "had an
equally undi sputed de cision-making function ins creening t he a pplicants" by dec iding
which of the applicants to reject from further consideration, and thus was subject to the
Sunshine Law. And see Roscow v. Abreu, No. 03-CA-1833 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. August 6,
2004) (committee created by the state department of transportation and composed of
officials from s tate, local and federal ag encies w as subject t 0 the Sunshine Law
because the committee was responsible for screening and evaluating potential corridors
and alignments for a possible expansion of the Suncoast Parkway).
Similarly, in A GO 94-21, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice advised that the Sunshine
Law governed t he meetings of a negotiating team that w as created by a city
commission to negotiate with a sports organization on be half of the city. Even though
the resolution creating t he team provided that t he neg otiations were subject t 0
ratification and approval by the city commission, the team was authorized to do more
than mere fact-finding in that it would be "participating in the decision-making process
by ac cepting some opt ions while rejecting ot hers for pr esentment of t he final
negotiations to the city commission.II Id.
3. Are private organizations subject to the Sunshine Law?
A more difficult question is presented with private organizations which are providing
services to state or local government. The Attorney General's Office has recognized that
private organizations generally are not subject to the Sunshine Law unless the private
organization has been created by a publ ic entity, has been delegated t he authority to
perform some governmental function, or pi ays an integral part in the dec ision-making
process of a public entity. AGO 07-27.
Thus, for ex ample, the Sunshine L aw does n ot apply t 0 a private nonpr ofit
corporation established by local business people to foster economic development where
no delegation of legislative or governmental functions by any local governmental entity
has oc curred a nd t he corporation does not ac tin an advisory capacity t 0 a ny such
entity. Inf. Op. to Hatcher and Thornton, September 15, 1992. Accord Inf. Op. to Gaetz
and Coley, December 17, 2 009. Compare AGO 1 0-30, concluding t hat a pr ivate
economic advisory council, delegated t he responsibility of accomplishing t he county's
economic development strategic plan, was subject to the Sunshine Law. And see Inf.
Ops. to Armesto, September 18, 1979 (meetings of political parties are not subject to s.
286.011, F.S.), and Fasano, June 7, 1996 (Sunshine Law does not apply to meetings of
a homeowners' association board).
However, as discussed below, the Sunshine Law applies to private entities created
by law or by public agencies, and to private entities providing services to governmental
agencies an d ac ting on behalf of t hose agencies i n t he performance of their publ ic
duties.
a. Private entities created pursuant to law or by public agencies
The Supreme Court has stated that "[t]he Legislature intended to extend application
of the 'open meeting' concept so as to bind every 'board or commission' of the state, or
of any county or pol itical subdivision over which [ the Leg islature] has do minion or
control." City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38,40 (Fla. 1971). Recognizing that
the Sunshine Law should be I iberally construed to give effect to its public purpose, the
Court has applied the Sunshine Law to a citizen's advisory committee established by,
and active on behalf of, a city council. See Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d
473, 478 (Fla. 1974).
Applying these pr inciples, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice h as concluded that t he
following private organizations are subject to the Sunshine Law: Enterprise Florida, Inc.,
board of di rectors, created by statute which pr escribed its membership, powers and
duties, AGO 92-80; Prison Rehabilitative Industries and Diversified Enterprises [PRIDE],
a nonprofit corporation established by state law to manage correctional work programs
of the Department of Corrections, AGO 04-44; John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art
Foundation, Inc., established pursuant to statute as a not-for-profit corporation to assist
the museum i n carrying out i ts functions, A GO 92 -53; education direct-support
organizations, A GO 0 5-27 and Inf. 0 p. t 0 Chiumento, June 2 7, 1990 ; no t-for-profit
corporation created by a city redevelopment agency to assist in the implementation of
its redevelopment pi an, A GO 9 7-17; Council on Aging 0 f St. Luc ie, I nc., a nonprofit
organization incorporated pursuant tot he II Community C are for the Elderly A ct, II AGO
98-55; Florida High School A ctivities Association, Inc., I egislatively des ignated as the
governing or ganization 0 f at hletics i n Florida pu blic schools, A GO 98 -42; board 0 f
trustees of an insurance trust fund created pursuant to collective bargaining ag reement
between a city and the employee union, AGO 98-01; and Inf. Op. to Martelli, July 20,
2009 (State Fair Authority, created by statute as a public corporation).
b. Private entities providing services to public agencies
Much of t he litigation regarding t he application of the op en government laws t 0
private organizations has been in the area of public records, and the courts have often
looked to Ch. 119, F .S., in determining the applicability of the Sunshine Law. See Cape
Coral Medical Center, Inc. v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 390 So. 2d 1216,
1218 n.5 (Fla. 2d D CA 1980) (inasmuch as the policies behind Ch. 119, F .S., and s.
286.011, F .S., are similar, they should be read together); Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d
934, 938 (Fla. 1983); and Krause v. Reno, 366 So. 2d 1244, 1252 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
As the courts have emphasized in analyzing t he application of Ch. 11 9, F .S., to
entities doing business with governmental agencies, the mere receipt of public funds by
private corporations, is not, standing alone, sufficient to bring the organization within the
ambit of t he op en government requirements. See, e.g., News and Sun-Sentinel
Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1 029 (Fla.
1992) (records of private architectural firm not subject to Ch. 119, F.S., merely because
firm contracted with school board). Similarly, a private corporation performing services
for a public agency and receiving compensation for such services is not by virtue of this
relationship alone subject to the Sunshine Law unless the public agency's governmental
or legislative functions have bee n del egated to it. McCoy Restaurants, Inc. v. City of
Orlando, 392 So. 2 d 252 (Fla. 1 980) (airlines ar e not by v irtue of t heir I ease with the
aviation authority public representatives subject to the Sunshine Law); and AGO 98-47
(Sunshine Law does not ap ply t 0 pr ivate nong overnmental or ganization when t he
organization counsels and advises private bus iness concerns on t heir participation in a
federal I oan pr ogram made available through a city). Cf AGO 8 0-45 (the receipt of
Medicare, Medicaid, government g rants a nd loans, or similar funds by a pr ivate
nonprofit hospital does not, standing alone, subject the hospital to the Sunshine Law);
Inf. Op. to Gaetz and Coley, December 17, 2009 (mere receipt of federal grant does not
subject private economic development organization to Sunshine Law).
Although private organizations generally are not subject to the Sunshine Law, open
meetings requirements can apply if the public entity has delegated lithe performance of
its publ ic purpose" to the private entity. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-
Journal Corporation, 729 So. 2d 3 73, 382-383 (Fla. 1999). And see Mae Volen Senior
Center, Inc. v. Area Agency on Aging, 978 So. 2d 1 91 (Fla. 4t h DCA 2008), review
denied, 1 S o. 3d 1 72 (Fla. 2009) (area ag encies on ag ing which are publ ic or private
nonprofit organizations designated by the Department of Elder Affairs to coordinate and
administer department programs and to provide, through contracting agencies, services
for the elderly within a planning and service area are subject to Ch. 119 and s. 286.011,
F.S., when considering any contracts requiring t he ex penditure 0 f pu blic funds).
Compare Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 927 So.
2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), in which the Fifth District applied the "totality of factors" test
set forth in News and Sun-Sentinel Co. v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group,
Inc., supra, and determined that a private corporation that purchased a hospital it had
previously leased from a pu blic hospital authority was not "acting on be half of" a public
agency and therefore was not subject to the Public Records Act or the Sunshine Law.
The Attorney General's 0 ffice has found meetings 0 f t he following ent ities t 0 be
subject tot he Sunshine Law: Family Services Coalition, I nc., board 0 f di rectors,
performing services for the Department of Children and Family Services which services
would nor mally be per formed by t he department, AGO 0 0-03; local heal th councils,
whose duties are prescribed by statute and which provide an integral role in the Agency
for Health Care Administration's decision-making process in providing for coordinated
health care services planning, AGO 07-27; property owners association, delegated the
performance of services otherwise performed by a municipal services taxing unit, AGO
07-44; boards of directors of volunteer fire departments that provide firefighting services
to the county and use facilities and eq uipment acquired with county funds, AGO 04-32;
community land trust, which contracted with city to carry out city's affordable housing
responsibilities and screen applicant files, AGO 08-66; Astronauts Memorial Foundation
when performing duties funded und er the General Appropriations Act, A GO 9 6-43;
nonprofit organization designated by county to fulfill role of county's dissolved cultural
affairs council, A GO 98-49; nonprofit corporation specifically created to contract with
county for operation of a public golf course on county property acquired by public funds,
AGO 02-53; downtown redevelopment task force which, although not appointed by city
commission, stood i n pi ace 0 f t he city commission when considering dow ntown
improvement issues, AGO 85 -55; nongovernmental advisory committee, which had
been impliedly delegated the authority to act on be half of the county commission in a
review of the zoning code, AGO 83-95; committee selected by a county bar association
on behalf of the school board to screen applicants and make recommendations for the
position of school board attorney, AGO 77-43. Cf Inf. Op. to Bedell, December 28, 2005
(private nonprofit organization which entered into an agreement with a city to operate a
theater, received city funding in the form of a loan for this purpose, and leased property
from the city, should comply with the Sunshine Law when holding discussions or making
decisions regarding the theater).
On the other hand, meetings of a county volunteer firefighters association for the
purpose of providing a forum for county volunteer fire departments to meet and discuss
common county firefighting concerns and issues are not subject to the Sunshine Law.
AGO 04-32. Cf AGO 00-08 (meetings of the Lee County Fire Commissioner's Forum, a
nonprofit ent ity created by fire di stricts as a vehicle f or networking and di scussion 0 f
common concerns, would be subject to the Sunshine Law if the Forum operates as a
collegial body for incipient decision-making); and Inf. Op. to Wiles, February 14, 2002 (if
the State University P residents Association operates as a collegial bo dy for incipient
decision-making, then t he association would be subject tot he Sunshine Law; if t he
association, however, merely provides an opportunity to network and di scuss common
concerns, the association would not necessarily be subject to the Sunshine Law).
c. Homeowners' associations
The Sunshine L aw does not generally appl y t 0 meetings 0 f a homeowners'
association board of directors. Inf. Op. to Fasano, June 7, 1996. Other statutes govern
access tor ecords and meetings of these a ssociations. See, e.g., s. 720.303(2), F .S.
(homeowners' association board of directors and any committee making a final decision
regarding t he ex penditure 0 f as sociation funds or any bo dy hav ing t he authority t 0
approve architectural plans involving a specific piece of property owned by a community
resident); s . 7 18.112(2)(c), F .S. ( condominium board 0 f adm inistration); s .
719.106(1 )(c), F .S. ( cooperative boar d 0 f a dministration); a nd s . 723. 078(2)(c), F .S.
(mobile home park ho meowners' as sociation board of di rectors). Cf AGOs 99-53 (an
architectural review committee of a homeowners' association is subject to the Sunshine
Law where that committee, pur suant to county or dinance, must review and appr ove
applications f or county bui Iding per mits), and 07 -44 ( property ow ners as sociation
subject to open government laws when acting on behalf of a municipal services taxing
unit) .
4. Are federal agencies subject to the Sunshine Law?
Federal ag encies, i.e., ag encies created under federal I aw, ope rating within t he
state, do not come within the purview of the state Sunshine Law. AGO 71-191. See also
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company v. General Electric Company, 854 F .2d 900 (6th
Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 1 09 S .Ct. 1 171 ( 1989) ( public has no right of ac cess t 0
negotiations leading to settlement of a case in federal court).
Thus, meetings of a federally-created private industry council are not subject to s.
286.011, F .S. AGO 8 4-16. Cf I nf. Op. to Knox, January 6, 2 005 ( St. Johns River
Alliance, Inc., a no n-profit corporation formed to hel p carry out t he federal American
Heritage Rivers I nitiative and t he associated intergovernmental Partnership Agreement
among s tate, local and federal governmental en tities, is subject to s . 2 86.011, F .S.,
requirements); I nf. 0 p. toG reen, December 11, 19 98 ( tri-state river commission
established pursuant to state and federal law is subject to the Sunshine Law); and I nf.
Op. toM arkham, September 10, 1 996 (technical oversight committee es tablished by
state agencies as part of settlement agreement in federal lawsuit subject to Sunshine
Law).
5. Does the Sunshine Law apply to the Governor and Cabinet?
Section 286.011, F.S., applies to those functions of the Governor and Cabinet which
are statutory responsibilities as opposed to duties arising under the Constitution. Thus,
the Governor a nd Cabinet i n di spensing pardons a nd t he ot her forms 0 f clemency
authorized by Art. IV, s. 8(a), Fla. Const., are not subject to s. 286.011, F .S. Cf In re
Advisory Opinion of the Governor, 334 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1976) (Constitution sufficiently
prescribes rules for the manner of exercise of gubernatorial clemency power; legislative
intervention is, therefore, unwarranted).
Section 286.011, F.S., however, does apply to the Governor and Cabinet sitting in
their capacity as a board created by the Legislature or whose powers are prescribed by
the Legislature, such as the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund.
In such cases, the Governor and Cabinet are not exercising powers derived from the
Constitution but are subject to the "dominion and control" of the Legislature.
Moreover, A rt. I, s. 24, Fla. C onst., requires that meetings 0 f II any collegial publ ic
body of the executive branch of state g overnment" be open and noticed to the publ ic.
The only exceptions to this constitutional right of access are those meetings which have
been ex empted by t he Leg islature pursuant to A rt. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., or which ar e
specifically closed by the Constitution. And see Art. III, s. 4(e), Fla. Const., providing, in
relevant part, that "all prearranged gatherings, between. . . the governor, the president
of the senate, or the speaker of the house of representatives, the purpose of which is to
agree upon formal legislative action that will be taken at a subsequent time, or at which
formal legislative action is taken, regarding pending legislation or amendments, shall be
reasonably open to the public."
6. Does the Sunshine Law apply to commissions created by the Constitution?
Boards or commissions created by the Constitution which prescribes the manner of
the ex ercise of their constitutional powers are not subject to s . 286.011, F .S., when
carrying out such constitutionally prescribed duties. See Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d
196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (judicial nominating commissions are not subject to s. 286.011,
F.S.). Cf In re Advisory Opinion of the Governor, 334 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1976) (clemency
power does not ex ist by virtue of I egislative enactment; rather Constitution sufficiently
prescribes rules for t he m an ner 0 f ex ercise of t he power); and AGO 77 -65 (Ch. 1 20,
F.S., inapplicable to Constitution Revision Commission established by Art. XI, s. 2, Fla.
Const.). Compare Turner v. Wainwright, 379 So. 2 d 148 (Fla. 1 s t DCA), affirmed and
remanded, 389 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1980), holding that the Parole Commission, which Art.
IV, s. 8(c), Fla. Const., recognizes may be created by law, is subject to s. 286.011, F.S.
However, A rt. I , s . 24, Fla. C onst., es tablishes a constitutional right 0 f access to
meetings of any collegial public body of the executive branch of state government by
providing that such meetings must be op en and noticed to the public unless exempted
by t he Leg islature pursuant to A rt. I , s . 24, Fla. C onst., or specifically closed by t he
Constitution.
7. Does the Sunshine Law apply to the Legislature?
Article I , s. 24, Fla. C onst., requires t hat meetings 0 f the Legislature be 0 pen an d
noticed as provided in Art. III, s. 4(e), Fla. Const., except with respect to those meetings
exempted by the Legislature pursuant to Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., or specifically closed
by the Constitution.
Pursuant to Art. III, s. 4(e), Fla. Const., the rules of procedure of each house of the
Legislature m ust provide t hat alii egislative committee an d subcommittee meetings of
each house and joint conference committee meetings be open and noticed. Such rules
must also provide:
[A]II pr earranged gatherings, bet ween more than two members 0 f t he
legislature, or bet ween t he governor, t he pr esident 0 f t he senate, or t he
speaker 0 f t he house of representatives, t he pur pose 0 f which is to ag ree
upon formal legislative action that will be taken at a subsequent time, or at
which f ormall egislative ac tion i s taken, regarding pen ding I egislation or
amendments, shall be reasonably open to the public. All open meetings shall
be subject to or der a nd decorum. This section s hall be implemented a nd
defined by the rules of each house, and such rules shall control admission to
the floor of each legislative chamber and may, where reasonably necessary
for security purposes or to protect a witness appearing before a committee,
provide for the closure of committee meetings. Each house shall be the sole
judge for the interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of this section.
The votes 0 f members dur ing t he final pa ssage 0 f legislation p ending be fore a
committee and, upon request of two members of a committee or subcommittee, on any
other question, must be recorded. Article III, s. 4(c), Fla. Const.
8. Does the Sunshine Law apply to the judiciary?
The open meetings provision found i n A rt. I, s . 24 , Fla. C onst., does no t include
meetings of the judiciary. In addition, separation of powers principles make it unlikely
that the Sunshine Law, a legislative enactment, could apply to the courts established
pursuant t 0 Art. V , Fla. C onst. AGO 8 3-97. Thus, questions of ac cess t 0 judicial
proceedings us ually ar ise und er ot her constitutional guarantees relating to open a nd
public judicial proceedings, Amend. VI, U.S. Const., and freedom of the press, Amend.
I, U.S. C onst. However, a circuit conflict committee es tablished by t he Legislature to
approve attorneys handling conflict cases is subject to the Sunshine Law, even though
the chief judge or hi s or her des ignee i sam ember, because t he II circuit conflict
committees are created by the Legislature, subject to its dominion and control." AGO
83-97. And see Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d
260 (Fla. 1973) (Sunshine Law appl ies to quasi-judicial f unctions; a boar d ex ercising
quasi-judicial functions is not a part of the judicial branch of government).
a. Criminal proceedings
A court possesses the inherent power to control the conduct of proceedings before
it. Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982); and State ex
reI. Miami Herald Publishing Company v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 1977). A three-
pronged test for criminal proceedings has been developed to provide lithe best balance
between the need for open government and public access, through the media, to the
judicial process, and the paramount right of a defendant in a criminal proceeding to a
fair trial before an impartialjury." Lewis, supra at7. Closure in criminal proceedings is
acceptable only when:
1) it is necessary to prevent a serious and imminent threat to the
administration of justice;
2) no alternatives are available, other than change of venue, which would
protect the defendant's right to a fair trial; and
3) closure would be effective in protecting the defendant's rights without
being broader than necessary to accomplish that purpose.
And see Bundy v. State, 455 S o. 2d 330, 339 (Fla. 1984), noting that the trial court
properly used a combination of alternative remedies for possible prejudicial effects of
pretrial publicity instead of barring public access to pretrial proceedings.
Article I , s . 16( b), Fla. C onst., pr ovides t hat v ictims of c rime or t heir I awful
representatives, including t he nex t 0 f k in 0 f homicide victims, ar e entitled t 0 b e
informed, to be present, and to be heard when relevant, at all crucial stages of criminal
proceedings, to the extent that these rights do not interfere with the constitutional rights
of the accused. See Sireci v. State, 587 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct.
1500 (1992) (court did not err by allowing the wife and son of the victim to remain in the
courtroom after their testimony). See also s. 960.001 (1 )(e), F .S., restricting exclusion of
victims, their lawful representatives, or their next of kin.
b. Civil proceedings
Stressing that all trials, civil and criminal, are public events and that there is a strong
presumption 0 f public ac cess to these pr oceedings, the Supreme Court in Barron v.
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So. 2d 11 3 (Fla. 1988), set forth the following
factors which must be considered by a court in determining a request for closure of civil
proceedings:
1) a strong presumption of openness exists for all court proceedings;
2) both the public and news media have standing to challenge any closure
order with the burden of proof being on the party seeking closure;
3) closure should occur only when necessary
a) to comply with established public policy as set forth in the Constitution,
statutes, rules or case law;
b) to protect trade secrets;
c) to protect a compelling governmental interest;
d) to obtain evidence to properly determine legal issues in a case;
e) to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties; or
f) to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected
by a common law or privacy right not generally inherent in the specific
type of civil proceeding sought to be closed.
4) whether a reasonable al ternative is available to ac complish t he desired
result and i f no ne exists, t he I east restrictive closure nec essary t 0
accomplish its purpose is used;
5) the presumption 0 f 0 penness continues through t he appellate review
process and the par ty seeking closure continues to have t he bur den to
justify closure.
And see Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 723 So. 2d 208,
209 (Fla. 199 8), reiterating support f or the Barron standards and stating th at "public
access t 0 court pr oceedings an d records [ is] important t 0 assure testimonial
trustworthiness; in providing a wholesome effect on all officers of the court for purposes
of moving t hose officers to astrict conscientiousness in t he performance 0 f du ty; in
allowing nonpar ties t he 0 pportunity 0 f I earning whether they ar e a ffected; an din
instilling a strong confidence i n judicial remedies, which would be abs ent und er a
system of secrecy"; and BDO Seidman v. Banco Espirito Santo International, Ltd., 34
F.L.W. D 739 ( Fla. 3 d D CA April 8, 2009) (test for sealing of court pr oceedings and
records is set forth in Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc.).
c. Depositions
While the courts have recognized that court proceedings are public events and the
public generally has access to such proceedings, the general public and t he press do
not have aright und er t he First A mendment or t he rules of procedure to at tend
discovery depositions. See Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Burk, 504 So. 2d 378, 380
(Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S.Ct. 346 (1987), stating that while discovery depositions
in criminal cases are judicially compelled f or t he purpose 0 f al lowing par ties t 0
investigate and pr epare, they ar e n ot judicial pr oceedings. Accord Post-Newsweek
Stations, Florida, Inc. v. State, 510 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1987) (media not entitled to notice
and 0 pportunity t 0 at tend pr etrial di scovery depos itions i n criminal cases); and SCI
Funeral Services of Florida, Inc. v. Light, 811 S o. 2d 796 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 2002)
(upholding pr otective or der closing depo sitions tot he media bas ed 0 n pr ivacy
concerns). Cf Lewis v. State, 958 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (while Burk applied
to u nfiled de positions made during an ong oing, active criminal prosecution, materials
related to defendant's prosecution, including depositions, are subject to disclosure after
the case becomes final).
d. Florida Bar grievance proceedings
An attorney's claim that t he Florida B ar violated t he Sunshine Law b y refusing to
allow him to attend a grievance committee meeting of the Barwas rejected in Florida
Bar v. Committee, 916 So. 2d 741, 744 -745 (Fla. 2005) : II The grievance committee
meetings of t he B ar ar e pr ivate, and therefore t he B ar is justified i n pr ohibiting [the
attorney] f rom at tendance. II The Court reiterated its holding in The Florida Bar: In re
Advisory Opinion, 398 So. 2d 446, 447 (Fla. 1981), that "[n]either the legislature nor the
governor can control what is purely a judicial function."
e. Grand juries
Section 905.24, F.S., provides that "[g]rand jury proceedings are secret"; thus, these
proceedings are not subject to s. 286.011, F .S. See Clein v. State, 52 So. 2d 117, 120
(Fla. 195 1) ( it is t he policy of t he law to shield t he proceedings 0 f grand juries from
public scrutiny); In re Getty, 427 So. 2d 380, 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (public disclosure
of grand j ury proceedings II could result in a myriad of harmful effects"); a nd A GO 73-
177, stating that it is the public policy of the state to keep secret the proceedings of the
grand jury. The grand j ury has al so be en referred to as a II coordinate br anch 0 f t he
judiciary, and as an ar m, ap pendage, or adj unct 0 f the circuit c ourt." State ex reI.
Christian v. Rudd, 302 So. 2d 821,828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Cf Butterworth v. Smith,
110 S.Ct. 1376 (1990), striking down a Florida statute to the extent that it prohibited a
witness from disclosing his own testimony before a grand jury after the grand jury's term
has ended.
In addi tion, he arings on certain grand j ury pr ocedural motions are closed. The
procedural steps contemplated ins. 905.28(1), F .S., for reports or presentments of the
grand j ury relating t 0 an individual which ar e not accompanied by a true bi II or
indictment, are cloaked with the same degree of secrecy as is enjoyed by the grand jury
in the receipt of evidence, its del iberations, and final product. Therefore, a newspaper
has no right of access to grand jury procedural motions and to the related hearing. In re
Grand Jury, Fall Term 1986,528 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). And see Palm Beach
Newspapers, Inc., v. Doe, 460 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (hearing anc illary or
related t 0 a grand j ury session constitutes a pr oceeding which comes within t he
protection of s. 905.24); and In re Subpoena to Testify Before Grand Jury Directed to
Custodian of Records, 864 F .2d 1559 ( 11 th C ir. 19 89) ( while a court must h old a
hearing a nd give reasons for closure 0 f criminal court pr oceedings, a court i s no t
required tog ive new spapers a hear ing an d give reasons for closure 0 f grand j ury
proceedings).
f. Judicial nominating commissions/Judicial Qualifications Commission
Judicial nominating commissions for the Supreme Court of Florida, the district courts
of appeal, or for a judicial circuit for the trial courts within the circuit are not subject to
the Sunshine Law. Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Article V, s.
11(d), Fla. Const., however, requires that except for its deliberations, the proceedings of
a judicial no minating commission a nd its records ar e op en tot he pu blic. While t he
deliberations of a commission are closed, such a I imitation appears to be applicable to
that point in the proceedings when the commissioners are weighing and examining the
reasons for and against a choice. Inf. Op. to Russell, August 2, 1991.
The statewide judicial nom inating commission for workers' compensation judges,
however, is not a judicial nom inating commission as contemplated by the Constitution;
thus, such a commission created pursuant to the workers' compensation law is subject
to s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 90-76.
Proceedings of t he Judicial Qualifications Commission ar e confidential. However,
upon a finding 0 f pr obable cause a nd t he filing of formal charges ag ainst a judge or
justice by the commission with the Clerk of the Supreme Court, all further proceedings
of the commission are public. Article V, s. 12(a)(4), Fla. Const.
g. Mediation proceedings
Court-ordered mediation and arbitration are to be conducted according to the rules
of practice a nd procedure adopted by t he Florida Supreme Court. Sections 44.102(1)
and 44.103(1), F .S. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1. 720(e) provides that the mediator
may meet and consult privately with any party or parties or their counsel. And see Rule
10.360(a), Florida Rules For Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators ("A mediator shall
maintain confidentiality of al I information revealed dur ing mediation except where
disclosure is required or permitted by law or is agreed to by all parties. ").
Public access t 0 court-ordered mediation proceedings between two cities and a
county was raised in News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Lee County, Florida, 570
So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Initially, the judge required the parties to have present
a representative "with full authority to bind them"; however, after the media objected to
the closure 0 f t he mediation pr oceeding, t he judge amended the order to limit t he
representatives' authority so that no final settlement decisions could be made during the
mediation conference. On appeal, the district court noted that no two members of any of
the public boards would b e pr esent at t he mediation proceedings and t hat the
mediation's narrow scope did no t give rise t 0 a substantial delegation affecting t he
boards' decision-making function so as to require the mediation to be open to the public.
570 So. 2d at 1327. See also O'Connell v. Board of Trustees, 1 F .L.W. Supp. 285 (Fla.
7th Cir. Ct. Feb. 9,1993) (as to public agencies, mediation is subject to the Sunshine
Law; thus, no more than one member of a collegial body should attend the mediation
conference). And see Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.720(b), stating that "[i]f a party to mediation is a
public entity required to conduct its business pursuant to chapter 286, Florida Statutes,
that party s hall be deemed to appear a tam ediation conference by t he physical
presence of a representative with full authority to negotiate on behalf of the entity and to
recommend settlement to the ap propriate decision-making body 0 f the entity. II Accord
Fla. R. App. P. 9.720(a). Cf AGO 06-03 (closed attorney-client session may not be held
to discuss settlement negotiations on a n issue that is the subject of ongoing mediation
pursuant to a partnership agreement between a water management district and others);
and Inf. Op. to McQuagge, February 13, 2002 (mediation meetings conducted pursuant
to the Florida Governmental Conflict Resolution Act, SSg 164.101-164.1061, F .S., which
involve officials or representatives of local governmental entities who have the authority
to negotiate on behalf of that governmental entity are subject to the Sunshine Law).
9. Does the Sunshine Law apply to staff?
Meetings of staff of boards or commissions covered by the Sunshine Law are not
ordinarily subject to s. 286.011, F .S. See, e.g., Occidental Chemical Company v. Mayo,
351 So.2d 336 (Fla. 1977), disapproved in part on other grounds, Citizens v. Beard,
613 S o. 2 d 403 ( Fla. 19 92); School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing
Company, 670 So. 2d 99, 101 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1996); and AGO 89-39.
Thus, a committee composed of staff that is responsible for advising and informing
the dec ision-maker through fact-finding consultations is not subject tot he Sunshine
Law. Bennett v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 2d D CA 1976) (meetings 0 f committee
appointed by community college president to report on employee working conditions not
subject to Sunshine Law). And see Knox v. District School Board of Brevard, 821 So. 2d
311, 315 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), holding that the Sunshine Law did not apply to a group of
school board employees meeting with an ar ea superintendent tor eview appl ications,
which were then sent by the area superintendent to the school superintendent with her
recommendation: "[A] Sunshine v iolation does n ot oc cur w hen a governmental
executive uses staff for a fact-finding and advisory function in fulfilling his or her duties."
Similarly, t he court in Lyon v. Lake County, 765 S o. 2d 78 5 (Fla. 5t h DCA 2000),
ruled that t he Sunshine Law di d not apply t 0 informal meetings of staff where t he
discussions were II merely informational, II w here no ne 0 f the individuals at tending t he
meetings had any decision-making authority during the meetings, and where no formal
action was taken or could have been taken at the meetings. And see Baker v. Florida
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 93 7 S o. 2d 1161 (Fla. 4 th D CA
2006), review denied, 954 So. 2d 27 (2007) (no violation of Sunshine Law when agency
employees conducted investigation into licensee's alleged failure to follow state law and
an assistant di rector made the decision to file a complaint as II [c]ommunication among
administrative staff i n fulfilling investigatory, advisory, or charging functions does n ot
constitute a ' Sunshine' Law violation"); Molina v. City of Miami, 837 So. 2d 462, 463
(Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (police di scharge 0 f firearms committee not subject to Sunshine
Law bec ause t he committee II is nothing more than a meeting 0 f staff members w ho
serve in a fact-finding advisory capacity to the chief'); J.I. v. Department of Children and
Families, 922 S o. 2 d 405 ( Fla. 4th D CA 2006) ( Sunshine L aw not applicable t 0
Department of Children an d Families per manency staffing meetings conducted to
determine whether to file a petition to terminate parental rights); Jordan v. Jenne, 938
So. 2d 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (Sunshine Law did not apply to professional standards
committee responsible f or reviewing charges ag ainst a sheriff's deput y and making
recommendations t 0 the inspector general as t 0 whether t he charges should be
sustained, di smissed, or should be deferred for more information); and McDougall v.
Culver, 3 S o. 3 d 3 91 (Fla. 2d D CA 2009) (Internal Affairs memorandum containing
findings and recommendations circulated to senior 0 fficials for review and comment
before submission to the sheriff for a decision on disciplinary action did not constitute a
meeting under the Sunshine Law since officials only provided a recommendation but did
not deliberate with the sheriff or have decision-making authority).
However, when a staff member ceases t 0 function i n a staff capacity and i s
appointed to a committee which is given "a policy-based decision-making function," the
staff member loses his or her identity as staff while working on t he committee and the
Sunshine Law applies to the committee. See Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934, 938
(Fla. 1983); and Evergreen the Tree Treasurers of Charlotte County, Inc. v. Charlotte
County Board of County Commissioners, 810 So. 2d 526,531-532 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
(when public officials delegate their fact-finding duties and decision-making authority to
a committee of staff members, those individuals no longer function as staff members but
"stand in the shoes of such public officials" insofar as the Sunshine Law is concerned).
In Wood v. Marston, supra, the Florida Supreme Court recognized that the function
of staff is to inform and advise the decision-maker. However, the Court concluded that-a
faculty committee charged with seeking applicants for a pos ition to be appointed by the
university pr esident, by screening appl icants and dec iding which of t he applicants to
reject from further consideration performed a policy-based decision-making function and
thus was subject tot he Sunshine Law. Even though t he faculty as a w hole had the
authority to review and reject the decisions of the committee, this factor "did not render
the committee's function any less policy-based or decision-making. II Id. at 938-939.
It is therefore the nature of the act performed, not the makeup of the committee or
the proximity of t he act to the final decision, which det ermines whether a committee
composed of staff is subject to the Sunshine Law. Wood v. Marston, supra. See News-
Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546,548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982),
concluding that it would be "Iudicrous" to hold that "a certain committee is governed by
the Sunshine Law when it consists 0 f members 0 f t he public, w ho ar e pr esumably
acting for the public, but hold a committee may escape the Sunshine Law if it consists of
individuals who owe their allegiance to, and receive their salaries from, the governing
authority. II
Thus, in Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691
So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d D CA 1 997), t he di strict court determined t hat a committee
composed primarily of staff that was created by a college purchasing di rector to assist
and advise her in evaluating contract proposals was subject to the Sunshine Law. The
committee's j ob to" weed through t he various pr oposals, to determine which were
acceptable and to rank them accordingly" was sufficient to bring the committee within
the scope of the Sunshine Law. "Governmental advisory committees which have offered
up structured recommendations such as here involved--at least those recommendations
which eliminate opportunities for alternative choices by the final authority, or which rank
applications for the final authority--have bee n determined to be ag encies governed by
the Sunshine Law." Id. at 11 01. See also AGOs 05-06 ( city development review
committee, composed of several city of ficials and representatives 0 f various city
departments t 0 review and appr ove development appl ications, is subject tot he
Sunshine Law), and 86-51 (land selection committee appointed by water management
district and delegated decision-making authority to consider projects for inclusion on a
list of proposed acquisition projects must comply with Sunshine Law "even though such
committee may be composed entirely of district staff a nd its dec isions a nd
recommendations are subject to further action by the district's governing board").
Similarly, in Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 877 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), the
court held that a meeting of a pre-termination conference panel established pursuant to
a county ordinance and composed of a department head, personnel director and equal
opportunity di rector should have be en hel din the Sunshine. Even though the county
administrator had the s ole authority to di scipline employees, t hat aut hority had been
delegated tot he department hea d who in turn chose to share t hat aut hority with the
other members of the panel. "Because it is undisputed that the staff gave advice on the
ultimate decision to terminate" an em ployee during a closed-door session at which the
decision to terminate was made, the closing of the deliberations violated the Sunshine
Law. Id. at 14. Compare Jordan v. Jenne, 938 So. 2d at 530 (Sunshine Law did not
apply to a professional standards committee responsible for reviewing charges against
sheriff's dep uty and making recommendations tot he inspector bec ause inspector
general made the "ultimate dec ision" on discipline and di d n ot deliberate with t he
committee).
10. Does the Sunshine Law apply to members of public boards who also
serve as administrative officers or employees?
In some cases, members of public boards also serve as administrative officers or
employees. The Sunshine L aw is not applicable t 0 di scussions of those individuals
when serving as administrative officers or employees, provided such discussions do not
relate to matters which will come before the public board on which they serve.
For example, the Sunshine Law would not apply to meetings between the mayor and
city commissioners w here a mayor performs the du ties of city manager a nd the city
commissioners individually serve as the head of a city department when the meeting is
held solely by these officers in their capacity as department heads for the purpose of
coordinating ad ministrative and 0 perational matters between executive departments of
city government for which no formal ac tion by t he governing body i s required or
contemplated. Those matters which normally come before, or should come before, the
city co mmission for discussion or ac tion, however, must n ot be di scussed a t such
meetings. A GO 81-88. Accord AGOs 83-70 and 75 -210 (mayor may di scuss matters
with individual city council member which concern hi s ad ministrative f unctions an d
would not come before the council for consideration and further action).
Similarly, a conversation bet ween a s tate at torney and sheriff about a specific
criminal investigation involving an as sault related to a youth gang would not violate the
Sunshine L aw even though bo th 0 fficials a re members 0 f a county criminal justice
commission and t he commission is studying and making recommendations 0 n t he
problem of youth gangs in t he community. AGO 9 3-41 And see Inf. Op. to Hughes,
February 17,1995; and Inf. Op. to Boyd, March 14,1994 (Sunshine Law not applicable
to school f acuity meeting simply bec ause two or more members 0 f school advisory
council w ho ar e al so faculty m embers attend t he faculty meeting as long as council
members refrain from di scussing matters t hat may come before t he council for
consideration).
C. WHAT IS A MEETING SUBJECT TO THE SUNSHINE LAW?
1. Number of board members required to be present
The Sunshine Law extends tot he di scussions a nd deliberations as well as t he
formal action taken by a pu blic board or commission. There is no requirement that a
quorum be pr esent for a meeting of m embers of a public board 0 r commission to be
subject to s . 2 86.011, F .S. Instead, t he law is appl icable to any gathering, whether
formal or casual, of two or more members of the same board or commission to discuss
some matter 0 n which foreseeable action will be taken by t he public board or
commission. Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). And see City of
Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2 d 38 (Fla. 1971); and Board of Public Instruction of
Broward County v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1969). Thus, discussions between two
members of a three-member complaint review board regarding their selection of a third
member must be conducted in ac cordance with t he Sunshine Law. AGO 9 3-79. Cf
AGO 04-58 ("coincidental unscheduled meeting of two or more county commissioners
to discuss emergency issues with st aff" during a declared s tate of emergency is no t
subject to s. 286.011 if the issues do not require action by the county commission).
It is the h ow and t he why officials dec ided to so act which interests the public, not
merely t he final decision. As the court recognized in Times Publishing Company v.
Williams, 222 S o. 2 d 470, 473 (Fla. 2d D CA 196 9), disapproved in part on other
grounds, Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985):
Every thought, as well as every affirmative act, of a public official as it relates
to and is within the scope of his official duties, is a matter of public concern;
and it is the entire decision-making process that t he legislature intended to
affect by the enactment of the statute before us.
2. Circumstances in which the Sunshine Law may apply to a single individual or
where two board members are not physically present
Section 2 86.011, F .S., appl ies to public bo ards and commissions, i.e., collegial
bodies, and has been applied to meetings of "two or more members" of the same board
or commission w hen discussing some matter which will f oreseeably come before the
board or commission. Therefore, the statute does not ordinarily apply to an individual
member of a public boar d or commission 0 r to publ ic officials who ar e not bo ard or
commission members. Inf. Op. to Dillener, January 5, 1990 (Sunshine Law not normally
applicable to meeting of town council member with private citizens) See City of Sunrise
v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Deerfield
Beach Publishing, Inc. v. Robb, 5 30 So. 2d 51 0 ( Fla. 4 th D CA 198 8) ( requisite t 0
application of the Sunshine Law is a meeting between two or more public officials); and
Mitchell v. School Board of Leon County, 335 S o. 2d 3 54 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 1976). Cf
Jennings v. Dade County, 589 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), review denied, 598 So.
2d 75 (Fla. 1 992), stating t hat ex parte (i.e., from one side 0 nly) communications in
quasi-judicial proceedings raise a pr esumption that the contact was prejudicial to the
decision-making process; and s. 286.0115, F.S., enacted in response to the Jennings
case, relating to access to local public officials in quasi-judicial proceedings. Compare
City of Hollywood v. Hakanson, 866 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (comments made
at a public city commission meeting which related to a terminated employee who had a
pending appeal did not constitute an offending ex parte communication simply because
a civil service board member was in the audience).
Certain factual situations, however, have ar isen where, i n or der to as sure public
access to the decision-making processes of public boards or commissions, it has been
necessary t 0 conclude that t he pr esence of t wo individuals 0 f the same board or
commission is not necessary to trigger application of s. 286.011, F .S. As stated by the
Supreme Court, the Sunshine L aw is to be construed "so as to frustrate all evasive
devices." Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473,477 (Fla. 1974).
a. Written correspondence between board members
A commissioner may send a written report to other commissioners on a subject that
will be di scussed at a public meeting without violating the Sunshine Law, if prior to the
meeting, there is no interaction related to the report among the commissioners and the
report, which is subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act, is not being used as
a substitute for action at a publ ic meeting. AGO 89-23. And see AGO 0 1-20 (e-mail
communication of factual background information from one council member to another
is a public record but does not constitute a meeting subject to the Sunshine Law when it
does not result i n t he ex change 0 f council members' comments or responses 0 n
subjects requiring council ac tion). Cf Inf.O p. t 0 Kessler, November 14,20 07
(procedural rule requiring county commissioner t 0 make a written request t 0
commission chair to withdraw an item from the consent ag enda do es n ot violate the
Sunshine Law).
If, however, the report is circulated among board members for comments with such
comments being pr ovided toot her members, there i s interaction among t he board
members which is subject to s. 286.011, F .S. AGO 90-03. See also AGO 96-35-(school
board member may prepare and circulate informational memorandum or position paper
to 0 ther bo ard members; however, us e 0 f a memorandum to solicit comments from
other bo ard m embers or t he circulation 0 f responsive memoranda by ot her boar d
members would v iolate the Sunshine Law); Inf. 0 p. t 0 Blair, June 2 9, 1973
(memorandum reflecting boar d member's v iew on a pending board issue circulated
among t he bo ard members with eac h indicating appr oval or di sapproval that, upon
completion of the signatures, has the effect of becoming the official action of the board
violates the Sunshine Law).
In ad dition, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice h as ex pressed concern t hat a process
whereby board members di stribute t heir ow n pos ition papers on the same subject to
other m embers is II problematical" and should be di scouraged. See AGO 0 1-21 (city
council's discussions and deliberations on matters coming before the council must occur
at a duly noticed city council meeting and the circulation of position statements must not
be used to circumvent the requirements of the statute). Accord AGO 07-35; and see
AGO 08-07 (city commissioner may pos t comment regarding city bus iness on blog or
message board; however, any subsequent pos tings by ot her commissioners on t he
subject of the initial posting could be construed as a response subject to the Sunshine
Law).
Similarly, a boar d that i s responsible for as sessing t he per formance 0 fits chief
executive of ficer ( CEO) should conduct t he review and appr aisal pr ocess i n a
proceeding ope n tot he public as pr escribed by s. 286 .011, F .S., instead 0 f using a
review procedure in which individual board members evaluate the C EO's performance
and send their individual written comments to the board chairman for compilation and
subsequent discussion with the CEO. AGO 93-90.
b. Meetings conducted over the telephone or using electronic media technology
(1) Discussions conducted via telephones, computers, or other electronic means
are not exempted from the Sunshine Law
As discussed in this manual, t he Sunshine Law appl ies tot he deliberations an d
discussions between two or more members of a board or commission on some matter
which foreseeably will come before that board or commission for action. The use of a
telephone t 0 conduct such di scussions does not remove t he conversation from t he
requirements of s. 286.011, F .S. See State v. Childers, No. 02-21939-MMC; 02-21940-
MMB (Escambia Co. Ct. June 5,2003), per curiam affirmed, 886 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2004) (telephone conversation during which two county commissioners an d t he
supervisor of elections discussed redistricting violated the Sunshine Law).
Similarly, members 0 f a publ ic boar d m ay not us e computers to conduct pr ivate
discussions among themselves about board business. AGO 89-39. And see AGO 09-19
(members of a city board or commission may not engage on the city's Facebook page
in an exchange or discussion of matters that foreseeably will come before the board or
commission for 0 fficial ac tion). Cf. Inf. 0 p. toG alaydick, 0 ctober 19, 1 995,(school
board members m ay s hare laptop computer even though computer's hard dr ive
contains information reflecting ideas of an individual member as long as computer is not
being used as a means of communication between members); and AGO 01-20 (one-
way e-mail communication from one council member to another, which does not result
in t he ex change 0 f council members' comments or responses on subjects requiring
council ac tion, does n ot constitute a meeting subject tot he Sunshine Law; however,
such e-mail communications are public records and must be maintained by the records
custodian for public inspection and copying).
(2) Authority of boards to conduct public meetings via electronic media
technology (e.g., telephone or video conferencing)
(a) State boards
In AGO 98-28, the Attorney General's Office concluded that s. 120.54(5)(b)2., F.S.,
authorizes state agencies to conduct public meetings via electronic means provided that
the board complies with uniform rules of procedure adopted by the state Administration
Commission. These rules c ontain no tice requirements an d pr ocedures for pr oviding
points of access for the public. See Rule 28-109, F.A.C.
(b) Local boards
As to local boards, the Attorney General's Office has noted that the authorization in
s. 120.54(5)(b)2., to conduct workshops and official meetings entirely through the use of
communications media technology appl ies only to s tate agencies. A GO 98 -28. Thus,
since s. 1 001.372(2)(b), F .S., requires a di strict school board to hold its meetings at a
"public pi ace in the county, II a quorum of the bo ard must be physically present at the
meeting of the school board. Id. And see AGO 09-56 (where a quorum is required and
absent a statute to the contrary, the requisite n umber of members must be physically
present at a meeting in order to constitute a quorum). But see Ch. 06-350, La ws of
Florida, authorizing the Monroe County Commission to use teleconferencing equipment
to qualify for a quorum for a special meeting.
If a quorum 0 f a local bo ard i s physically present, lithe participation 0 f an abs ent
member by telephone conference or 0 ther interactive el ectronic technology i s
permissible when such absence is due to extraordinary circumstances such as illness[;]
. . . [w]hether the absence of a member due to a scheduling conflict constitutes such a
circumstance is a determination that must be made in the good judgment of the board."
AGO 03-41. Accord AGOs 94-55 (when a quorum of the board is physically present at
the public meeting site in Florida, a museum board may allow an out -of-state member
with health problems to participate and vote in board meetings through the use of such
devices as a speaker telephone that allow t he abs ent member t 0 par ticipate i n
discussions, to be heard by ot her board m embers an d t he public a nd t 0 hear
discussions taking pi ace during t he meeting), 92-44 (ill county commissioner may
participate an d vote in commission meetings through us e of a n interactive v ideo and
telephone system, provided a legal quorum of the commission meet in a public place in
the county as required by statute), and 02-82 (physically-disabled members 0 f a city
advisory committee may participate and vote by electronic means as long as a quorum
of the committee members is physically present at the meeting site).
The physical pr esence 0 f a quorum has not been required, however, where
electronic media technology (such as video conferencing and digital audio) is used to
allow public access and participation at workshop meetings where no formal action will
be taken. In AGO 06-20, the Attorney General's Office concluded that an advisory board
composed of representatives from several county metropolitan planning organizations
may us e el ectronic media technology to I ink simultaneously hel d publ ic meetings 0 f
citizens' adv isory committees i n each 0 fits par ticipating counties, s 0 as t 0 allow all
members of the committees and the publicto hear and participate at workshops. The
use of electronic media technology, however, do es not satisfy quorum requirements
necessary for official action to be taken. Id.
Similarly, ai rport aut hority members m ay conduct informal discussions an d
workshops over the I nternet, provided proper notice is given, and interactive access by
members of the public is provided. AGO 01-66. Such interactive access must include
not only public access via the Internet but also at designated places within the authority
boundaries where the airport authority makes computers with I nternet access available
to members 0 f t he public w ho m ay not ot herwise have Internet ac cess. Id. For
meetings, however, where a quorum is ne cessary f or ac tion t 0 be taken, physical
presence of the members making up the quorum would be required in the absence of a
statute providing otherwise. Id. Internet access to such meetings, however, may still be
offered to provide greater pu blic access. Id. Cf AGO 08-65, noting that a city's plan to
provide addi tional public ac cess to on-line workshop meetings by making computers
available at a public library "should ensure that operating-type assistance is available at
the library where the computers are located."
However, the use of an electronic bulletin board to discuss matters over an extended
period of days or weeks, which does not permit the public to participate online, violates
the Sunshine Law by circumventing the notice and access provisions of that law. AGO
02-32. And see Inf. Op. to Ciocchetti, March 23, 2006 (even though the public would be
able to participate online, a town commission's proposed use of an electronic bulletin
board to di scuss matters that may f oreseeably come be fore the commission over an
extended period of time would not comply with the spirit or letter of the Sunshine Law
because t he burden would be on t he public to constantly monitor the site in 0 rder to
participate meaningfully in the discussion). Compare AGO 08-65 (city advisory boards
may conduct workshops lasting no more than two hours using an on-line bulletin board
if proper notice is given and interactive access to members of the public is provided).
c. Delegation of authority
liThe Sunshine Law does not provide for any 'government by delegation' exception; a
public bo dy cannot escape t he application 0 f t he Sunshine La w b y under taking t 0
delegate the conduct of public business through an alter ego." IDS Properties, Inc. v.
Town of Palm Beach, 279 S o. 2 d 3 53, 3 59 ( Fla. 4 th D CA 19 73), certified question
answered sub nom., Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974). See
also News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546, 547-548 (Fla.
2d DCA 1982) (when public officials delegate de facto authority to act on their behalf in
the formulation, preparation, and promulgation of plans on which foreseeable action will
be taken by those pu blic officials, those delegated that authority stand in the s hoes of
such public officials insofar as the Sunshine Law is concerned). Cf Leach-Wells v. City
of Bradenton, 734 S o. 2d 11 68, 1 171 (Fla. 2d D CA 1999) (committee charged with
evaluating pr oposals violated the Sunshine Law when the city clerk uni laterally tallied
the results of the committee members' individual written evaluations and ranked them;
the short-listing by the clerk "was formal action that was required to be taken at a public
meeting").
Thus, the Attorney General's Office has concluded that a single member of a board
who has been delegated the authority to negotiate the terms of a lease on behalf of the
board "is subject to the Sunshine Law and, therefore, cannot negotiate for such a lease
in secret. II AGO 74-294. Accord AGO 84-54. Similarly, when an individual member of a
public board, or a boa rd member and the executive director of the board, conducts a
hearing or investigatory pr oceeding on be half 0 f the entire board, t he he aring or
proceeding must be held in the sunshine. AGOs 75-41 and 74-84. And see AGO 10-15
(special magistrate subject tot he Sunshine Law w hen ex ercising t he del egated
decision-making authority of the value adjustment board).
If a board member or des ignee has been authorized onl y tog ather information or
function as a fact-finder, the Sunshine Law does not apply. AGO 95-06. And see AGO
93-78 (if public board member is authorized only to explore various contract proposals,
with such pr oposals being related back tot he governing bo dy for consideration, t he
discussions bet ween the board member a nd t he ap plicant ar e not subject to the
Sunshine Law). Cf State, Department of Management Services v. Lewis, 653 So. 2d
467 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1995) (issuance of an order of reconsideration by a board chair does
not violate the Sunshine Law where the purpose of the order is to provide notice to the
parties and allow them an opportunity to provide argument on the issue).
If, however, t he bo ard m ember has be en delegated the au thority tor eject certain
options from further consideration by the entire board, the board member is performing
a decision-making function that must be conducted in the sunshine. AGOs 95-06 and
93-78. See also AGO 90-17 (while Sunshine Law not violated by a city council member
meeting with private contractor for information gathering purposes, if the board member
has be en aut horized, formally or informally, to ex ercise any dec ision-making aut hority
on behalf of the board, such as approving or rejecting certain contract provisions, the
board member i s ac ting on behal f 0 f t he board and t he meetings ar e subject t 0 s .
286.011, F .S.). And see Broward County v. Conner, 660 So. 2d 288, 290 (Fla. 4th DCA
1995), review denied, 669 S o. 2d 250 (Fla. 1996) (since Sunshine Law provides that
actions of a public board are not valid unless they are made at an open public meeting,
a county's at torneys would not b e authorized toe nter into a contract 0 n t he
commission's behalf "without formal action by the county commission at a meeting as
required by t he s tatute"). Compare Lee County v. Pierpont, 693 S o. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1997), affirmed, 71 0 S o. 2d 9 58 (Fla. 199 8) (authorization to c ou nty at torney to
make settlement offers to landowners not to exceed appraised value plus 200/0, rather
than a specific dollar amount, did not violate the Sunshine Law).
Thus, the applicability 0 f t he Sunshine Law r elates to the di scussions 0 f a single
individual who has been delegated decision-making authority on behalf of a board or
commission. If the individual, r ather than the board, i s vested by law, charter or
ordinance with t he authority tot ake action, such di scussions are not subject t 0 s .
286.011, F .S. See City of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 S o. 2 d
1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1 989) (since the mayor was responsible under the city charter for
disciplining city em ployees and since the mayor was not a boar d or commission and
was not ac ting f or a boar d, meetings be tween t he mayor an d a city employee
concerning the employee's duties were not subject to s. 286.011, F.S.).
d. Use of nonmembers as liaisons between board members
The Sunshine Law i s ap plicable to meetings bet ween aboard member an d an
individual who is not a member 0 f the bo ard when that individual is bei ng us ed as a
liaison between, or to conduct a de facto meeting of, board members. See AGO 74-47
(city manager is not a member 0 f the city council and thus may meet with individual
council members; however, the manager may not act as a liaison for board members by
circulating information and thoughts of individual council members). Compare AGO 89-
39 (aides to county commissioners would not be subject to the Sunshine Law unless
they have been delegated decision-making functions outside of the ambit of normal staff
functions, are acting as liaisons between board members, or are acting in place of the
board or its members at their direction).
For example, in Blackford v. School Board of Orange County, 375 So. 2d 578 (Fla.
5th DCA 1979), the court held that a series of scheduled successive meetings between
the school superintendent and individual members of the school board were subject to
the Sunshine Law. While normally meetings between the school superintendent and an
individual school boa rd member would no t be subject t 0 s . 2 86.011, F .S., these
meetings were hel din II rapid-fire s uccession" i n or der t 0 av oid a publ ic ai ring of a
controversial redistricting problem. They amounted to a de facto meeting of the school
board in violation 0 f s. 286 .011, F .S. And see Sentinel Communications Company v.
School Board of Osceola County, No. C192-0045 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. April 3, 1992) (series
of pr ivate meetings between school superintendent a nd individual school board
members to consider staff recommendations concerning administrative structure of the
school system and to privately address any of the board's concerns, should have been
held in the sunshine; while individual board members are not prohibited from meeting
privately with staff or t he superintendent for informational pur poses or on a n ad h oc
basis, the Sunshine Law II shall be construed to prohibit the scheduling of as eries of
such meetings which concern a specific ag enda"). Cf Inf. Op. to Go ren, October 28,
2009 (while individual city commissioners may seek advice or information from staff, city
should be cognizant of the potential that commissioners seeking clarification by follow-
up with staff with staff responses provided to all commissioners could be considered to
be a de facto meeting of t he commissioners by us ing staff as a conduit between
commissioners).
In Citizens for a Better Royal Palm Beach, Inc. v. Village of Royal Palm Beach, No.
CL 9114417 AA (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. May 14, 1992), the court invalidated a contract for the
sale of municipal property when it determined that after the proposal to sell the property
which had been di scussed and ap proved at a publ ic meeting collapsed, t he city
manager met individually with council members and from those discussions the property
was so Id to anot her g roup. The circuit court found that these meetings resulted in a
substantial change in the terms of sale and that the execution of the contract, therefore,
violated the Sunshine Law.
Thus, a city manager should refrain from asking each commissioner to state his or
her p osition on a specific matter which w ill f oreseeably be considered by t he
commission at a public meeting in order to provide the information to the members of
the commission. AGO 89-23. See also AGO 75-59 (director should refrain from calling
each member 0 f t he board separately and as king eac h member t 0 s tate hi s or he r
position on a matter which will foreseeably be p resented for consideration to the entire
board in open session); and Inf. Op. to Biasco, July2, 1997 (administrative officers or
staff w ho serve publ ic boar ds should n ot poll boar d members on issues which w ill
foreseeably come before the board although an administrative officer is not precluded
from contacting individual board members for their views on a matter when the officer,
and not the board, has been vested with the authority to take action). Cf AGO 81-42
(the fact that a city council member has expressed his or her views or voting intent on
an upcoming matter to a news reporter prior to the scheduled public meeting does not
violate the Sunshine Law so long as the reporter is not being used by the member as an
intermediary in order to circumvent the requirements of s. 286.011, F.S.).
Not all decisions taken by staff, however, need to be made or approved by a board.
Thus, t he di strict court concluded i n Florida Parole and Probation Commission v.
Thomas, 364 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1978), that the decision to appeal made by legal
counsel t 0 a public board after di scussions be tween t he legal staff and individual
members of the board was not subject to the Sunshine Law.
D. WHAT TYPES OF DISCUSSIONS ARE COVERED BY THE SUNSHINE LAW?
1. Informal discussions, workshops
As discussed in s. C.1., supra, the Sunshine Law applies to any gathering, whether
formal or casual, of two or more members of the same board or commission to discuss
some matter 0 n which foreseeable action will be taken by t he public bo ard or
commission. As the Florida Supreme Court said, "collective inquiry and di scussion
stages" are embraced within the terms of the statute. Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison,
296 So. 2d 474, 477 (Fla. 1974). With these principles in mind, the Attorney General's
Office h as stated that t he following gatherings ar e subject to t he Sunshine Law:
"executive work sessions" held by a boar d of commissioners of a hous ing authority to
discuss policy matters, A GO 7 6-102; "conciliation c onferences" 0 f a human relations
board, AGO 74-358; "workshop meetings" of a planning and zoning commission, AGO
74-94; II conference sessions" held by a town council before its regular meetings, AGO
74-62; discussions of preaudit reports of the Auditor General by the governing body of a
special district, AGO 73-08. And see Ruff v. School Board of Collier County, 426 So. 2d
1015 (Fla. 2 d DCA 1983) (organizational meeting of task force subject to s. 286.011,
F.S.).
The Sunshine Law is, therefore, a pplicable to all functions of covered boards and
commissions, whether formal or informal, which relate to the affairs and duties of the
board or commission. "[T]he Sunshine Law does n ot pr ovide that cases be treated
differently based upon their level of public importance." Monroe County v. Pigeon Key
Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857, 868 ( Fla. 3d D CA 19 94). And see Inf. Op . to
Nelson, May 19, 1980 (meeting with congressman and city council members to discuss
"federal budg etary matters which vitally concern their c ommunities" should be hel din
the sunshine because II it appears extremely likely that discussion of public business by
the council members [and perhaps dec ision making] will take pi ace at the m eeting");
and Inf. to Jove, January 12, 2009, concluding t hat a public forum hos ted by a city
council member with city council members invited t 0 at tend a nd participate i n t he
discussion would be subject to s. 286.011, F.S. Cf AGOs 08-63 (orientation sessions
held by local governments for special magistrates hired to hear value adjustment board
petitions ar e n ot subject t 0 s. 286.011, F .S.); and 10 -15 ( Sunshine L aw appl ies t 0
discussions 0 f special magistrate on matters that w ill f oreseeably come be fore t he
magistrate for action in exercising his or her delegated authority to act on be half of the
value adjustment board).
2. Investigative meetings or meetings to consider confidential material
a. Investigative meetings
The Sunshine Law i s appl icable t 0 investigative inquiries of publ ic boar ds or
commissions. The fact that a meeting concerns alleged violations of laws or regulations
does n ot remove it from t he scope 0 f t he I aw. AGO 7 4-84; an d Canney v. Board of
Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973).
A number of statutory exemptions to the Sunshine Law have been enacted to close
meetings of some agencies (usually state agencies) when those agencies are making
investigatory det erminations. For ex ample, s. 112. 324(2)(a), F .S. provides t hat any
proceeding r elated to a complaint or pr eliminary investigation hel d by t he Florida
Commission on Ethics, a county or municipal Commission 0 n Ethics and Public Trust,
or a county or municipality that has established a local investigatory process to enforce
more stringent standards 0 f conduct a nd disclosure requirements as pr ovided ins.
112.326 is confidential unt il t he complaint is di smissed, t he alleged violator requests
that the proceedings be made public, or the commission or the county or municipality
that h as es tablished such a local investigatory pr ocess det ermines whether pr obable
cause exists. And see s. 455.225(4), F .S. (meetings of probable cause panels of the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation confidential unt il 10 day s after
probable cause i s found t 0 ex ist or until confidentiality waived by subject of
investigation); and s . 472. 033(4), F .S. ( meetings of pr obable cause panels for
disciplinary proceedings of the Board of Professional Surveyors and Mappers within the
Department of A griculture and Consumer Services are ex empt from s. 286.011, F .S.,
until 1 0 days after probable cause is found to exist or until confidentiality is waived by
subject of investigation).
For additional information regarding exemptions from s. 286.011, F.S., that relate to
investigatory proceedings, please consult Appendix D.
b. Meetings to consider confidential material
The Florida Supreme Court has stated that in the absence of a statute exempting a
meeting in which privileged material is discussed, s. 286.011, F.S., should be construed
as containing no exceptions. City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971).
The Public Records Act was amended in 1991 after several district courts held that
certain pr oceedings could b e closed when considering confidential material. Section
119.07(7), F.S., provides that an ex emption from s. 119.07, F .S., II does not imply an
exemption from s . 2 86.011. The ex emption from s . 2 86.011 must be ex pressly
provided." Thus, exemptions from the Public Records Act do not by implication allow a
public ag ency to c lose a meeting where exempt records are to be di scussed in the
absence of a specific exemption from the Sunshine Law. See AGOs 10-04 and 91-75
(school board), 04-44 (PRIDE), 95-65 (district case review committee), 93-41 (county
criminal justice commission), 91-88 (pension board) and 91-75 (school board). And see
AGOs 05-03 (confidentiality provisions of cited federal law do not authorize child abuse
death review committee to close its meetings although the committee should take steps
to ens ure that identifying information is n ot di sclosed at such meetings), an d 96-75
(since transcript of a closed attorney-client session is open to public inspection once the
litigation is concluded, city and its attorney should be sensitive to any discussions of
confidential medical reports during such a meeting and take precautions to protect the
confidentiality of such medical reports so that when t he transcript i s opened f or
inspection, the privacy of the employee will not be breached). Cf. AGO 96-40 (a town
may not require a complainant to sign a waiver of confidentiality be fore accepting a
whistle-blower's complaint f or pr ocessing since the Legislature has pr ovided f or
confidentiality of the whistle-blower's identity).
3. Legal matters
In the absence of a I egislative exemption, discussions between a publ ic board and
its attorney are subject to s. 286.011, F .S. Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company,
462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985) (s. 90.502, F .S., providing for the confidentiality of attorney-
client communications under the Florida Evidence Code, does not create an exemption
for attorney-client communications at public meetings; application of the Sunshine Law
to such discussions does not usurp Supreme Court's constitutional authority to regulate
the practice of law, nor is it at odds with Florida Bar rules providing for attorney-client
confidentiality). Cf s. 90.502(6), F .S., stating that a di scussion or activity that is not a
meeting for purposes of s. 286.011, F .S., shall not be construed to waive the attorney-
client privilege. And see Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. Thomas, 364 So.
2d 480 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1978), stating that all decisions taken by legal counsel to a public
board need not be made or approved by the board; thus, the decision to appeal made
by legal counsel after private discussions with the individual members of the board did
not violate s. 286.011, F.S.
There ar e statutory ex emptions, however, which appl y t 0 some di scussions of
pending litigation between a public board and its attorney.
a. Settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures
Section 286.011(8), F.S., provides:
Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), any board or commission of
any state ag ency or authority or an y ag ency or aut hority of an y county,
municipal corporation, or political subdivision, and the chief administrative or
executive of ficer 0 f t he governmental en tity, m ay meet i n pr ivate with t he
entity's attorney to discuss pending litigation to which the entity is presently a
party bef ore a court or adm inistrative ag ency, provided that the following
conditions are met:
(a) The entity's attorney shall advise the entity at a public meeting that he or
she desires advice concerning the litigation.
(b) The subject matter 0 f t he meeting s hall be confined t 0 settlement
negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures.
(c) The ent ire session s hall be recorded by a certified court reporter. The
reporter shall record the times of commencement and termination of the
session, all discussion and proceedings, the names of all persons present
at any time, a nd t he names 0 f all per sons speaking. N 0 portion of t he
session s hall be 0 ff the record. The court reporter's no tes s hall be fully
transcribed a nd filed with the entity's clerk within a reasonable time after
the meeting.
(d) The entity shall give reasonable public notice of the time and date of the
attorney-client session and t he na mes 0 f persons who will be at tending
the session. The session shall commence at an open meeting at which the
persons chairing t he meeting s hall announce t he commencement an d
estimated length 0 f t he attorney-client session a nd the n ames of t he
persons a ttending. A t t he conclusion 0 f the at torney-client session, t he
meeting s hall be reopened an d t he per son chairing t he meeting shall
announce the termination of the session.
(e) The transcript shall be made part of the public record upon conclusion of
the litigation. (e.s.)
(1) Is s. 286.011 (8) to be liberally or strictly construed?
It has been held that the Legislature intended astrict construction of s. 286.011 (8),
F.S. City of Dunnellon v. Aran, 662 S o. 2 d 102 6 ( Fla. 5t h D CA 1995). liThe clear
requirements of t he statute ar e n either one rous nor di fficult to s atisfy." Id. at 102 7.
Accord School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99
(Fla. 1 st DCA 1996).
(2) Who may call an attorney-client meeting?
While section 286.011 (8), F .S., does not specify who calls the closed attorney-client
meeting, it requires that the governmental entity's attorney II shall advise the entity at a
public meeting t hat he or s he desires advice concerning t he I itigation. II Thus, t he
exemption merely pr ovides a governmental entity's at torney an 0 pportunity tor eceive
necessary di rection and information from t he governmental ent ity regarding pendi ng
litigation. A GO 0 4-35. Accordingly, one 0 f the conditions that must b e met pr ior t 0
holding a closed attorney-client meeting is that the city attorney must indicate to the city
council at a public meeting that he or she wishes the advice of the city council regarding
the pending litigation tow hich t he city i s pr esentlya par ty be fore a court or
administrative ag ency. Inf. 0 p. to V ock, July 11, 2001. "If the city at torney does not
advise the city council at a public meeting that he or she desires the council's advice
regarding the litigation, the city council is not precluded from providing such advice to
the city attorney but it must do so at a public meeting. II Id.
The requirement that the board's attorney advise the board at a public meeting that
he or she desires advice concerning litigation, is not satisfied by a previously published
notice of the closed session; such an announcement must be made at a public meeting
of the board. AGO 04-35. The request may be made during a special meeting provided
that the special meeting at which the request is made is open to the public, reasonable
notice has been given, and minutes are taken. AGO 07-31.
(3) Who may attend?
Only t hose per sons listed in t he statutory ex emption, i.e., the entity, th e entity's
attorney, th e chief a dministrative of ficer 0 f t he en tity, and t he court reporter ar e
authorized t 0 a ttend a closed attorney-client se ssion. Other staff members 0 r
consultants ar e no t allowed to be pr esent. School Board of Duval County v. Florida
Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d at 101. See Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d
891, 898 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 735 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 1999) (city charter
provision requiring that city clerk attend all council meetings does not authorize clerk to
attend closed at torney-client session; municipality m ay no t authorize what t he
Legislature has ex pressly forbidden); A GO 01 -10 ( clerk of court not aut horized t 0
attend); and AGO 09-52 (attorneys representing superintendent not authorized to attend
closed session to di scuss settlement of ad ministrative action in which school bo ard is
the named party).
Since the entity's at torney is per mitted to attend the closed session, if t he school
board hires outside counsel to represent it in pending litigation, both the school board
attorney and the litigation attorney may attend a closed session. AGO 98-06. See Zorc
v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 898 (attendance of special counsel authorized).
In rejecting the argument that the exemption should be construed so as to allow staff
to at tend closed at torney-client sessions, t he courts have not ed t hat individual board
members are free to meet privately with staff at any time since "staff members are not
subject to the Sunshine Law." Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 899; School
Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d at 1 01. Cf. AGO 95-
06 (s. 286.011 [8], F .S., does not authorize the temporary adjournment and reconvening
of meetings in order for members who are attending such a session to leave the room
and consult with others outside the meeting). And see s. C .2.d., supra, regarding the
Sunshine Law's application to meetings between individual board members and staff, if
staff is bei ng used as a liaison between, or to c ond uct a de facto meeting 0 f, bo ard
members.
However, as the Attorney General's 0 ffice recognized i n A GO 08-42, qualified
interpreters for the deaf are treated by the Americans with Disabilities Act as auxiliary
aids in the nature of hearing aids and other assistive devices and may attend litigation
strategy meetings 0 f a bo ard or commission t 0 interpret for a deaf board member
without violating section 286.011 (8), F.S.
(4) Is substantial compliance with the conditions established in the statute
adequate?
In City of Dunnellon v. Aran, supra, t he court said t hat a city council's failure to
announce t he n ames of t he I awyers par ticipating i n a closed at torney-client session
violated t he Sunshine Law. The court rejected t he city's claim that when t he mayor
announced that attorneys hired by the city would attend the session (but did not give the
names 0 f t he individuals), hi s II substantial c ompliance" w as sufficient t 0 satisfy t he
statute. Cf Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 901, noting that deviation from the
agenda at a n attorney-client session i s not authorized; while such dev iation i s
permissible if a public meeting has be en pr operly not iced, "there i s no case I aw
affording the same latitude to deviations in closed door meetings. II
(5) What kinds of matters may be discussed at the attorney-client session?
Section 286.011(8)(b), F.S., states that the subject matter of the meeting shall be
confined t 0 settlement neg otiations or strategy sessions related t 0 litigation
expenditures. If a boa rd goes beyond the "strict parameters of settlement negotiations
and strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures" and takes II decisive action," a
violation of the Sunshine Law results. Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 900.
And see AGO 99-37 (closed-meeting exemption may be us ed only when the attorney
for a governmental entity seeks advice on settlement negotiations or strategy relating to
litigation expenditures; such meetings should not be used to finalize action or discuss
matters outside these two narrowly prescribed areas). Accord AGO 04-35.
Section 2 86.011(8), F.S.," simply pr ovides a governmental entity's at torney an
opportunity to receive necessary direction and information from the government entity.
No final decisions on I itigation matters can be voted on dur ing these private, attorney-
client strategy meetings. The decision to settle a case, for a certain amount of money,
under certain conditions is a dec ision which must be voted upon in a public meeting."
School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99, 100 (Fla.
1 st D CA 1 996), quoting Staff of Fla. H .R. Comm. 0 n Go v't Op erations, C S/HB 4 91
(1993) Final Bill Analysis & Economic Impact Statement 2 (Fla. State Archives), at 3.
Thus, II [t]he settlement of a case is exactly that type of final decision contemplated
by the drafters of section 286.011 (8) which must be voted upon in the sunshine." Zorc v.
City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 901. Accord AGO 08-17 (any action to approve a
settlement or I itigation ex penditures must be v oted on in a public meeting). See also
Freeman v. Times Publishing Company, 696 S o. 2d 427 ( Fla. 2d D CA 1 997)
(discussion 0 f methods or opt ions t 0 ac hieve continuing compliance with a I ong-
standing federal desegregation mandate [such as whether to modify the boundaries of a
school z one to ac hieve racial bal ance] must be hel din t he sunshine). Compare
Bruckner v. City of Dania Beach, 823 So. 2d 167, 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (closed city
commission meeting to discuss various options to settle a lawsuit involving a challenge
to a city resolution, including modification 0 f t he resolution, aut horized bec ause t he
commission II neither voted, took 0 fficial action t 0 am end t he resolution, nor di d it
formally decide to settle the litigation"); and Brown v. City of Lauderhill, 654 So. 2d 302,
303 ( Fla. 4 th D CA 1 995) ( closed-door session bet ween city at torney and board t 0
discuss claims for attorney's fees, authorized).
(6) When is an agency a party to "pending litigation" for purposes of the
exemption?
Section 286.011 (8) permits an entity to use the exemption if the entity "is presently a
party before a court or administrative agency. . . ." A city council and its attorney may,
therefore, hol d a closed-door meeting pur suant tot his statute t 0 di scuss settlement
negotiations or strategy related to I itigation expend itu res for pe nd ing litigation involving
a workers' compensation claim where a petition for benefits as prescribed in s. 440.192,
F.S., has been filed. AGO 96-75.
In Brown v. City of Lauderhill, 654 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the court said it
could II discern no rational bas is for concluding t hat a city is not a' party' to pendi ng
litigation in which it is the real party in interest. II And see Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722
So. 2d at 900 (city was pr esently a par ty to ong oing I itigation by virtue 0 fits al ready
pending claims in ba nkruptcy pr oceedings); and A GOs 09 -15 (exemption ap plicable
when city is real party in interest of a pending lawsuit despite not being a named party
at the time of the meeting), and 08-17 (health care district may hold a closed attorney-
client meeting t 0 discuss settlement neg otiations and strategies related t 0 litigation
expenditures for pe nding litigation i n which i ts wholly-owned subsidiary hol ding
company is the named party).
Although the Brown decision established that the exemption could be used by a city
that was a real party in interest on a claim involved in pending litigation, that decision
does not mean that an agency may meet in executive session with its attorney where
there i s 0 nly t he threat of lit igation. See AGOs 0 4-35 and 9 8-21 ( s. 2 86.011 [8]
exemption II does not apply w hen no I awsuit has been filed even t hough the par ties
involved believe litigation is inevitable"). And see AGOs 06-03 (exemption not applicable
to pre-litigation mediation proceedings), 09-14 (exemption not applicable to discussion
of terms of mediation in conflict resolution proceedings under the "Florida Governmental
Conflict Resolution Act," SSg 164.101-164.1061, F .S.), and 09-25 (town council which
received pre-suit notice letter under the Bert J. Harris Act, s. 70.001, F .S., is not a party
to pending litigation for purposes of s. 286.011 [8], F.S.).
(7) When is litigation "concluded" for purposes of s. 286.011 (8)(e)?
An ac tion or lawsuit is II pending" from its inception until t he rendition of a final
judgment. AGO 06-03. Litigation that is ongoing but temporarily suspended pursuant to
a stipulation for settlement has not been concluded for purposes of s. 286.011 (8), F .S.,
and a transcript 0 f meetings hel d bet ween t he city and i ts at torney to di scuss such
litigation may be kept confidential until conclusion of the litigation. AGO 94-64. And see
AGO 94-33 (a public agency may maintain the confidentiality of a record of a strategy or
settlement meeting between a public agency and its attorney until the suit is dismissed
with pr ejudice or t he appl icable statute 0 f I imitations h as run). Cf AGO 9 6-75
(disclosure of medical records to a city council during a closed-door meeting under s.
286.011 [8], F .S., does not affect requirement t hat the transcript of such a meeting be
made a part of the public record at the conclusion of the litigation).
b. Risk management exemption
Section 768.28(16)(c), F .S., states that portions 0 f meetings and pr oceedings
relating solely to the evaluation of claims or to offers of compromise of claims filed with
a risk management pr ogram 0 f t he state, its ag encies an d subdivisions, ar e ex empt
from s. 286.011, F .S. The minutes of such meetings and proceedings are also exempt
from pu blic disclosure until the termination of the I itigation and settlement of all claims
arising out of the same incident. Section 768.28(16)(d), F.S.
This exemption is limited and applies only to tort claims for which the agency may be
liable und er s. 768.28, F .S. AGO 04-35. The exemption is not ap plicable to meetings
held prior to the filing of a tort claim with the risk management program. AGO 92-82.
Moreover, a meeting 0 f a city's risk management committee i s ex empt from t he
Sunshine Law only when the meeting relates solely to the evaluation of a tort claim filed
with the risk management program or relates solely to an offer of compromise of a tort
claim filed with the risk management program. AGO 04-35.
Unlike s. 286.011(8), F.S., s. 768.28(16), F .S., does not specify the personnel who
are authorized to attend the meeting. See AGO 00-20, advising that personnel of the
school district who are involved in the risk management aspect of the tort claim being
litigated or settled m ay at tend such meetings without jeopardizing t he confidentiality
provisions of the statute.
c. Notice of settlement of tort claim
A governmental entity, except a municipality or county, settling a claim in tort which
requires t he ex penditure 0 f more than $ 5,000 in pu blic funds, is required to pr ovide
notice pursuant to Ch. 50, F .S., of the settlement in the county in which the claim arose
within 60 days of entering into the settlement. No notice is required if the settlement has
been approved by a court of competent jurisdiction. Section 69.081 (9), F.S.
4. Personnel matters
Meetings of a public board or commission at which personnel matters are discussed
are n ot ex empt from the pr ovisions 0 f s. 286.011, F .S., in t he absence of a specific
statutory exemption. Times Publishing Company v. Williams, 222 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d
DCA 196 9), disapproved in part on other grounds, Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing
Company, 46 2 S 0.2 d 82 1 (Fla. 1985). And see AGO 10-14 (three member team
established by charter school board of directors to review personnel decisions of the
school subject to Sunshine Law).
a. Collective bargaining discussions
(1) Strategy sessions
A limited exemption from s. 286.011, F .S., exists for discussions between the chief
executive officer of the public employer, or his or her representative, and the legislative
body of the public employer relative to collective bargaining. Section 447.605(1), F .S. A
similar ex emption is contained ins. 1 10.201 (4), F .S., for discussions be tween t he
Department 0 f Management Services and the Governor, between the de partment and
the Administration Commission or agency hea ds, or between any of their respective
representatives, relative to collective bargaining.
A dul y-appointed labor neg otiating committee 0 f a city t hat does not have a city
manager or city administrator qualifies as the "chief executive officer" for purposes of s.
447.605(1), F .S., an d may use t he exemption when meeting with the city council to
discuss collective bar gaining. AGO 8 5-99. And see AGO 9 9-27, concluding t hat a
committee formed by the city manager to represent the city in labor neg otiations may
participate in closed executive sessions conducted pursuant to s. 447.605(1), F.S. The
exemption also extends to meetings of the negotiating committee itself which are held to
discuss labor neg otiation strategies, including w hen the committee adjourns dur ing
negotiations to hold a caucus among i ts members t 0 determine the strategy t 0 be
employed in ongoing negotiations. Id.
If a school superintendent's responsibility to conduct collective bargaining on behalf
of t he school bo ard h as bee n completely del egated t 0 a separate labor neg otiating
committee a nd t he superintendent does n ot par ticipate i n t he collective bar gaining
negotiations, t he ex emption a fforded by s. 447. 605(1), F .S., ap plies to di scussions
between the committee and the school board only and does not encompass discussions
among the committee, school board and superintendent. AGO 98-06.
The exemption afforded by s. 447.605(1), F.S., applies only in the context of actual
and impending collective bargaining negotiations. AGO 85-99. It does not allow private
discussions of a proposed "mini-PERC ordinance" or the stance a public body intends
to adopt in regard to unionization and/or collective bargaining. AGO 75-48. Moreover, a
public bo dy m ay not conduct an entire meeting out side the Sunshine Law merely by
discussing one topic during the course of that meeting which may be statutorily exempt
from s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 85-99.
Section 447.605(1), F.S., does not directly address the dissemination of information
that may be obt ained at t he closed meeting, but there is clear legislative intent that
matters discussed during such meetings are not to be open to public disclosure. AGO
03-09.
(2) Negotiations
The collective bar gaining negotiations between t he chief ex ecutive of ficer and a
bargaining ag ent ar e not ex empt and pursuant t 0 s .4 47.605(2), F .S., must be
conducted in the sunshine. Once the collective bar gaining pr ocess beg ins, w hen one
side or its representative, whether before or after the declaration of an impasse, meets
with the other side or its representative to discuss anything relevant to the terms and
conditions 0 f t he employer-employee relationship, the meeting i s subject tot he
Sunshine Law. City of Fort Myers v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 514 So. 2d
408,412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Accord AGO 99-27. As with other meetings subject to s.
286.011, F .S., minutes of the negotiation meeting must be kept. I nf. 0 p. to Fulwider,
June 14, 1993.
The Legislature has, therefore, divided Sunshine Law policy on collective bargaining
for public employees into two parts: when the public employer is meeting with its own
side, it is exempt from the Sunshine Law; when the public employer is meeting with the
other side, it is required to comply with the Sunshine Law. City of Fort Myers v. News-
Press Publishing Company, Inc., 514 So. 2d at 412; and AGO 76-102. Cf. Palm Beach
County Classroom Teachers' Association v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 411
So. 2d 1375, 13 76 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 1982) ( collective bar gaining agreement cannot b e
used lito circumvent the requirements of public meetings" in s. 286.011, F.S.).
b. Complaint review boards, disciplinary proceedings and grievances
A complaint review board of a city police department is subject to the Government in
the Sunshine Law. Barfield v. City of West Palm Beach, No. CL94-2141-AC (Fla. 15th
Cir. Ct. May 6, 1994). Accord AGOs 78-105 (police complaint review boards convened
pursuant to s. 112.532[2], F.S., are subject to the Sunshine Law), and 80-27 (sheriff civil
service board created by special act). And see AGO 93-79 (discussions between two
members of a three-member complaint review boar d regarding their selection 0 f the
third member 0 f t he board must be conducted in ac cordance with s . 286.011, F .S.).
Compare Molina v. City of Miami, 837 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (Sunshine Law
does n ot ap ply t 0 a Discharge of Firearms Review Committee, composed of three
deputy chiefs of police, because the committee is nothing more than a meeting of staff
members who serve in a fact-finding advisory capacity to the chief ).
Similarly, meetings of a board or commission to conduct disciplinary proceedings are
subject to the Sunshine Law in the absence of a statutory exemption. See, e.g., AGOs
92-65 (employee termination hearing), 07 -54 (while post-termination hearing before city
manager are not subject to the Sunshine Law, hearings before a three member panel
appointed by the city manager should be 0 pen), and 1 0-14 (team created by charter
school board 0 f di rectors tor eview em ployment decisions is subject to the Sunshine
Law). And see News-Press Publishing Company v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646,647-648
(Fla. 1977) , i n which t he Court disapproved 0 f a county's us e 0 f II pseudonyms or
cloaked references" during a meeting held to reprimand an unnamed department head.
Cf Inf. 0 p. toG erstein, July 16, 1 976, noting t hat a di scussion bet ween t wo city
councilmen and the city manager regarding the city manager's resignation was subject
to the Sunshine Law.
A meeting of a municipal housing a uthority commission to consider an employee's
appeal of his or her dismissal by the executive director must be open to the public. AGO
92-65. See also AGO 7 7-132 (personnel council composed 0 f citizens appoi nted by
members of county commission to hear appeals from county employees who have been
disciplined n ot au thorized t 0 del iberate ins ecret). And see Dascott v. Palm Beach
County, 877 S o. 2d 8 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 200 4) (deliberations 0 f pre-termination pa nel
composed of t he de partment head, personnel di rector an d eq ual opp ortunity di rector
should have been held in the Sunshine). Compare Jordan v. Jenne, 938 So. 2d 526
(Fla. 4t h D CA 2006) ( Sunshine Law no t ap plicable t 0 a pr ofessional standards
committee responsible f or reviewing charges against a sheriff's deput y and making
recommendations t 0 the inspector general as t 0 whether t he charges should be
sustained, di smissed, or whether the case should be de ferred for more information);
McDougall v. Culver, 3 So. 3d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).
Where, however, a mayor as chief executive officer, rather than the city council, is
responsible under the city charter for disciplining city employees, meetings between the
mayor and a city employee concerning discipline of the employee are not subject to the
Sunshine Law. City of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 13 54
(Fla. 4th DCA 1989).
The Sunshine Law also applies to board discussions concerning grievances. AGO
76-102. And see Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher's Association v. School Board
of Palm Beach County, 411 S o. 2 d 13 75 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 1 982), in which t he court
affirmed t he lower tribunal's refusal t 0 issue a temporary injunction t 0 ex clude a
newspaper reporter from a grievance ar bitration hearing. A collective bar gaining
agreement cannot be used lito circumvent the requirements of public m eetings" ins.
286.011, F .S. Id. at 1 376. See also Dascott v. Palm Beach County, supra (grievance
committee hearings subject to Sunshine Law); and A GO 84-70 (Sunshine Law appl ies
to staff grievance committee created to make nonbinding recommendations to a county
administrator regarding disposition of employee grievances).
c. Evaluations
Meetings 0 f a bo ard to evaluate employee performance ar e no t ex empt from t he
Sunshine Law. See AGO 89-37 (Sunshine Law applies to meetings of a board of county
commissioners when conducting job evaluations of county employees).
A bo ard that i s responsible for assessing t he performance 0 fits chief ex ecutive
officer (CEO) should conduct the review and appraisal process in a proceeding open to
the public as prescribed by s. 286.011, F .S., instead of using a review procedure in
which individual boar d members evaluate t he C EO's per formance an d send their
individual written comments tot he board chairman for compilation an d subsequent
discussion with the C EO. A GO 9 3-90. However, meetings 0 f individual school board
members with the superintendent to discuss the individual board members' evaluations
do n ot v iolate the Sunshine Law when such evaluations d 0 not bec ome t he board's
evaluation until they ar e compiled a nd di scussed a t a pu blic meeting by t he school
board for adoption by the board. AGO 97-23.
d. Interviews
The Sunshine Law applies to meetings of a board of county commissioners when
interviewing applicants for county pos itions appointed by t he board, when conducting
job evaluations of county em ployees ans wering to an d serving at t he pleasure 0 f the
board, a nd when conducting em ployment termination interviews of county em ployees
who serve at t he pi easure 0 f t he board. AGO 89 -37. And see AGO 7 5-37 ( state
commission must conduct interviews relating to hiring of its lawyer in public); and AGO
71-389 ( district school bo ard conducting employment interviews for district school
superintendent applicants would violate the Sunshine Law if such interviews were held
in secret).
e. Selection and screening committees
The Sunshine Law applies to advisory committees created by an agency to assist in
the selection process. In Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2 d 934 (Fla. 1983), a committee
created t 0 screen a pplications and make recommendations for t he position 0 f a law
school de an was hel d to be subject to s. 286.011, F .S. By screening appl icants an d
deciding which applicants to reject from further consideration, the committee performed
a pol icy-based, dec ision-making function delegated t 0 i t by t he pr esident 0 f t he
university. And see AGOs 8 0-20 ( selection committee appointed to screen an drank
applicants for submission to the city council subject to the Sunshine Law even though
the city council was not bound by the committee's rankings), and 80-51 (Sunshine Law
applicable to city selection committee screening proposals from consultants and audit
firms). Cf Dore v. Sliger, No.9 0-1850 ( Fla. 2 d C ir. C t. July 1 1, 1 990) (faculty 0 f
university law school pr ohibited from conducting secret ballots on personnel hi ring
matters); and AGO 10-14 (team to review charter school employment decisions subject
to Sunshine Law).
However, i f t he sole f unction of t he screening committee i s simply tog ather
information for t he decision-maker, rather than to ac cept or r eject applicants, t he
committee's activities are outside the Sunshine Law. See Cape Publications, Inc. v. City
of Palm Bay, 473 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), holding that the Sunshine Law was
not violated when the city manager, who was responsible for selecting the new police
chief, asked several people to sit in on the interviews as the only function of this group
was to assist the city manager in acquiring information on the applicants he had chosen
by asking questions during the interviews and then discussing the qualifications of each
candidate with the city manager after the interview. And see Knox v. District School
Board of Brevard, 821 So. 2d 311, 314 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), holding that an-interview
team composed 0 f staff was not subject to s. 286.011, F .S., even t hough the team
made recommendations since II all t he applications went tot he superintendent and he
decided which applicants to interview and nominate to the school board."
For more information on this subject, pi ease refer tot he di scussion on adv isory
bodies found in s. B.2., supra.
5. Purchasing or bid evaluation committees
A committee appointed by a college's purchasing di rector t 0 consider pr oposals
submitted by contractors w as held to be subject to t he Sunshine Law bec ause i ts
function w as to" weed through t he various pr oposals, t 0 de termine which were
acceptable and to rank them accordingly." Silver Express Company v. District Board of
Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099, 1100 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Accord Inf. Op. to
Lewis, March 15, 19 99 ( panels es tablished by state ag ency t 0 create requests for
proposals and evaluate vendor responses are subject to the Sunshine Law). And see
Leach-Wells v. City of Bradenton, 734 So. 2d 1168, 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (selection
committee created by city council t 0 evaluate proposals violated t he Sunshine Law
when the city clerk unilaterally ranked the proposals based on the committee members'
individual written evaluations; the court held that lithe short-listing was formal action that
was required to be taken at a public meeting"). Cf s. 286.0113(2), F.S., providing an
exemption from the Sunshine Law for meetings at which a neg otiation with a vendor is
conducted pursuant to s. 287.057(1), F.S.
In Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen's Association, Local
1922-1, 65 2 S o. 2 d 1 169, 1 170 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 1995) , t he court ruled t hat a bo ard's
selection and negotiation committee violated t he Sunshine L aw when competing
bidders were requested t 0 excuse themselves from t he committee meeting dur ing
presentations by competitors. The court found that the committee's actions "amounted
to a de facto exclusion of the competitors, especially since the 'request' was made by an
official di rectly involved with t he pr ocurement pr ocess. II Cf. Pinel/as County School
Board v. Suncam, Inc., 829 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (school board violated the
Sunshine Law when it refused to permit videotaping of a public meeting held to evaluate
general contractor construction proposals).
6. Quasi-judicial proceedings
The Florida Supreme Court has stated that t here is no ex ception to the Sunshine
Law which would al low closed-door he arings or del iberations w hen a boar d or
commission is acting in a "quasi-judicial" capacity. Canney v. Board of Public Instruction
of Alachua County, 278 S o. 2 d 26 0 ( Fla. 19 73). See also Occidental Chemical
Company v. Mayo, 351 S o. 2d 3 36, 340 n.7 (Fla. 1977), disapproved in part on other
grounds, Citizens v. Beard, 613 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1992 ) (characterization of the Public
Service Commission's dec ision-making pr ocess as "quasi-judicial" di d not ex empt it
from s. 286.011, F .S.); a nd Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher's Association v.
School Board of Palm Beach County, 411 So. 2d 1 375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), affirming
the lower court's refusal to issue a temporary injunction to exclude a newspaper reporter
from a grievance hearing.
The Attorney General's 0 ffice has concluded t hat del iberations of t he following
boards or commissions are subject to s. 286.011, F .S., notwithstanding the fact that the
boards or commissions ar e ac ting i n a "quasi-judicial" capacity: municipal ho using
authority, A GO 9 2-65; municipal board of adjustment, A GO 83 -43; personnel council
created t 0 he ar ap peals 0 f di sciplined em ployees, A GO 77-132; as sessment
administration review commission, AGO 75-37; civil service board, AGOs 73-370 and
71-29; fair housing and employment appeals board, Inf. Op. to Beare, April 20, 1977.
7. Real property negotiations
In t he absence 0 f a statutory ex emption, t he neg otiations by a publ ic boar d or
commission for the s ale or purchase of property must be conducted in the sunshine.
See City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38, 40 (Fla. 1971) (city commission not
authorized to hold closed sessions to discuss condemnation issues). In addition, if the
authority of t he public board or commission t 0 ac quire or I ease pr operty has been
delegated t 0 a single m ember, that member i s subject t 0 s . 28 6.011, F .S., an d is
prohibited from negotiating the acquisition or lease of the property in secret. AGO 74-
294. Cf AGO 95-06 (statutory exemption from Ch. 119, F.S., for certain records relating
to the proposed purchase of real property does not authorize a city or its designee to
conduct negotiations for purchase of property outside the Sunshine Law).
Advisory committees charged with land acquisition responsibilities are also subject
to the Sunshine Law. See AGOs 87-42 (ad hoc committee appointed by mayor to meet
with the Chamber of Commerce to discuss a proposed transfer of city property), and 86-
51 (land selection committee appointed by water management district to evaluate and
recommend projects for acquisition).
E. DOES THE SUNSHINE LAW APPLY TO:
1. members-elect or candidates;
2. meetings between members of different boards;
3. meetings between a mayor and a member of the city council;
4. meetings between a board member and his or her alternate;
5. meetings between an ex officio, non-voting board member and a voting member
of the board;
6. community forums sponsored by private organizations;
7. board members attending meetings of another public board;
8. social events; or
9. a husband and wife serving on the same board?
1. Members-elect or candidates
Members-elect 0 f bo ards or commissions a re subject tot he Sunshine Law. See
Hough v. Stembridge, 278 S o. 2 d 288 , 28 9 ( Fla. 3d D CA 1973) (individual, upon
election to public office, loses his or her status as a pr ivate individual and acquires a
position more ak in to that 0 f a public trustee and therefore is subject to s . 286 .011 ,
F.S.). And see AGO 74-40 (members-elect may be liable for "sunshine" violations).
However, the Sunshine Law does not apply to a briefing session between a retiring
mayor and t he mayor-elect who is not an incumbent council member since the mayor
and t he mayor-elect do not , and w ill not once t he mayor-elect takes 0 ffice, serve
together 0 n t he city council. A GO 9 3-04. Nor does t he Sunshine Law appl y t 0
candidates for office, unless the candidate is an incumbent seeking reelection. AGO 92-
05. And see AGO 9 8-60 (although a candidate running for city commission may be
unopposed, he or she is not considered to be elected until the election has been held
and therefore is not a member-elect for purposes of the Sunshine Law until that time).
2. Meetings between members of different boards
The Sunshine Law does not ap ply t 0 a meeting be tween individuals w ho ar e
members of different boards unless one or more of the individuals has been delegated
the authority to act on behalf of his or her board. Rowe v. Pinellas Sports Authority, 461
So. 2d 72 ( Fla. 19 84). Accord AGO 84-16 ( meeting bet ween t he c hair of a pr ivate
industry council created pur suant t 0 f ederall aw and t he c hair of a five-county
employment and training consortium created pur suant to s tate I aw is not subject to
Sunshine Law, unless there is a delegation of decision-making authority to the chair of
the consortium); and I nf. 0 p. to M cClash, April 29, 1992 (Sunshine Law generally not
applicable t 0 county commissioner meeting with individual m ember of metropolitan
planning organization). And see News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Lee County,
Florida, 570 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (Sunshine Law not applicable to mediation
proceeding at tended by individual members 0 f city and county boar ds w ho were in
litigation because only one member of each board was present at the proceedings and
no final settlement negotiations could be made during the mediation conference).
An individual city council member may, therefore, meet privately with an individual
member of t he municipal pi anning an d zoning boar d t 0 di scuss a recommendation
made by that bo ard since two or more members 0 f ei ther board ar e not pr esent,
provided t hat no delegation 0 f dec ision-making aut hority has be en made and nei ther
member is acting as a liaison. AGO 87-34. Accord AGOs 99-55 (school board member
meeting with member of advisory committee established by school board), and 97-52
(discussions between individual member of community college board of trustees and
school board member regarding acquisition of property by school board).
3. Meetings between a mayor and a member of the city council
If the mayor is a m ember of the councilor has a voice indecision-making through
the power to br eak tie votes, meetings between the mayor and a member of the city
council to discuss some matter which will come before the city council are subject to the
Sunshine Law. AGOs 8 3-70 an d 75 -210. Cf AGO 9 2-26 (discussions be tween the
mayor and city ad ministrator, who are members of a personnel committee responsible
for making recommendations to the city council, on matters which foreseeably will come
before the committee for action are governed by s. 286.011, F.S.).
Where, however, t he mayor i s not a member 0 f t he city council and does not
possess any power to vote even in the case of a tie vote but possesses only the power
to veto legislation, then the mayor may privately meet with an individual member of the
city council without violating the Sunshine Law, provided the mayor is not acting as a
liaison between members and neither individual has been delegated the authority to act
on behalf of the council. AGOs 90-26 and 85-36. And see Inf. Op. to Cassady, April 7,
2005 (mayor who is not a member of the city council and cannot vote even in the event
of a t ie, may meet with an individual council member t 0 discuss t he mayor's
recommendations to the council concerning prospective appointees).
If a dec ision falls within t he ad ministrative functions 0 f t he mayor and would no t
come be fore t he city council for consideration, discussions be tween an individual
member of the city council and the mayor are not subject to the Sunshine Law since
such discussions do n ot relate to a matter which will foreseeably come before the city
council for action. AGOs 83-70 and 75210. See s. B.10., supra. Cf City of Sunrise v.
News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (since mayor
was responsible under the city charter for disciplining city employees, mayor in carrying
out this function was not subject to s. 286.011, F.S.).
4. Meetings between a board member and his or her alternate
Since the alternate is authorized to act only in the absence of a board or commission
member, there is n 0 meeting 0 f two individuals w ho ex ercise independent d ecision-
making aut hority at the meeting. There is, in effect, onl y one dec ision-making 0 fficial
present. Therefore, a meeting between a board member and his or her alternate is not
subject to the Sunshine Law. AGO 88-45.
5. Meetings between an ex officio, non-voting board member and a voting
member of the board
Meetings between a v oting member 0 f a boar d and a non-voting member w ho
serves as a member of the board in an ex officio, non-voting capacity, are subject to the
Sunshine Law. AGO 05-18.
6. Community forums sponsored by private organizations
A II Candidates' N ight" sponsored by a pr ivate organization at which candidates for
public office, including several incumbent city council members, will speak about their
political philosophies, trends, and issues facing the city, is not subject to the Sunshine
Law unl ess t he council members di scuss issues coming be fore the council among
themselves. AGO 92-05. Compare Inf. Op. to Jove, January 12, 2009, concluding that a
public forum hos ted by a city council member with city council members invited t 0
attend and participate in the discussion would be subject to s. 286.011, F.S.
Similarly, in AGO 94-62, the Attorney General's Office concluded that the Sunshine
Law does not apply to a pol itical forum sponsored by a private civic club during which
county commissioners ex press their p osition on matters t hat may f oreseeably come
before t he commission, sol ong as t he commissioners av oid di scussions am ong
themselves on these issues. And see A GO 08 -18 ( participation by two city council
members i n a citizens pol ice ac ademy does no t violate t he Sunshine Law; " [t]he
educational course is not changed into a meeting of a bo ard or commission. . . by the
attendance and participation of members of the city council in the course work of the
academy").
However, caution should be exercised to avoid situations in which private political or
community forums may be used to circumvent the statute's requirements. Id. See Town
of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473,477 (Fla. 1974) (Sunshine Law must be
construed "so as to frustrate all evasive devices"). For example, in State v. Foster, 12
F.L.W. Supp. 1194a (Fla. Broward Co. Ct. September 26, 2005), the court rejected the
argument that t he Sunshine L aw per mitted city commissioners t 0 at tend a pr ivate
breakfast meeting at which t he sheriff s poke a nd t he commissioners individually
questioned the sheriff but did not direct comments or questions to each other. The court
denied the commissioners' motion for summary judgment and ruled that the discussion
should have been held in the Sunshine because the sheriff was a "common facilitator"
who received comments from each commissioner in front of the other commissioners.
7. Board members attending meetings of another public board
The Attorney General's 0 ffice has stated that t he Sunshine Law does not prohibit
city commissioners from attending ot her city boar d meetings a nd commenting on
agenda items t hat may subsequently come be fore t he commission for final ac tion,
provided the city commissioners attending such meetings do not discuss those issues
among themselves. AGO 0 0-68. And see AGOs 99-55 ( school boar d member m ay
attend a pu blic meeting of an adv isory committee without pr ior not ice 0 f hi s or her
attendance; if, however, it is known that two or more members of the school board are
planning t 0 be i n a ttendance and participate, i t would be advisable t 0 note their
attendance i n t he notice of t he advisory committee meeting), and 98-79 ( city
commissioner may attend a community development board meeting held to consider a
proposed city ordinance and express his or her views on the proposed ordinance even
though ot her city commissioners m ay be i n at tendance; however, t he city
commissioners i n at tendance may not en gage i n a di scussion or debat e among
themselves). See also AGOs 05-59,91-95 and 77-138.
When board members also serve on a second public board, the Attorney General's
Office has stated that the board members may participate in the meetings of the second
board held in accordance with s. 286.011, F.S., and express their opi nions relating to
the second board's business without violating t he Sunshine Law. A GO 07 -13 ( two
county commissioners serving as board members for a regional planning council). And
see AGO 98-14, stating that members of a metropolitan planning organization (MPO)
who also serve as city council members are not required to separately notice an M PO
meeting when they plan to discuss MPO matters at an advertised city council meeting
as long as the agenda of the city council meeting mentioned that MPO business would
be discussed.
8. Social events
Members 0 f a pu blic board or commission are no t pr ohibited un der t he Sunshine
Law from meeting together socially, provided that matters which may come before the
board or commission are not discussed at such gatherings. AGO 92-79. Therefore, a
luncheon meeting hel d by a pr ivate or ganization f or members 0 f a public board or
commission at which there is no di scussion among such officials on matters relating to
public bus iness would not b e subject tot he Sunshine Law merely bec ause 0 f t he
presence of two or more members of a covered board or commission. AGO 72-158.
Accord Inf. 0 p. t 0 Batchelor, M ay 27, 1982 ( Sunshine Law inapplicable when t he
gathering of t wo or m ore members 0 f a board or commission i sent irely f or social
purposes and no public business is discussed).
9. A husband and wife serving on the same board
There is no per se violation of the Sunshine Law for a husband and wife to serve on
the same pu blic boar d or c omm ission sol ong as t hey do no t discuss bo ard bus iness
without complying with the requirements of s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 89-06.
F. WHAT ARE THE NOTICE AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE
SUNSHINE LAW?
1. What kind of notice of the meeting must be given?
a. Reasonable notice required
A vital element of the Sunshine Law is the requirement that boards subject to the law
provide II reasonable n otice" 0 fall meetings. See s. 286.011 (1), F .S. Even be fore the
statutory am endment in 1 995 expressly requiring not ice, the courts ha d stated that in
order for a public meeting to be in essence "public," reasonable notice of the meeting
must beg iven. See Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2 d 288, 291 (Fla. 3d D CA 1973) ;
Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515, 517 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1985).
Reasonable pu blic notice i s required for all meetings subject tot he Sunshine Law
and is required even though a quorum is not present. AGOs 90-56 and 71-346. And see
Baynard v. City of Chidland, Florida, No. 38-2002-CA-000789 (Fla. 8th C ir. Ct. July 8,
2003) (reasonable notice required even if subject of meeting is "relatively unimportant").
Notice is required even though meetings of the board are II of general knowledge" and
are not conducted in a closed door manner. TSI Southeast, Inc. v. Royals, 588 So. 2d
309,310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). "Governmental bodies who hold unnoticed meetings do
so at their peril." Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 S o. 2d 8 57,
869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).
The type of notice that must be given is variable, however, depending on the facts of
the situation and the board involved. In some instances, posting of the notice in an area
set aside for that purpose may be sufficient; in others, publication in a local newspaper
may be necessary. In each case, an agency must give notice at such time and in such a
manner as will enable the media and the general public to attend the meeting. AGOs
04-44,80-78 and 73-170. And see Rhea v. City of Gainesville, 574 So. 2d 221,222
(Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (purpose of the notice requirement is to apprise the public of the
pendency of matters that might affect their rights, afford them the opportunity to appear
and present their views, and afford them a reasonable time to make an appearance if
they wish). Cf Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785, 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (where
county attorney provided citizen with "personal due notice" of a committee meeting and
its function, it would be II unjust tor eward" t he citizen by concluding t hat a meeting
lacked adequate notice because the newspaper advertisement failed to correctly name
the committee). See also Suncam, Inc. v. Worrall, No. C197-3385 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. May
9,1997) (Sunshine Law requires notice to the general public; agency not required to
provide II individual n otice" t 0 company that wished t 0 be informed when certain
meetings were going to occur).
While the Attorney General's Office cannot specify the type of notice which must be
given in all cases, it has suggested the following notice guidelines:
1. The notice should contain the time and place of the meeting and, if
available, an agenda (or if no agenda is available, subject matter
summations might be used);
2. the notice should be prominently displayed in the area in the agency's
offices set aside for that purpose, e.g., for cities, in city hall;
3. emergency sessions should be afforded the most appropriate and
effective notice under the circumstances and special meetings should
have at least 24 hours reasonable notice to the public; and
4. the use of press releases and/or phone calls to the wire services and other
media is highly effective. On matters of critical public concern such as
rezoning, budgeting, taxation, appointment of public officers, etc.,
advertising in the local newspapers of general circulation would be
appropriate.
See, e.g., AGOs 00-08, 94-62 and 90-56. The notice procedures set forth above should
be considered as suggestions which w ill vary dependi ng upon t he circumstances of
each particular situation. See AGO 73-170 ("If the purpose for notice is kept in mind,
together with the character of the event about which notice is to be given and the nature
of the rights to be affected, the essential requirements for notice in that situation will
suggest themselves. ").
Thus, in Rhea v. City of Gainesville, 574 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), the court
held that a complaint alleging that members of the local news media were contacted
about a special meeting 0 f t he city commission 0 ne and on e-half hours bef ore t he
meeting stated as ufficient cause of action that the Sunshine Law had be en violated.
Compare Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1985) (three days' notice
of special meeting deemed adequate); and News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Cox,
702 F. Supp. 891 (S.D. Fla. 1988) (no Sunshine Law violation occurred when on March
31, a "general notice" of a city commission meeting scheduled for April 5 was posted on
the bulletin board ou tside city hall). And see Yarbrough v. Young, supra, at 51 7n.1
(Sunshine Law does not require city council to give notice "by paid advertisements" of
its intent to take action regarding utilities system improvements although the Legislature
"has required such notice for certain subjects," see, e.g., 166.041 [3][c], F.S.).
The determination as to who will actually prepare the notice or agenda is essentially
"an integral part of t he actual mechanics a nd procedures for conducting t hat meeting
and, therefore, aptly relegated to local practice and procedure as prescribed by .
charters and ordinances." Hough, 278 So. 2d at 291.
b. Notice requirements when meeting adjourned to a later date
If a meeting is to be adjourned and reconvened later to complete the business from
the agenda of the adjourned meeting, the second meeting should also be noticed. AGO
90-56. But see State v. Adams, N o. 9 1-175-CC (Fla. Sumter Co. C t. July 15, 1992),
holding that s. 2 86.011, F .S., was not v iolated by a brief di scussion as tow hether
commission members could make an inspection t rip when the di scussion took pi ace
immediately after t he adjournment of a duly not iced commission meeting, the room
remained open during the discussion, no m ember of the public relied to their detriment
on the adjournment by leaving the proceedings, and there was no allegation that the
alleged adjournment was utilized as a tool to avoid the public scrutiny of governmental
meetings. And see Greenbarg v. Metropolitan Dade County Board of County
Commissioners, 61 8 So. 2d 76 0 ( Fla. 3d D CA 1 993) ( no impropriety i n county
commission continuing its meeting until the early morning hours).
c. Notice requirements when board acting as quasi-judicial body or taking action
affecting individual rights
Section 286.0105, F.S., requires:
Each board, commission, or agency of this state or of any political subdivision
thereof shall include in the notice of any meeting or hearing, if notice of the
meeting or hear ing i s required, 0 f such board, commission, 0 r ag ency,
conspicuously on such notice, the advice that, if a person decides to appeal
any decision made by the board, agency, or commission with respect to any
matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of
the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he or she may need to ensure
that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the
testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
Where a public board or commission acts as a quasi-judicial body or takes official
action on matters that affect individual rights of citizens, in contrast with the rights of the
public at large, the board or commission is subject to the requirements of s. 286.0105,
F.S. AGO 81-06.
d. Effect of notice requirements imposed by other statutes, codes or ordinances
While t he Sunshine L aw requires onl y t hat reasonable public no tice be given, a
public ag ency may b e subject t 0 additional not ice requirements imposed by ot her
statutes, charters or codes. See, e.g., s. 166.041 (notice requirements for adoption of
municipal ordinances); and s. 189.417(1), F.S. (notice requirements for meetings of the
governing bodies of special districts). In such cases, the requirements of that statute,
charter, or code must be strictly observed. Inf. Op. to Mattimore, February 6, 1996. Cf
Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515, 517, n.1 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1985) (Sunshine Law does
not require city council to give notice "by paid advertisements" of its intent to take action
regarding ut ilities system improvements, al though t he Legislature II has required such
notice for certain subjects," e.g., 166.041 [3][c], F.S.).
Thus, a board or commission subject to Ch. 120, F .S., the Administrative Procedure
Act, must comply with t he not ice requirements of t hat act. See, e.g., s. 1 20.525, F .S.,
which provides for publication in the Florida Administrative Weekly and on the agency's
website not less than 7 day s be fore t he e vent. Those requirements, however, ar e
imposed by C h. 1 20, F .S., n ot s. 286.011, F .S., al though t he notice 0 f aboard or
commission published in the Florida Administrative Weekly pursuant to Ch. 120, F .S.,
also satisfies the notice requirements of s. 286.011, F .S. Florida Parole and Probation
Commission v. Baranko, 407 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1982).
2. Does the Sunshine Law require that an agenda be made available prior to
board meetings or restrict the board from taking action on matters not on
the agenda?
The Sunshine Law does not mandate that an agency provide notice of each item to
be di scussed v ia a published agenda al though t he Attorney General's Office ha s
recommended the publication of an agenda, if available. The courts have rejected such
a requirement because it could effectively preclude access to meetings by members of
the general public who wish to bring specific issues before a governmental body. See
Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d D CA 1 973); and Yarbrough v. Young,
462 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (posted agenda unnecessary and public body not
required to postpone meeting due to inaccurate press report which was not part of the
public body's official notice efforts).
Thus, the Sunshine Law does not require boards to consider only those matters on a
published ag enda. "[W]hether t 0 impose a requirement that restricts every relevant
commission or board from considering matters not on an ag enda is a pol icy decision to
be made by the legislature. II Law and Information Services, Inc. v. City of Riviera Beach,
670 So. 2d 1014,1016 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So.
3d 193 (Fla. 1st D CA 2 010), appeal pending, No. S C10-798 (Fla. April 20,20 10)
(Sunshine Law does not prohibit use of consent agenda procedure to approve minutes).
Even though the Sunshine Law does not prohibit a board from adding topics to the
agenda 0 far egularly not iced meeting, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice has adv ised
boards to postpone formal action on a ny added items that are controversial. See AGO
03-53, stating that II [i]n the spirit of the Sunshine Law, the city commission should be
sensitive to the community's concerns that it be allowed advance notice and, therefore,
meaningful participation on controversial issues coming before the commission.II
While t he Sunshine Law requires not ice 0 f meetings, no t 0 f t he individual items
which m ay be considered at that meeting, ot her statutes, c odes or or dinances m ay
impose such a requirement and agencies subject to those provisions must follow them.
See Inf. Op. to Mattimore, February 6, 1996. For example, s. 120.525(2), F .S., requires
that agencies subject to the Administrative Procedure Act must prepare an ag enda in
time to ensure that a copy may be received at least seven days before the event by any
person in the state who requests a copy and who pays the reasonable cost of the copy.
After the agenda has been made available, changes may be made only for good cause.
Id. Therefore, ag encies subject tot he Administrative Procedure Act must follow t he
requirements in that statute
3. Does the Sunshine Law limit where meetings of a public board or commission
may be held?
a. Inspection trips
The Sunshine Law does no t pr ohibit advisory boards from conducting inspection
trips provided that the board members do not discuss matters which may come before
the board for official action. See Bigelow v. Howze, 291 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974);
and AGO 0 2-24 ( two or more m embers of a n a dvisory group created t 0 make
recommendations to the city councilor planning commission on proposed development
may conduct vegetation surveys without subjecting themselves to the Sunshine Law,
provided that they d 0 not discuss among themselves any recommendations t he
committee may make).
This exception tot he Sunshine Law, however, does no t apply t 0 a board with
"ultimate decision-making authority." See Finch v. Seminole County School Board, 995
So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008), holding that a district school board, as the ultimate
decision making body, violated the Sunshine Law when the board, together with school
officials and members of the media, took a bus tour of neighborhoods affected by the
board's pr oposed rezoning even t hough board members were separated f rom each
other 0 n t he bus, di d not ex press any opi nions or their pr eference for any of t he
rezoning pi ans, an d d id not v ote during the t rip. Compare AGO 02-24 (two or more
members of an advisory group created by a city code to make recommendations to the
city councilor planning commission on proposed development may conduct vegetation
surveys without subjecting themselves tot he requirements 0 f t he Sunshine Law,
provided that they d 0 not discuss among themselves any recommendations or
comments the committee may make).
b. Luncheon meetings
Public access to meetings of public boards or commissions is the key element of the
Sunshine Law, and public agencies are advised to avoid holding meetings in places not
easily accessible to the public. The Attorney General's Office has suggested that public
boards or commissions av oid t he us e 0 f I uncheon meetings t 0 conduct board or
commission bus iness. These meetings m ay have a "chilling" effect up on the pu blic's
willingness or desire to attend. People who would otherwise attend such a meeting may
be unwilling or reluctant to enter a publ ic dining room without purchasing a meal and
may be financially or personally unwilling to do s o. Inf. 0 p. to Campbell, February 8,
1999; and Inf. Op. to Nelson, May 19, 1980. In addition, discussions at such meetings
by members of the board or commission which are audible only to those seated at the
table may violate the "openness" requirement of the law. AGO 71-159. Cf City of Miami
Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2 d 38, 4 1 (Fla. 1 971), in which the Florida Supreme Court
observed: "A secret meeting occurs when public officials meet at a time and place to
avoid being seen or heard by the public. II
c. Meetings at facilities that discriminate or unreasonably restrict access
prohibited
Section 286.011(6), F.S., prohibits boards or commissions subject to the Sunshine
Law from holding their meetings at any facility which discriminates on the basis of sex,
age, race, creed, color, origin, or economic status, or which operates in such a manner
as to unr easonably restrict publ ic ac cess to such a facility. And see s. 2 86.26, F .S.,
relating to accessibility of public meetings to the physically handicapped.
Public boards or commissions, therefore, are advised to avoid holding meetings at
places where the public and the press are effectively excluded. AGO 71-295. Thus, a
police pe nsion board should not hold its meetings i n a facility where t he pu blic has
limited access and where there may be a II chilling" effect on the public's willingness to
attend by requiring the public to provide identification, to leave such identification while
attending the meeting and to request permission before entering the room where the
meeting is held. AGO 96-55. And see Inf. Op. to Galloway, August 21, 2008, in which
the Attorney General's Office expressed concerns about holding a public meeting in a
private home in light of the possible "chilling effect" on the public's willingness to attend.
While a city may not require persons wishing to attend pu blic meetings to provide
identification as a condition of attendance, it may impose certain security measures on
members 0 f t he public ent ering a publ ic building, such as requiring t he publ ic tog 0
through metal detectors. AGO 05-13.
d. Out-of-town meetings
The fact that a meeting is held in a publ ic room does not make it public within the
meaning 0 f the Sunshine Law; f or a meeting to be II public, II the public must be given
advance not ice and provided with a reasonable opp ortunity t 0 at tend. Bigelow v.
Howze, 291 So. 2d 645,647-648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974).
Accordingly, a school boar d workshop hel d out side county limits over 100 miles
away from t he board's he adquarters violated t he Sunshine L aw where t he only
advantage tot he board resulting from the out-of-town gathering (elimination of travel
time and expense due to the fact that the board members were attending a conference
at t he site) did not outweigh t he interests 0 f t he public i n having a reasonable
opportunity to attend. Rhea v. School Board of Alachua County, 636 So. 2d 1383 (Fla.
1 st DCA 1994). The court refused to adopt a rule prohibiting any board workshops from
being hel d at a site more than 100 miles from its he adquarters, instead appl ying a
balancing of interests test to determine which interest predominates in a given case. As
stated by t he court, "[t]he interests of t he public in having a reasonable op portunity to
attend aBoard workshop must be balanced ag ainst t he Board's need t 0 conduct a
workshop at a site beyond the county boundaries. II Id. at 1385.
In addition, there may be other statutes which limit where board meetings may be
held. See, e.g., s. 125.001, F .S. (meetings of the board of county commissioners may
be held at any appropriate public place in the county); s. 1001.372, F.S. (school board
meetings may be held at any appropriate public place in the county). And see AGOs 08-
01, 03-03 an d 75-139 ( municipality m ay not hol d commission meetings at facilities
outside its boundaries).
Conduct which occurs outside the state which would constitute a knowing violation
of the Sunshine Law is a second degree misdemeanor. Section 286.011(3), F.S. Such
violations ar e pr osecuted i n t he county i n which t he bo ard or commission normally
conducts its official business. Section 910.16, F.S.
4. Can restrictions be placed on the public's attendance at, or participation in, a
public meeting?
a. Public's right to attend or record meeting
(1) Size of meeting facilities
The Sunshine Law requires that meetings of a public board or commission be "open
to t he pu blic. II F or meetings w here a large turnout 0 f the pu blic i s ex pected, public
boards and commissions should take reasonable steps t 0 ens ure that t he facilities
where t he meeting w ill be held will ac commodate t he anticipated turnout. Inf. Op. to
Galloway, August 21, 2008. Meetings held at a facility which can accommodate only a
small n umber of the public attending, w hen a large public turnout can reasonably be
expected, m ay violate t he public ac cess requirement 0 f s . 286.011, F .S., by
unreasonably restricting access to the meeting. If a huge public turnout is anticipated for
a particular issue and the I argest available public meeting room cannot accommodate
all of those who are expected to attend, the use of video technology (e.g., a television
screen outside the meeting room) may be appropriate. In such cases, as with ot her
open meetings, reasonable steps to provide an opportunity for public participation in the
proceedings should also be considered. Id.
(2) Inaudible discussions
A violation of the Sunshine Law may occur if, during a recess of a publ ic meeting,
board members discuss issues before the board in a manner not generally audible to
the publ ic attending t he meeting. Although such a meeting i s not clandestine, i t
nonetheless violates the letter and spirit of the law. Rackleff v. Bishop, No. 89-235 (Fla.
2d C ir. C t. March 5, 1990). And see AGO 7 1-159, stating t hat discussions 0 f pu blic
business which are audible only to "a select few" who are at the table with the board
members may violate the "openness" requirement of the law.
(3) Exclusion of certain members of the public
The term "open tot he publ ic" as us ed i n the Sunshine Law means 0 pen t 0 all
persons who choose to attend. AGO 99-53. Thus the court in Port Everglades Authority
v. International Longshoremen's Association, Local 1922-1, 652 So. 2d 1169, 1170 (Fla.
4th D CA 1995), ruled t hat a procurement committee violated the Sunshine L aw by
requesting that bidders voluntarily excuse themselves from each others' presentations.
The court found t hat the board's ac tions II amounted t 0 a de facto exclusion of t he
competitors, especially since the 'request' was made by an official directly involved with
the procurement process. II
Staff of a public agency clearly are members of the public as well as employees of
the ag ency; they cannot, therefore, be ex cluded from pu blic meetings. AGO 7 9-01.
Section 2 86.011, F .S., however, does n ot pr eclude t he reasonable application of
ordinary personnel policies, for example, the requirement that annual leave be used to
attend meetings, provided that such policies do not frustrate or subvert the purpose of
the Sunshine Law. Id.
Although not directly addressing the open meetings laws, courts of other states have
ruled that i n t he a bsence of a compelling governmental interest, ag encies m ay not
single out an d ex clude a particular news or ganization or reporter from pr ess
conferences. See, e.g., Times-Picayune Publishing Corporation v. Lee, 15 Media L.
Rep. 1713 (E.D. La. 1988); Borreca v. Fasi, 369 F. Supp. 906 (D. Hawaii 1974); Quad-
City Community News Service, Inc. v. Jebens, 334 F . S upp. 8 ( S.D. Iowa 1971); an d
Southwestern Newspapers Corporation v. Curtis, 584 S.W.2d 362 (Tex. Ct. App. 1979).
(4) Cameras and tape recorders
A board or commission may adopt reasonable rules and policies which ens ure the
orderly conduct of a public meeting and require orderly behavior on t he part of those
persons at tending a publ ic meeting. A board, however, m ay n ot ban the use 0 f
nondisruptive recording dev ices. Pinellas County School Board v. Suncam, Inc., 829
So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (school board's ban on unobtrusive videotaping invalid).
Accord AGO 91-28. And see AGO 77-122 (silent nondisruptive tape recording of district
meeting permissible).
The Legislature in Ch. 934, F.S., appears to implicitly recognize the public's right to
silently record pu blic meetings. AGO 9 1-28. Chapter 9 34, F .S., t he Security 0 f
Communications Act, regulates t he interception 0 f or al communications. Section
934.02(2), F .S., however, def ines "[o]ral c ommunication" to specifically ex clude II any
public oral communication uttered at a public meeting. II See also Inf. Op. toG erstein,
July 16, 1976, stating that public officials may not complain that they are secretly being
recorded during public meetings in violation of s. 934.03, F.S.
b. Public's right to participate in a meeting
(1) Importance of public participation
The courts 0 f this s tate an d the Attorney General's 0 ffice have recognized t he
importance of public participation in open meetings. See AGO 04-53 and cases cited at
footnote 6. In Evergreen the Tree Treasurers of Charlotte County, Inc. v. Charlotte
County Board of County Commissioners, 810 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), the court
held t hat a county de velopment review committee was subject tot he Sunshine Law,
and should have allowed public comment before making its decision on a project. Cf. s.
286.0115(2)(b), F.S., providing that "[i]n a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government
land use matters, a person who appears before the decisionmaking body who is not a
party or a party-intervenor shall be allowed to testify before the decisionmaking body,
subject to control by the decisionmaking body, . . . . II
However, the Supreme Court has indicated that there may not be aright under s.
286.011, F .S., for a member of the public to participate in all meetings. See Wood v.
Marston, 442 So. 2d 934, 941 (Fla. 1983), in which the Court, in reviewing the activities
of a committee carrying out executive functions traditionally conducted without public
input, stated:
This Court recognizes t he necessity f or t he free exchange 0 f ideas i n
academic forums, without fear 0 f governmental reprisal, t 0 foster deep
thought and intellectual growth. . . . We hasten to reassure respondents that
nothing in this decision gives the public the right to be more than spectators.
And see Law and Information Services v. City of Riviera Beach, 670 So. 2d 1014, 1016
(Fla. 4th DCA 1996), citing Marston for the principle that the public does not have a right
to speak 0 nail issues pr ior tor esolution 0 f the issue by t he bo ard; and Homestead-
Miami Speedway, LLC. v. City of Miami, 828 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (city did
not violate Sunshine Law where there was public participation and debate in some but
not all 0 f t he meetings concerning a pr oposed contract). Cf Inf. 0 p. to Thrasher,
January 27, 1994; an d I nf. 0 p. to Conn, May 19, 1987 (if a committee or bo ard is
carrying out legislative responsibilities, t he publ ic should be afforded a meaningful
opportunity t 0 participate at each stage 0 f t he decision-making pr ocess, including
workshops
Recently, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed a lower court ruling holding that
while the Sunshine Law requires meetings to be open to the public, the law does not
give the publ ic the right to s peak at t he meetings. Stating that in the absence 0 f any
case construing the phrase "open to the public" to grant the public the right to speak and
relying on t he "clear and unambiguous I anguage" in Marston, the court stated it was
"not inclined" to broadly construe the phrase as granting a right to speak at a meeting of
a not-for-profit corporation charged by the city with overseeing development of a parcel
of public waterfront property. Keesler v. Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc., 32
So. 3d 659 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), appeal pending, No. SC10-910 (Fla. May 14, 2010).
And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 S o. 3d 19 3 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 2010), appeal
pending, No. S C 1 0-798 ( Fla. April 20 , 20 1 0) (citizens have aut hority t 0 at tend op en
meeting but not to participate in or interfere with decision-making process).
(2) Authority to adopt reasonable rules
In providing an opportunity for public participation, the Attorney General's Office has
advised that reasonable rules and policies, which ensure the orderly conduct of a public
meeting and which require orderly behavior on the part of those persons attending, may
be adopted by a publ ic board. AGOs 04-53 and 91 -28. And see Inf. Op. to Thrasher,
January 27, 1994 (rule limiting amount of time an individual may address the board may
be adopted provided that the time limit does not unreasonably restrict the public's right
of access); and Inf. Op. to Joseph P. Caetano, July 2, 1996 (board may request that a
representative or representatives of eac h g roup or faction, rather than all m embers of
the group, address the board).
Although not directly considering the Sunshine Law, the court in Jones v. Heyman,
888 F.2d 1328, 1333 (11th Cir. 1989), recognized that lito deny the presiding officer the
authority tor egulate irrelevant debat e an d di sruptive behav ior at a publ ic m eeting--
would cause such meetings to drag on interminably, and deny others the opportunity to
voice their opi nions. II Thus, the court concluded that a mayor's actions in attempting to
confine the speaker to the agenda item in the city commission meeting and having the
speaker removed when t he speaker app eared t 0 become disruptive constituted a
reasonable time, place and manner regulation an d di d not violate the speaker's First
Amendment rights. And see Rowe v. City of Cocoa, 358 F.3d 800 (11th Cir. 2004) (city
council's regulation limiting speech 0 f nonresidents dur ing its meetings is viewpoint-
neutral and does not violate the First or Fourteenth Amendment rights of nonresidents).
Cf AGO 04-53 (statute requiring special district board to hold "a public hearing at which
time qualified electors 0 f t he di strict may app ear and be he ard" does not prohibit
nonqualified electors from participating).
5. May the members of a public board use codes or preassigned numbers in
order to avoid identifying individuals?
Section 286.011, F .S., requires that meetings of public boards or commissions be
"open tot he publ ic at all times. II I f at any time dur ing t he meeting t he pr oceedings
become covert, secret or not wholly exposed to the view and hearing of the public, then
that por tion of the meeting v iolates the portion of s . 2 86.011, F .S., requiring that
meetings be II open tot he public a t all times. II See Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing
Company, 462 S o. 2d 82 1, 82 3 (Fla. 19 85), disapproving a pr ocedure permitting
representatives of the media to attend a city council meeting provided that they ag reed
to "respect the confidentiality" of certain matters: "Under the Sunshine Law, a meeting is
either fully open or fully closed; there are no intermediate categories."
the use of preassigned numbers or codes at public meetings to avoid identifying the
names 0 f a pplicants violates s . 286. 011, F.S., bec ause lito permit di scussions of
applicants for the position of a municipal department head by a preassigned number or
other coded identification in order to keep the public from knowing the identities of such
applicants an d t 0 exclude t he public from t he ap pointive or selection pr ocess would
clearly frustrate or defeat the purpose of the Sunshine Law." AGO 77-48. Accord AGO
76-240 (Sunshine Law prohibits the use of coded symbols at a public meeting in order
to av oid revealing the na mes of applicants for the p osition of city manager). And see
News-Press Publishing Company v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646, 648 (Fla. 1977) ("public
policy of this state as expressed in the public records law and the open meetings statute
eliminate any notion that the commission was free to conduct the county's personnel
business by pseudonyms or cloaked references").
6. May members of a public board vote by written or secret ballot?
Board members are not prohibited from us ing written ballots to cast a v ote as long
as the votes are made openly at a publ ic meeting, the name of the person who voted
and his or her selection are written on the ballot, and the ballots are maintained and
made available for pu blic inspection in ac cordance with the Public Records A ct. See
AGO 73-344. Cf AGO 7 8-117 (in t he absence 0 f statutory aut hority, pr oxy voting by
board members is not allowed).
By contrast, a secret ballot violates the Sunshine Law. See AGO 73-264 (members
of a personnel board may not vote by secret ballot during a hearing concerning a public
employee). Accord AGOs 72-326 and 71-32 (board may not use secret ballots to elect
the chairman and other officers of the board).
7. Are board members authorized to abstain from voting?
Section 286.012, F.S., provides:
No member 0 f a ny state, county or municipal governmental bo ard,
commission, or ag ency who is present at any meeting of any such body at
which an official decision, ruling, or other official act is to be taken or adopted
may abs tain from voting. . . a v ote shall be recorded or counted for eac h
such member present, except when, with respect to any such member, there
is, or a ppears to be, a possible conflict of interest under. . . s. 112.311, s.
112.313, or s. 112.3143, F.S. (e.s.)
A member of a state, county or municipal board who is present at a meeting is thus
prohibited from abs taining f rom voting unl ess there is, or ap pears t 0 be, a pos sible
conflict of interest under SSg 112.311,112.313 or 112.3143, F.S., of the Code of Ethics
for Public Officers and Employees. And see AGO 02-40 (s. 286.012 applies to advisory
board appointed by a county commission). Failure of a member to vote, however, does
not invalidate the entire proceedings. City of Hallandale v. Rayel Corporation, 313 So.
2d 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cause dismissed sua sponte, 322 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1975)
(to rule ot herwise would permit any member to frustrate 0 fficial ac tion merely b y
refusing to participate).
Section 286.012, F.S., applies only to state, county and municipal boards. AGO 04-
21. Special district bo ards ar e not subject to its pr ovisions and m ay adopt t heir ow n
rules regarding abstention, subject to s. 112.3143, F.S. AGOs 04-21,85-78 and 78-11.
Section 1 12.3143(3)(a), F .S., pr ohibits a county, municipal, or other local pu blic
officer f rom v oting on any measure which inures to hi s or her special pr ivate gain or
loss; which t he officer knows would inure tot he special pr ivate gain or loss of any
principal or parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal, other than a public
agency, by whom he or she is retained; or which the officer knows would inure to the
special pr ivate gain or loss 0 far elative or bus iness a ssociate of t he officer. An
exception exists for a commissioner of a community redevelopment agency created or
designated pur suant to s .1 63.356, F .S., or s .163 .357, F .S., or an 0 fficer 0 f an
independent special tax di strict el ected 0 n a on e-acre, one -vote basis. Section
112.3143(3)(b), F.S.
For those local officials subject to s. 112.3143(3)(a), F .S., however, no exception
exists even though the abstention has the effect of preventing the local legislative body
from taking action on t he matter. AGO 8 6-61. Prior tot he vote being taken, t he local
officer must publicly state the nature of his or her interest in the matter from which he is
abstaining. Within 15 days of the vote, the officer must disclose the nature of his or her
interest in a memorandum filed with the person responsible for recording the minutes of
the meeting w ho shall incorporate t he memorandum i n t he minutes. Section
112.3143(3)(a), F.S.
State public officers are not required to abstain from voting because of a conflict of
interest. Section 112.3143(2), F.S. But see s. 120.665(1), F .S., applicable to agencies
subject to C h. 120, F .S., t he Administrative Procedure Act, stating that
"[n]otwithstanding t he provisions of s. 112.3143, any individual serving alone or with
others as an agency head may be disqualified from serving in an agency proceeding for
bias, prejudice, or interest when any party to the agency proceeding shows just cause
by a suggestion filed within a reasonable period of time prior to the agency proceeding."
If the state officer votes on a matter which would inure to his or her special private
gain or loss, or tot he special gain or loss of a ny pr incipal or parent or ganization or
subsidiary of a corporate pr incipal by which the 0 fficer is retained, or tot he special
private gain or loss of a relative or business associate, the officer is required to disclose
the nature 0 f hi s or her interest in a memorandum. The memorandum must be filed
within 15 days after the vote with the person responsible for recording the minutes of
the meeting who shall incorporate the memorandum in the minutes. See s. 112.3143(2),
F.S.
Although a member of a state board or commission is aut horized to a bstain from
voting on a question in which he or s he is personally interested, the member is no t
disqualified f rom voting; t he member may, therefore, be counted for pur poses 0 f
computing a quorum for a vote on that question. Once a quorum is present, a majority
of those members actually voting is sufficient to decide the question. AGO 75-244.
When a member of a local board is required to abstain pursuant to s. 112.3143(3),
F.S., the local board member is disqualified from voting and may not be counted for
purposes of determining a quorum. AGOs 86-61 and 85-40.
Questions as tow hat constitutes a conflict of interest under t he above statutes
should be referred to the Florida Commission on Ethics.
8. Is a roll call vote required?
While s. 286.012, F.S., requires that each member present cast a vote either for or
against the proposal under consideration by the publ ic board or commission, it is not
necessary that a roll call vote of the members present and voting be taken so that each
member's specific vote on each subject is recorded. The intent of the statute is that all
members present cast a vote and that the minutes so reflect that by either recording a
vote or counting a v ote for each member. Ruff v. School Board of Collier County, 426
So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (roll call vote so as to record the individual vote of each
such member i s n ot nec essary). Cf. s . 20. 052(5)(c), F .S., requiring that minutes,
including a record of all votes cast, be maintained for all meetings of an advisory body,
commission, board of trustees, or other collegial body adjunct to an executive agency.
9. Must written minutes be kept of all sunshine meetings?
Section 2 86.011, F .S., specifically requires that minutes 0 f a meeting 0 f a public
board or commission be promptly recorded and open to public inspection. The minutes
required to be kept for "workshop" meetings are not different than those required for any
other meeting 0 f a public bo ard or commission. A GOs 0 8-65 an d 74-62. And see
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, No. 502007CA007552XXXXMBAN (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct.
June 9, 2009), appeal pending, No. 4D 09-2703 (Fla. 4th DCA July 9, 2009) (minutes
required for city council's agenda review meetings).
While tape recorders may also be used to record the proceedings before a public
body, written minutes of the meeting must be taken and promptly recorded. AGO 75-45.
And see AGO 08-65 (while board may archive the full text of all workshop discussions
conducted on the Internet, written minutes of the workshops must also be prepared and
promptly recorded).
The term "minutes" in s. 286.011, F .S., contemplates a brief summary or series of
brief notes or memoranda reflecting the events of the meeting. AGO 82-47. And see
State v. Adams, N o. 9 1-175-CC (Fla. Sumter C o. C t. July 15, 1992) (no v iolation of
Sunshine Law where minutes failed to reflect brief discussion concerning a proposed
inspection trip). However, an agency is not prohibited from using a written transcript of
the meeting as the minutes, if it chooses to do so. Inf. Op. to Fulwider, June 14, 1993.
Draft minutes of a board meeting may be circulated to individual board members for
corrections and studying pr ior t 0 approval by t he board, sol ong as any changes,
corrections, or deletions are discussed and adopted during the public meeting when the
board adopts t he minutes. AGOs 0 2-51 an d 7 4-294. The minutes ar e publ ic records
when the person responsible for preparing the minutes has performed his or her duty
even though they have not yet been sent to the board members or officially approved by
the board. AGO 91-26. And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1 st DCA
2010), appeal pending, Case No. SC10-798 (Fla. April 20, 2010) (city violated both the
language and the purpose of s. 286.011 [2] by denying public access to its minutes until
after approval).
Section 286.011, F .S., does not specify who is responsible for taking the minutes of
public meetings. This appears to be a procedural matter which the individual boards or
commissions must resolve. Inf. Op. to Baldwin, December 5, 1990.
1 O.ln addition to minutes, does the Sunshine Law require that meetings be
transcribed or tape recorded?
Minutes of Sunshine Law meetings need not be verbatim transcripts of the meetings.
AGO 82-47. Nor does the Sunshine Law require that pu blic boards a nd commissions
tape record their meetings. AGO 8 6-21. However, onc e made, such recordings ar e
public records and their retention is governed by schedules established by the Division
of Li brary and Information Services 0 f t he Department 0 f State i n accordance with s .
257.36(6), F .S. Id. Accord AGO 86-93 (tape recordings of school board meetings are
subject to Public Records Act even though written minutes are required to be prepared
and made available tot he pu blic). And see AGO 0 4-15 ( tape recordings of staff
meetings made at t he request of t he ex ecutive di rector by a secretary f or us e i n
preparing minutes of the meeting are public records).
G. WHAT ARE THE STATUTORY EXCEPTIONS TO THE LAW?
1. Sunshine Law to be liberally construed while exceptions to the law to be
narrowly construed
As a statute enacted for t he public benefit, t he Sunshine Law should bel iberally
construed tog ive ef fect t 0 i ts public purpose while ex emptions should b e narrowly
construed. See, e.g., Board of Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224 So.
2d 693 (Fla. 1969); Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983). And see Turner v.
Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148,155 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), affirmed and remanded, 389 So.
2d 1181 (Fla. 19 80) (rejecting a board's ar gument t hat a legislative requirement that
certain board meetings must be open to the pu blic implies that the board could meet
privately to discuss other matters).
The courts have recognized t hat the Sunshine Law should be construed so as to
frustrate all evasive devices. City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971);
Blackford v. School Board of Orange County, 375 S o. 2d 578 ( Fla. 5t h D CA 1 979);
Wolfson v. State, 344So.2d 611 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Asthe Florida Supreme Court
stated in Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260, 264
(Fla. 1973):
Various bo ards an d agencies have obv iously at tempted tor ead exceptions
into the Government in the Sunshine Law which do not ex ist. Even though
their intentions m ay be sincere, such boards and agencies should no t b e
allowed to circumvent t he pi ain provisions 0 f the statute. The be nefit tot he
public far outweighs the inconvenience of the board or agency. If the board or
agency f eels aggrieved, then the remedy lies in t he halls of the Legislature
and not in efforts to circumvent the plain provisions of the statute by devious
ways in the hope that the judiciary will read some exception into the law.
If a board member i s una ble to determine whether a meeting i s subject tot he
Sunshine Law, he or s he should ei ther I eave t he meeting or ens ure that the meeting
complies with the Sunshine Law. See City of Miami Beach v. Berns, supra at 41; Town
of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 S o. 2d 4 73, 47 7 (Fla. 197 4) (liThe pr inciple to be
followed is very simple: When in doubt, the members of any board, agency, authority or
commission should follow the open-meeting policy of the State. ").
2. Creation and review of exemptions
Article I, s. 24(b), Fla. Const., requires that all meetings of a collegial public body of
the executive branch of state government or of local government, at which official acts
are to be taken or a t which t he public business 0 f such body is to bet ransacted or
discussed, be open and noticed to the public. All laws in effect on July 1, 1993, that limit
access to meetings remain in force until they are repealed. Article I, s. 24(d), Fla. Const.
The Legislature is authorized to provide by general law passed by two-thirds vote of
each house for the exemption of meetings, provided such law states with specificity the
public nec essity justifying t he ex emption and i s no broader than necessary t 0
accomplish t he stated purpose 0 f t he I aw. Article I, s . 24(c), Fla. C onst. See s.
119.011 (8), F .S., de fining the term II exemption" to include a pr ovision of g enerall aw
which pr ovides t hat a II specified. .. meeting, or portion thereof, is not subject tot he
access requirements" in s. 286.011, F.S., or Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const. And see Halifax
Hospital Medical Center v. News-Journal Corporation, 724 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1999) (open
meetings exemption for certain hospital board meetings unconstitutional because it did
not meet t he constitutional standard of specificity as t 0 stated publ ic nec essity and
limited br eadth t 0 ac complish that purpose). Compare Baker County Press, Inc. v.
Baker County Medical Services, Inc., 870 So. 2d 1 89, 1 95 ( Fla. 1s t D CA 2004) ,
upholding a more recent public meetings ex emption because II the constitutional
concerns expressed by the Florida Supreme Court in Halifax" were met due to a more
specific Ie gislative justification ac companied by adeq uate findings t 0 support t he
breadth of the exemption.
Section 119.15, F .S., t he 0 pen Government Sunset Review Act, pr ovides for
legislative review of exemptions from the open government laws. Pursuant to the Act, in
the fifth year after enactment 0 f a new ex emption or ex pansion 0 f an ex isting
exemption, the exemption shall be repealed on 0 ctober 2 of the fifth year, unless the
Legislature acts to reenact the exemption. Section 119.15(3), F.S. The two-thirds vote
requirement for enactment of exemptions set forth in Art. I, s. 24(c), Fla. Const., applies
to re-adoption of exemptions as well as initial creation of exemptions. AGO 03-18.
3. Statutory exemptions
There are a nu mber of exemptions to the Government in the Sunshine Law. While
the ex emptions for certain investigative meetings, litigation meetings, and collective
bargaining strategy sessions are respectively di scussed ins ubsections D .2, D .3, an d
D4., supra, the following discussion, although by no means comprehensive,
summarizes some 0 f the other more significant ex emptions which have formed t he
basis 0 f inquiries to the Attorney General's 0 ffice by governmental ag encies and the
public. For a more complete listing of statutory exemptions, please see Appendix D.
a. Abuse meetings
Portions 0 f meetings 0 f t he State Child Abuse Death Review Committee or local
committees atwhich information made confidential by s. 383.412(1) is discussed are
exempt from open meetings requirements. Section 383.412(3), F.S. Although the closed
portion of the meeting must be recorded, the recording is exempt from disclosure. Id.
Portions 0 f meetings of do mestic violence fatality review teams regarding dom estic
violence fatalities and their prevention, during which confidential or exempt information,
the identity of the victim, or the identity of the victim's children is discussed, are exempt
from s. 286.011, F.S. Section 741.3165(2), F.S.
Portions of meetings of the statewide or local advocacy councils which relate to the
identity of clients, which relate to the identity of individuals providing information about
abuse or alleged violation of rights, or where testimony is provided relating to records
otherwise made confidential by I aw ar e no t subject t 0 open meetings requirements.
Sections 402.165(8)(c) and 402 .166(8)(c), F .S. See AGO 0 6-34 ( members 0 f local
advocacy council, who are attending a closed session of the statewide advocacy council
during the discussion of one of the local council's cases, may not remain in the closed
session when the statewide advocacy council is considering cases from other advocacy
councils which are unrelated to the local advocacy council's cases).
b. Economic development meetings
While s. 288.075(2), F .S., allows a pr ivate corporation to request confidentiality for
certain records relating t 0 i ts pi ans t 0 locate or relocate i n Florida, t his ex emption
"applies only to records and does not constitute an exemption from the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Law. . . ." AGO 04-19. Accord AGO 80-78. Compare s.
288.9551 (3), F .S. ( Scripps Florida Funding Corporation); s . 288 .982(2), F .S.
(Governor's Advisory Council on Base Realignment and Closure); and s. 331.326, F .S.
(Space Florida), pr oviding I imited ex emptions from t he Sunshine Law f or certain
discussions 0 f confidential records. Cf s. 2 86.0113(2), F .S., providing an ex emption
from the Sunshine Law for a meeting at which a negotiation with a vendor is conducted
pursuant to s. 287.057(1), F.S., and providing that a complete recording must be made
of any exempt meeting.
c. Education meetings
Student ex pulsion hearings ar e ex empt from t he Sunshine La w al though t he
student's parent must be given not ice 0 f the pr ovisions 0 f s. 286.011, F .S., and may
elect to have the hearing held in compliance with that section. Section 1006.07(1)(a),
F.S. See AGO 93-03.
Hearings on an exceptional student's placement or denial of placement in a special
education program are exempt from s. 286.011, F.S., except to the extent that the State
Board of Education adopts rules establishing other procedures. Section 1 003.57(1) (b),
F.S.
Meetings 0 f t he Florida Technology, Research, an d Scholarship Board a t which
information made confidential by s. 1004.226, F .S., is di scussed is ex empt from s .
286.011, F.S., and Art. I, s. 24(b), Fla. Const. Section 1 004.226(8)(b)1., F.S.
Although s. 1002.22, F.S., makes the education records of students confidential, this
exemption does not close the meetings of a school board in which such records may be
considered. AGO 10-04.
d. Hearings involving minors
Dependency adjudicatory hearings are open; however, a judge by special order may
close any hearing to the public upon determining that the public interest or the welfare
of the child is best served by closure. Section 39.507(2), F.S. And see Mayer v. State,
523 So. 2d 11 71 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 529 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1988) (former
version 0 f statute requiring hearings t 0 be closed di d n ot violate First Amendment
freedom 0 f press rights). Hearings f or t he appointment 0 f a guardian advocate ar e
confidential and closed to the public. Section 39.827(4), F.S.
All hear ings involving termination 0 f parental rights ar e confidential. Section
39.809(4), F .S. See Natural Parents of J.B. v. Florida Department of Children and
Family Services, 780 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2001), upholding the constitutionality of the statute.
And see J.I. v. Department of Children and Families, 922 So. 2 d 405 ( Fla. 4th DCA
2006) ( Sunshine La w does not ap ply t 0 Department 0 f Children and Families
permanency staffing meetings conducted to de termine whether t 0 file petition t 0
terminate parental rights). Cf Stanfield v. Florida Department of Children and Families,
698 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (trial court may not issue a "gag" order preventing a
woman from di scussing a termination 0 f parental rights case bec ause II [t]he court
cannot prohibit citizens from exercising their First Amendment right to publicly discuss
knowledge that they have gained independent 0 f court documents even though t he
information may mirror the information contained in court documents").
Hearings hel d und er the Florida A doption Act ar e closed. Section 63. 162(1), F .S.
See In re Adoption of H. Y. T., 458 So. 2 d 1127 (Fla. 1984) (statute pr oviding t hat all
adoption hearings shall be held in closed court is not unconstitutional).
Except as provided in s. 918.16(2), the judge shall clear the courtroom, except for
listed individuals, in a criminal or civil t rial when any person under 16 years of ag e 0 r
any per son with mental retardation is testifying concerning any s ex offense. Section
918.16(1), F .S. When the v ictim of a s ex offense is testifying concerning t hat offense,
the court shall clear the courtroom, except for listed individuals, upon request of the
victim, regardless of the victim's ag e or mental capacity. Section 918. 16(2), F .S. Cf
Pritchett v. State, 566 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 570 So. 2d 1306 (Fla.
1990) (where a trial court failed to make any findings to justify closure, application of s.
918.16, F .S., to the trial of a defendant charged with capital sexual battery violates the
defendant's constitutional right to a public trial). Accord Kovaleski v. State, 854 So. 2d
282 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), cause dismissed, 860 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 2003).
All hear ings conducted i n ac cordance with a pet ition for a waiver of t he notice
requirements per taining to a minor seeking to terminate her pr egnancy, shall remain
confidential and closed to the public, as provided by court rule. Section 390.01114(4)(e),
F.S.
e. Hearings to obtain HIV test results
While t he test results for hu man immunodeficiency virus infection ar e confidential
and may be released only as prescribed by statute, a person may be allowed access to
the results by court order if he or she demonstrates a compelling need for the results
which cannot be accommodated by other means. The court proceedings in these cases
are to be conducted in camera unless the person tested ag rees to a he aring in open
court or the court determines t hat a pu blic hear ing is nec essary tot he public interest
and the proper administration of justice. Section 381.004(3)(e)9., F.S.
f. Hospitals
(1) Public hospitals and health facilities
The meetings of peer review panels, committees and governing bodies of hospitals
or am bulatory surgical centers licensed in accordance with C h. 395, F .S., which relate
to di sciplinary ac tions and are hel d t 0 achieve t he objectives 0 f such panels,
committees, or governing boar ds, ar e exempt from s . 2 86.011, F .S. Section
395.0193(7), F .S. The meetings of the committees and governing board of a licensed
facility held solely for the purpose of achieving the objectives of risk management are
not open to the public. Section 395.0197(14), F.S. See AGO 92-29, stating that to the
extent a meeting of the bo ard 0 f directors and t he medical staff's quality as surance
committee deal s with carrying out cited risk management statutes, t he meeting i s
exempt from the open meeting requirements of s. 286.011, F.S.
Similar exemptions for portions of meetings which relate solely to patient care quality
assurance ar e found ins s. 38 1.0055(3) (Department of Health an d local health
agencies); 394.907(7) (community mental health centers); and 395.51 (3), F .S. (trauma
agencies). And see SSg 400.119(2)(a) (long-term care facilities); 40 1.425(5) (emergency
medical services); 7 66.101 (7)(c) ( medical review committee proceedings); an d
945.6032(3), F .S. (medical review committee created by Correctional Medical Authority
or Department of Corrections).
Those por tions 0 f a meeting 0 f a publ ic hos pital's governing boar d at which
negotiations for contracts with nongovernmental entities occur or are reported on when
such negotiations concern services that are or are reasonably expected to be provided
by t he hos pital's competitors ar e exempt from public meetings requirements. Section
395.3035(3), F.S. However, meetings at which the governing board is scheduled to vote
on contracts, except managed care contracts, are open. Id. In addition, those portions of
meetings at which certain written strategic plans are considered are exempt from open
meetings requirements al though a hospital may not ap prove a bi nding ag reement to
implement a strategic pi an at any closed meeting. Section 395.3035(4) an d (8), F .S.
The Attorney General's 0 ffice has suggested that t he governing body strictly lim it
attendance at meetings closed pursuant to s. 395.3035, F .S., to only those individuals
who are essential to the purpose of the meeting in order to avoid what the courts might
consider to be a disclosure to the public. AGO 07-28. While the board is not required to
give notice of the closed meeting to discuss the hospital's strategic plan, before such a
plan may be implemented i t must be discussed a tap ublic meeting not iced i n
accordance with section 28 6.011 and, i f t he strategic pi an involves a substantial
reduction in the level of medical services provided to the public, such notice must be
given at least 30 days prior to the meeting at which the governing board considers the
decision to implement the strategic plan. Id.
That po rtion 0 f a pu blic meeting which would reveal information contained i n a
comprehensive emergency management plan that addresses the response of a hospital
to an act of terrorism is exempt from open meetings requirements. Section 395.1056(4),
F.S.
Any portion of the meeting of the governing board, peer review panel, or committee
meeting of a university health services support organization during which a confidential
and exempt contract, document, record, marketing plan, or trade secret is discussed is
exempt from s. 286.011, F .S. Section 1004.30(3), F .S. And see s. 409.91196(2), F .S.
(tAat--portion of a meeting of the Medicaid Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committee
at which the rebate amount, percent of rebate, manufacturer's pricing, or supplemental
rebate, or other trade secrets that t he Agency f or Health C are A dministration has
identified for us e i n neg otiations, ar e discussed i s ex empt from 0 pen meetings
requirements).
That portion of a long term care ombudsman council meeting in which the council
discusses information that is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., is closed
to t he pu blic. Section 400. 0077(2), F .S. And see s. 64 1.68, F .S. ( managed care
ombudsman committee).
(2) Private or nonprofit corporations operating public health facilities
Section 395.3036, F .S., provides that meetings of the governing board of a private
corporation t hat I eases a public hospital or health c are facility ar e ex empt from open
meetings requirements when t he public lessor complies with t he public finance
accountability provisions of s. 155.40(5), F .S., with respect to the transfer of any public
funds to the private lessee and when the private lessee meets at least three of the five
criteria set forth in t he ex emption. See Indian River County Hospital District v. Indian
River Memorial Hospital Inc., 766 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th D CA 20 00). See also Baker
County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, Inc., 870 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 1 s t
DCA 2004) (exemption is constitutional). Cf Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v.
News-Journal Corporation, 927 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (private corporation that
purchased hospital from public hospital au thority i s not subject to op en government
requirements). And see s. 155.40(8), F.S., describing and construing the term "complete
sale" as applied to the purchase of a public hospital by a private entity.
Meetings of the governing body of the not-for-profit corporation operating the H. Lee
Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, or its subsidiaries, are also exempt except
that meetings at which expenditures of dollars appropriated to the corporation by the
state are discussed must remain open to the public, unless made confidential or exempt
by law. Section 1004.43(9), F .S. And see s. 1004.4472(4), F.S. (portions of meetings of
the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, Inc., or its subsidiary at which
confidential and exempt information is presented may be closed). Cf AGO 07-27 (local
health councils, which may be public or private nonprofit corporations, whose duties are
prescribed by s. 408.033, F.S., and who provide an integral role in the decision-making
process of the Agency for Health C are Administration in providing for the coordinated
planning of health care services within the state, are subject to s. 286.011, F.S.).
g. Insurance meetings
Proceedings and hearings relating tot he ac tions of t he 0 ffice 0 f Insurance
Regulation regarding an insurer's risk-based capital plan or report are exempt from s.
286.011, F .S., except as otherwise provided in the section. Section 624.40851 (2), F .S.
Portions of meetings of the Citizens Property Insurance Corporation and of the Florida
Automobile Joint Underwriting A ssociation where confidential underwriting files 0 r
confidential 0 pen claims files ar e di scussed ar e closed tot he publ ic. Sections
627.351 (6)(x)4. and 627.311 (4)(b), F.S. Meetings of the subscriber assistance panel are
open tot he pu blic un less t he pr ovider or subscriber whose grievance w ill be hear d
requests a closed meeting or t he Agency f or Health C are A dministration or t he
Department 0 f Financial Services det ermines that information relating t 0 subscriber
medical hi story or to internal risk management pr ograms may be revealed, in which
case that portion 0 f t he meeting i s ex empt from t he Sunshine Law. Section
408.7056(14)(b), F.S.
That portion of a meeting of the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection
Methodology or of a r ate proceeding on an insurer's rate filing at which a confidential
trade secret i s di scussed i s ex empt from op en meetings requirements. Section
627.0628(3)(f)2., F.S. Although the closed portion of the meeting must be recorded, the
recording is exempt from disclosure. Id.
Discussions involving of ficials 0 f t he Department 0 f Financial Services and an
insurance company relating t 0 investigation 0 f fraudulent insurance claims ar e
confidential a nd ex empt from s . 286.011, F .S. Section 6 33.175(5), F .S. And see SSg
631.724 ( certain neg otiations or meetings of t he Florida Li fe a nd Health Insurance
Guaranty Association); 631 .932 ( negotiations bet ween an insurer and the Florida
Workers' Compensation Insurance Guaranty A ssociation); and 440.3851 (3)(a), F.S.
(portions of meetings of board of directors of Florida Self-Insurers Guaranty Association,
Incorporated, at which confidential records are discussed).
Meetings held by the board of governors of the Florida Workers' Compensation Joint
Underwriting A ssociation, I nc., or any subcommittee 0 f the as sociation's board, t 0
discuss records made confidential by s .627. 3121, F .S., ar e ex empt. Section
627.3121 (4), F.S.
h. Security and criminal justice meetings
Meetings relating to the security systems for any property owned by or leased to the
state or any of its political subdivisions or for any privately owned or leased property
which is in the hands of an agency are exempt from s. 286.011, F.S. Section 281.301,
F.S. This statute exempts meetings of a board when the board discusses issues relating
to th e security systems for any pr operty ow ned or I eased by t he board or for any
privately owned or leased property which is in the possession of the board. The statute
does not merely close such meetings; it exempts the meetings from the requirements of
s. 286.011, F .S., such as notice. AGO 93-86. And see s. 286.0113(1), F .S., stating that
the portion 0 f a meeting that would reveal a security system pi an or portion thereof
made confidential and exempt by s. 11 9.071 (3)(a), F .S. (providing an ex emption from
the Public Records A ct f or a II security system pi an") is ex empt from ope n meetings
requirements.
The Florida Violent Crime and Drug Control Council may close portions of meetings
during which the council will hear or discuss active criminal investigative information or
active criminal intelligence information, provided that specified conditions are met as set
forth in the exemption. Section 943.031 (7)(c), F.S. And see s. 943.0314, F.S. (Domestic
Security Oversight Council).
i. Licensure examination meetings
There ar e a several ex emptions for meetings at which I icensure ex amination
questions a nd answers ar e di scussed. See, e.g., s s. 4 56.017(4), F .S. ( board within
Department 0 f Health), 455 .217(5), F .S. (boards within Department of Business a nd
Professional Regulation); 4 97.172(1 )(a), F.S. ( Board 0 f Funeral, Cemetery, an d
Consumer Services within t he Department of Financial Services); 472.0131 (5), F .S.
(Board 0 f Professional Surveyors and Mappers within Department 0 f A griculture and
Consumer Services).
4. Special act exemptions
Prior to July 1, 1993, exemptions from the Sunshine Law could be created by special
act. Article I, s. 24, Fla. Const., however, now limits the Legislature's ability to enact an
exemption from t he constitutional right 0 f ac cess too pen meetings established
thereunder. While exemptions in effect on July 1, 1993, remain in force until repealed,
the Constitution requires t hat ex emptions enacted after that dat e must be by general
law. Such law must state with specificity the public necessity for the exemption and be
no broader than necessary to accomplish that stated purpose.
H. WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES IF A PUBLIC BOARD OR COMMISSION
FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THE SUNSHINE LAW?
1. Criminal penalties
Any member 0 f a board or commission or 0 f any state ag ency or aut hority 0 f a
county, municipal corporation, or pol itical subdivision who knowingly violates t he
Sunshine Law is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree. Section 286.011 (3)(b),
F.S. A person convicted of a second degree misdemeanor may be sentenced to a term
of imprisonment not to exceed 60 days and/or fined up to $500. Sections 775.082(4)(b)
and 775.083(1)(e), F .S. The criminal penalties apply to members of advisory councils
subject tot he Sunshine Law as well as to members 0 f el ected 0 r app ointed boards.
AGO 01-84 (school advisory council members).
Conduct which occurs outside the state which constitutes a knowing violation of the
Sunshine L aw i s a second deg ree misdemeanor. Section 286 .011 (3)(c), F .S. Such
violations are prosecuted i n t he county i n which t he bo ard or commission normally
conducts i ts 0 fficial business while v iolations occurring within t he state m ay be
prosecuted in that county. Section 910.16, F.S.
2. Removal from office
When a method for removal from office is not otherwise provided by the Constitution
or by law, t he Governor m ay suspend an elected or appointed public 0 fficer w ho is
indicted or informed against for any misdemeanor arising directly out of his or her official
duties. Section 112.52(1), F .S. If convicted, the officer may be removed from office by
executive order of the Governor. Section 112.52(3), F .S. A person who pleads guilty or
nolo contendere or who is found guilty is, for purposes of s. 11 2.52, F .S., deemed to
have been convicted, notwithstanding the suspension of sentence or the withholding of
adjudication. Id. Cf s. 112.51, F.S., and Art. IV, s. 7, Fla. Const.
3. Noncriminal infractions
Section 286.011(3)(a), F .S., imposes no ncriminal pe nalties for v iolations 0 ft he
Sunshine Law by pr oviding t hat any publ ic of ficer violating t he pr ovisions of t he
Sunshine Law is guilty of a no ncriminal infraction, punishable by a fine not exceeding
$500. The s tate attorney m ay pur sue such ac tions 0 n behalf of t he s tate. State v.
Foster, 12 F .L.W. S upp. 1 194a (Fla. B roward C o. C t. September 26, 2 005). Accord
AGO 91-38. Cf State v. Foster, 13 F . L.W. S upp. 385a (Fla. 17th Cir. C t. January 25,
2006) (no right to jury trial is triggered when an individual faces a noncriminal violation
of the Sunshine Law).
If a nonprofit corporation i s subject tot he Sunshine Law, its board 0 f di rectors
constitute II public 0 fficers" for purposes of s. 286 .011 (3)(a), F .S. AGO 9 8-21. See
Goosby v. State, Case N o. GF 05-(001122-001130,001135)-BA ( Fla. 10th C ir. C t.
December 22, 2006), cert. denied, Case No. 2D 07-281 (Fla. 2 d DCA May 25, 2007)
(members of the Polk County Opportunity Council, which had assumed and exercised a
delegated governmental f unction, were II public officers" for pur poses 0 f the Sunshine
Law and subject to the imposition of the noncriminal infraction fine).
4. Attorney's fees
Reasonable attorney's fees will be assessed against a board or commission found to
have violated t he Sunshine Law. Section 286.011 (4), F.S. See Indian River County
Hospital District v. Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., 766 So. 2d 233,235 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2000) , concluding that t he trial court erred by failing to as sess at torney's fees
against a non profit hospital corporation found to have violated the Sunshine Law. And
see s. 286.011(5), F.S., authorizing the assessment of attorney fees if a board appeals
an order finding the board in violation of the Sunshine Law and the order is affirmed.
While s. 286.011 (4), F .S., authorizes an award 0 f a ppellate fees i f a person
successfully appeals a trial court order denying access, the statute "does not supersede
the appellate rules, n or do es it au thorize t he trial court t 0 make an initial award of
appellate at torney's fees. II School Board of Alachua County v. Rhea, 661 S o. 2 d 33 1
(Fla. 1st DCA 1995), review denied, 670 So. 2d 939,332 (Fla. 1996). Thus, a person
prevailing on appe al must file an appropriate motion in the appellate court in order to
receive appellate attorney's fees. Id. If aboard ap peals an order finding the board in
violation 0 f t he Sunshine Law, and t he order is a ffirmed, lithe court s hall as sess a
reasonable attorney's fee for the appeal" against the board. Section 286.011 (5), F.S.
Attorney's fees may be assessed ag ainst t he individual members 0 f the bo ard
except in those cases where the board sought, and took, the advice of its attorney, such
fees may n ot be as sessed ag ainst t he individual members 0 f the board. Section
286.011 (4) and (5), F.S.
If a member of a board or commission charged with a violation of s. 286.011, F.S., is
subsequently ac quitted, t he board or commission i s aut horized tor eimburse that
member for any portion of hi s or her reasonable attorney's fees. Section 286.011 (7),
F.S. Cf AGO 86-35, stating that this subsection does not authorize the reimbursement
of attorney's fees incurred during an investigation of alleged sunshine violations when
no formal charges were filed, although common I aw pr inciples m ay per mit such
reimbursement.
Reasonable attorney's fees may be as sessed against the individual filing an ac tion
to enforce the provisions of s. 286.011, F .S., if the court finds that it was filed in bad
faith or was frivolous. Section 286.011 (4), F.S. The fact that a plaintiff may be unable to
prove t hat a secret meeting took pi ace, however, does not necessarily mean that
attorney's fees will be assessed. See Bland v. Jackson County, 514 So. 2d 1115, 1116
(Fla. 1 s t DCA 1 987), concluding t hat although the pi aintiff was unable to prove that a
meeting i n violation 0 f t he Sunshine Law took place, t he evidence showed that t he
county commission unanimously voted on the issue in an open public meeting without
identifying what t hey were voting on and without any di scussion and under these
circumstances an inference might reasonably be drawn that the commissioners had no
need t 0 di scuss t he action being taken because t hey had al ready di scussed an d
decided the issue before the public meeting.
5. Civil actions for injunctive or declaratory relief
Section 286.011(2), F .S., states that the circuit courts have jurisdiction to issue
injunctions upon application by any citizen of this state. While normally irreparable injury
must be pr oved by t he pi aintiff before ani njunction may be issued, inS unshine Law
cases the mere showing that the law has been violated constitutes II irreparable public
injury." Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2 d 473 (Fla. 1974); and Times
Publishing Company v. Williams, 222 S o. 2d 470 ( Fla. 2d D CA 1 969), disapproved in
part on other grounds, Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla.
1985). The plaintiff's burden is to "establish by the greater weight of the evidence" that a
meeting which should have been held in the sunshine took place on the date alleged.
Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785, 789 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
A complaint for injunctive relief must allege by na me or sufficient des cription the
identity 0 f t he pu blic 0 fficial with whom t he de fendant public 0 fficial has violated t he
Sunshine Law. Deerfield Beach Publishing, Inc. v. Robb, 530 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 4th DCA
1988). And see Forehand v. School Board of Gulf County, Florida, 600 So. 2d 1187
(Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (plaintiff was not denied a fair and impartial hearing because the
board 0 nly br iefly del iberated i n publ ic before a vote w as taken as there w as no
evidence that t he board h ad privately del iberated 0 n this issue); a nd Law and
Information Services v. City of Riviera Beach, 670 So. 2d 1 014 (Fla. 4t h DCA 1996)
(patent speculation, absent any allegation that a nonpublic meeting in fact occurred, is
insufficient to state a cause of action).
Future violations may be enjoined by the court where one v iolation has been found
and it appears that the future violation will bear some resemblance to the past violation
or that the danger of future violations can be anticipated from the course of conduct in
the past. Board of Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224, So. 2d 693 (Fla.
1969). S ee Wood v. Marston, 442 S o. 2d 93 4 ( Fla. 19 83) ( trial court's permanent
injunction affirmed). Compare Leach-Wells v. City of Bradenton, 734 S o. 2d 1168,
1170n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), in which the court noted that had a citizen appealed the
trial court's deni al 0 f her motion for temporary injunction based on a selection
committee's alleged violation of the Sunshine Law, the appellate court "would have had
the opportunity to review this matter before the project was completed and to direct that
the City be enjoined from entering into a final contract with the developer until after such
time as t he ranking 0 f the pr oposals could be accomplished incompliance with t he
Sunshine Law. II
Although a court cannot issue a blanket order enjoining any violation of the Sunshine
Law on a showing that it was violated in particular respects, a court may enjoin a future
violation that bears some resemblance to the past violation. Port Everglades Authority v.
International Longshoremen's Association, Local 1922-1, 652 So. 2d 1169, 1173 (Fla.
4th D CA 199 5). The future conduct must be II specified, with such reasonable
definiteness a nd certainty that the defendant could readily k now what it must refrain
from doing without s peculation a nd conjecture. II Id., quoting f rom Board of Public
Instruction v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693,699 (Fla. 1969). And see Wood v. Marston, 442
So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983) (trial court's permanent injunction affirmed); and Lozman v. City
of Riviera Beach, No. 502007CA007552XXXXMBAN (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. June 9,2009),
appeal pending, No.4 D09-2703 (Fla. 4t h DCA July 8, 2009) (grant of injunctive relief
against a future violations of city to record minutes of certain meetings appropriate in
light of city's pas t conduct and consistent refusal tor ecord such minutes even after
being advised to do so by the city attorney and because the city "has continuously taken
the legal position that local governments are not required by the Sunshine Law to record
minutes").
Declaratory relief i s not appr opriate w here no present di spute ex ists but where
governmental agencies merely seek judicial advice different from that advanced by the
Attorney General and the state attorney, or an injunctive restraint on the prosecutorial
discretion of the state attorney. Askew v. City of Ocala, 348 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1977).
6. Validity of action taken in violation of the Sunshine Law and subsequent
corrective action
Section 286.011, F .S., provides that no resolution, rule, regulation or formal action
shall be considered binding except as taken or made at an open meeting.
Recognizing that t he Sunshine Law should be construed s 0 a s t 0 frustrate all
evasive devices, the courts have held that action taken in violation of the law is void ab
initio. Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974); Blackford v. School
Board of Orange County, 375 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979) (resolutions made during
meetings held in violation of s. 286.011, F .S., had to be re-examined and re-discussed
in open publ ic meetings); Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal
Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (selection committee rankings resulting
from a meeting held i n v iolation of the Sunshine Law ar e void ab initio and ag ency
enjoined from entering into contract based on such r ankings); TSI Southeast, Inc. v.
Royals, 588 So. 2 d 309 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 1 991) (contract for s ale a nd purchase of real
property voided because board failed to properly notice the meeting under s. 286.011,
F.S.); and Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 ( Fla. 1 s t DCA 2010), appeal
pending, N o. S C 10-798 ( Fla. April 20 , 20 10) (by failing to op en its minutes to pu blic
inspection and copying in a timely and reasonable manner, prejudice is presumed and
therefore city's approval of minutes is null and void ab initio).
Such a violation need not be II clandestine" in order for a contract to be invalidated
because II the pr inciple t hat a Sunshine Law violation renders v oid a resulting official
action does not depend upon a finding of intent to violate the law or resulting prejudice."
Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen's Association, Local 1922-1,
652 So. 2d 1169,1171 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). But see Killearn Properties, Inc. v. City of
Tallahassee, 366 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 378 So. 2d 343 (Fla.
1979) (city which had received bene fits un der contract w as es topped from claiming
contract invalid as having been entered into in violation of the Sunshine Law).
Where, however, a pu blic board or commission does not merely perfunctorily ratify
or ceremoniously accept at a later open meeting those decisions which were made at
an earlier secret meeting but rather takes "independent final action in the sunshine," the
decision 0 f t he bo ard or commission will n ot be di sturbed. Tolar v. School Board of
Liberty County, 39 8 S o. 2d 4 27, 4 29 (Fla. 198 1). Accord Bruckner v. City of Dania
Beach, 823 So. 2d 167, 171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Sunshine violations "can be cured by
independent, final action completely in the S unshine"); and Finch v. Seminole County
School Board, 99 5 S o. 2d 1068, 1073 ( Fla. 5t h D CA 20 08) ( inadvertent Sunshine
violation by school board was cured by subsequent well attended public hearings where
rezoning pi an was the subject of extensive publ ic comment an d debate before being
adopted). And see Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857,
861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (adoption of the open government constitutional amendment,
Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., did not overrule the Tolar "standard of remediation"). Cf. Board
of County Commissioners of Sarasota County v. Webber, 658 S o. 2 d 1069 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1995) (no evidence suggesting that board members met in secret during a recess
to reconsider and de ny a variance and t hen perfunctorily ratified this decision at the
public hearing hel d a few minutes later); B.M.Z. Corporation v. City of Oakland Park,
415 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (where no evidence that any decision was made in
private, subsequent formal action in sunshine was not merely perfunctory ratification of
secret decisions or ceremonial acceptance of secret actions).
Thus, i n a case involving t he validity of a lease approved by a board of county
commissioners after an advisory committee held two unnoticed meetings regarding the
lease, a court held that t he Sunshine Law violations were cured when t he bo ard of
county commissioners held open public hearings after the unnoticed meetings, an effort
was made to make available to the public the minutes of the unnoticed meetings, the
board ap proved a I ease that was markedly di fferent from that recommended by t he
advisory committee, and most 0 f the I ease neg otiations were conducted after t he
advisory committee h ad concluded its work. Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical
Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857, 860-861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). The court also said that the
adoption of the open government constitutional amendment, found at Art. I, s. 24 of the
Florida Constitution, did not overrule the Tolar "standard of remediation. II Id. at 861.
It must be emphasized, however, that only a full open hearing will cure the defect; a
violation of the Sunshine Law will not be cured by a perfunctory ratification of the action
taken 0 utside 0 f t he sunshine. Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc. v. Centrust Savings
Bank, 535 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). For example, in Zorc v. City of Vero Beach,
722 So. 2d 891, 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 735 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 1999),
the Fourth District ex plained why a subsequent city council meeting di d not cure the
council's prior violation of the Sunshine Law:
It is evident from the record that the meeting was not a full reexamination of
the issues, bu t rather, was merely t he perfunctory ac ceptance 0 f the City's
prior dec ision. This w as n ot a full, op en public he aring convened for the
purpose 0 f enabling t he public t 0 ex press its v iews and par ticipate i n the
decision-making process. Instead, this was merely a Council meeting which
was then opened to the public for comment at the City's request. There was
no significant discussion 0 f t he issues or a di scourse as tot he language
sought to be included. The City Councilmen were provided with transcripts of
the hearings, but none reviewed the language previously approved, and the
Council subsequently voted to deny reconsideration of the wording.
Similarly, a publ ic he aring held by a county commission following an adv isory
committee's violation of the Sunshine Law failed to cure the "Sunshine Law problem"
because the county commission did not II review the complete deliberative process fully
in the sunshine. II Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority v. Board of County Commissioners,
Monroe County, Florida, No. CA-K-00-1170 (Fla. 16t h C ir. C t. May 16, 2001). "Where
there are secret or non-public meetings by an advisory board. . . the problem can be
cured, but only by scheduling a new meeting of an appropriate deliberative body which
will cover the same subject matter previously covered in violation of the Sunshine Law. II
Id. And see Gateway Southeast Properties, Inc. v. Town of Medley, 14 F .L.W. S upp.
20a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. October 24, 2006) (subsequent public meeting did not cure the
defects of earlier closed meeting where no ev idence was presented and no questions
asked or discussion pursued by council members at subsequent open meeting).
7. Damages
The onl y remedies provided f or i n the Sunshine Law ar e a declaration 0 f t he
wrongful action as void and reasonable attorney fees. Dascott v. Palm Beach County,
988 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), review denied, 6 So. 3d 51 (Fla. 2009) (equitable
recovery of back pay not authorized for employment termination conducted in violation
of Sunshine Law).
PART II
PUBLIC RECORDS
A. WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT?
Florida's Public Records Law, Ch. 119, F.S., provides a right of access to the
records of the state and local governments as well as to private entities acting on their
behalf. In the absence of a statutory exemption, this right of access applies to all
materials made or received by an agency in connection with the transaction of official
business which are used to perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge.
A right of access to records is also recognized in Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., which
applies to virtually all state and local governmental entities, including the legislative,
executive and judicial branches of government. The only exceptions are those
established by law or by the Constitution. The complete text of Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const.,
may be found in Appendix A.
B. WHAT IS A PUBLIC RECORD WHICH IS OPEN TO INSPECTION AND
COPYING?
1. What materials are public records?
Section 119.011 (12), F.S., defines "public records" to include:
all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound
recordings, data pr ocessing software, or 0 ther material, regardless 0 f t he
physical form, characteristics, or means 0 f transmission, made or received
pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official
business by any agency.
The Florida Supreme Court has interpreted this definition to encompass all materials
made or received by an agency in connection with official business which are used to
perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge. Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer,
Reid and Associates, Inc., 379 S o. 2d 6 33, 64 0 ( Fla. 1980) . All such materials,
regardless of whether they are in final form, are open for public inspection unless the
Legislature has exempted t hem from di sclosure. Wait v. Florida Power & Light
Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979). The complete text of Ch. 119, F .S., the Public
Records Act, i s found i n Appendix C. Cf Inf. 0 p. t 0 Burke, April 14, 20 10 ( state
licensing board, and not the Attorney General's Office, must determine whether letter,
allegedly sent to the board by mistake, was received in connection with the transaction
of board business).
The term II public r ecord" is not limited tot raditional written doc uments. As t he
statutory definition states, "tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing
software, or other material, regardless of the physical form, characteristics, or means of
transmission" can all constitute public records. Accordingly, lithe form of the record is
irrelevant; t he material issue is whether t he record ism ade or received by the pu blic
agency i n connection with t he transaction 0 f official bus iness. II AGO 04-33. And see
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201 (Fla.
1 st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3 d 848 ( Fla. 2010) ("public records law is not
limited to paper documents but applies, as well, to documents that exist only in digital
form"). Compare Rogers v. Hood, 906 So. 2d 1220,1223 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), review
denied, 919 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 2005) (unused or unvoted Florida punch card ballots from
2000 el ection do not constitute public records bec ause t hey do no t II perpetuate,
communicate, or formalize knowledge," but a ballot becomes a public record once it is
voted because at that point lithe voted ballot, as received by the supervisor of elections
in a given county, has memorialized the act of voting").
Clearly, as technology changes the means by which agencies communicate,
manage, and store information, public records will take on increasingly different forms.
Yet, the comprehensive scope of the term "public records" will continue to make the
information open to inspection, unless exempted by law. The broad definition of the
term "public record" can be seen in numerous Attorney General Opinions and court
decisions. The following are some examples of materials found by the Attorney
General's Office to constitute public records: anonymous letters sent to city officials
containing allegations of misconduct by city employees, AGO 04-22; guardianship files
audit prepared by the clerk of court, AGO 04-33; list of subscribers to state publication,
AGO 85-03; salary records of assistant state attorneys, AGO 73-30; tape recording of a
staff meeting, AGO 04-15; travel itineraries and plane reservations for use of state
aircraft, AGO 72-356; and videotaped training film, AGO 88-23.
Article I, s. 24, Fla. Const., establishes a constitutional right of access to any public
record made or received i n connection with t he official business 0 f any pu blic bo dy,
officer, or employee of the state, or persons acting on their behalf, except those records
exempted pursuant to Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., or specifically made confidential by the
Constitution. See State ex reI. Clayton v. Board of Regents, 635 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 1994)
("[O]ur Constitution requires that pu blic 0 fficials must conduct pu blic bus iness in t he
open and that public records must be made available to all members of the public.").
The complete text 0 f A rt. I , s . 24 , Fla. C onst., t he Public Records an d Meetings
Amendment, may be found in Appendix A.
2. When are notes or nonfinal drafts of agency proposals subject to Ch. 119,
F.S.?
There is no II unfinished bus iness" ex ception tot he pu blic inspection an d copying
requirements of Ch. 119, F .S. If the purpose of a document prepared in connection with
the 0 fficial bus iness 0 f a pu blic ag ency is toper petuate, communicate, or formalize
knowledge, then it is a publ ic record regardless 0 f whether it is i n final form or t he
ultimate product of an agency. Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and Associates,
Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980). II Interoffice memoranda an d intra-office memoranda
communicating information from one public employee to another or merely prepared for
filing, even though n ot a part 0 fan ag ency's later, formal public pr oduct, would
nonetheless constitute publ ic records inasmuch as they supply t he final ev idence of
knowledge obtained in connection with the transaction of official business. II 379 So. 2d
at 640. Cf. Gannett Corporation, Inc. v. Goldtrap, 302 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
(county's concern that premature disclosure of a report could be harmful to the county
does not make the document confidential).
Accordingly, any ag ency doc ument, however pr epared, i f circulated for re view,
comment or information, i s a pu blic record regardless 0 f whether i tis an 0 fficial
expression of policy or marked "preliminary" or "working draft" or similar label. Examples
of such materials would include interoffice memoranda, preliminary dr afts of agency
rules or proposals which have been submitted for review to anyone within or outside the
agency, and working dr afts 0 f reports which have been furnished to a supervisor for
review or approval.
In eac h of these cases, t he fact that t he records a re part of a preliminary process
does not detract from their essential character as public records. See Times Publishing
Company v. City of Sf. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (while the mere
preparation 0 f doc uments f or submission to a publ ic body does not create public
records, t he documents c an become public records w hen exhibited top ublic 0 fficials
and revised as part of a bar gaining process); Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes &
Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 S o. 2d 2 27, 229 ( Fla. 3 d D CA 199 8) ( book
selection forms completed by state university instructors an d furnished t 0 campus
bookstore "are made i n connection with 0 fficial bus iness, for memorialization an d
communication purposes" and are public records); Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d
193 ( Fla. 1s t D CA 201 0), appeal pending, No . S C10-798 ( Fla. A pril20, 20 10)
(canvassing boar d's minutes, al though n ot yet considered by city commission for its
approval, constituted board's final work product and are subject to disclosure); and AGO
91-26 ( minutes 0 f city council meetings ar e publ ic records 0 nce minutes have bee n
prepared by clerk even though n ot y et sent t 0 city council m embers or officially
approved by the city council). Thus, such records are subject to disclosure unless the
Legislature has specifically exempted the documents from inspection or has otherwise
expressly ac ted tom ake t he records confidential. See, e. g., s. 119. 071 (1 )( d), F. S.,
providing a limited work product exemption for agency attorneys.
Similarly, II personal" notes c an constitute public records i f they ar e intended t 0
communicate, perpetuate or formalize knowledge of some type. For ex ample, t he
handwritten not es pr epared by t he as sistant city labor at torney dur ing her interviews
with city per sonnel ar e pu blic records when t hose not es ar e us ed t 0 communicate
information to the labor attorney regarding possible future personnel actions. AGO 05-
23. See also City of Pinellas Park, Florida v. Times Publishing Company, No. 00 -
008234CI-19 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 3, 2001) (rejecting city's argument that employee
responses to survey are "notes" which are not subject to disclosure because lias to each
of the employees, their responses were prepared in connection with their official agency
business and they were 'intended to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge'
that they had about their department"); and Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc. v. Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, No. 91-4218 (Fla. 2d C ir. C t. June 5, 1992)
(handwritten notes of agency staff, "utilized to communicate and formulate knowledge
within [the ag ency] are publ ic records subject to no ex emption"); Miami Herald Media
Co. v. Sarnoff, 971 So. 2 d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (memorandum prepared by a city
commissioner after meeting with a former city official, summarizing details of what was
said and containing alleged factual information ab out possible criminal activity, was a
public record subject to disclosure as memorandum was not a draft or a note containing
mental impressions t hat would I ater form a par t 0 fag overnment record, b ut rather
formalized and perpetuated his final knowledge gained at the meeting).
However, II under chapter 1 19 public employees' not es tot hemselves which are
designed for their own personal use in remembering certain things do not fall within the
definition of' public record.'" (e.s). The Justice Coalition v. The First District Court of
Appeal Judicial Nominating Commission, 8 23 S o. 2d 1 85, 192 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 200 2).
Accord Coleman v. Austin, 521 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), holding that preliminary
handwritten not es prepared by ag ency at torneys and intended on Iy for t he at torneys'
own per sonal us e ar e not pu blic records; I nf. 0 p. toT rovato, June 2, 2 009. (to the
extent city commissioner has taken notes for his own personal use and such notes are
not intended to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge, personal notes taken
at a workshop or during a commission meeting would not be considered public records).
C. WHAT AGENCIES ARE SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT?
Section 119.011 (2), F .S., defines "agency" to include:
any state, county, district, authority, or municipal officer, department, division,
board, bureau, commission, or other separate unit of government created or
established by law including, for the purposes of this chapter, the Commission
on Ethics, the Public Service Commission, and the Office of Public Counsel,
and any other public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or
business entity acting on behalf of any public agency.
In addition, Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const., establishes a constitutional right of access to
"any publ ic record made or received i n connection with t he 0 fficial bus iness 0 f a ny
public body, officer, or employee of the state, or persons acting on their behalf, except
with respect tot hose records ex empted pur suant tot his section or specifically made
confidential by this C onstitution." This constitutional right of access includes t he
legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government; counties, municipalities, and
districts; an d each constitutional officer, board, and commission, or entity created
pursuant to law or by the Constitution.
1. Advisory boards
The definition 0 f "agency" for purposes of C h. 11 9, F .S., i s not I imited to
governmental entities. A "public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or
business en tity ac ting on behalf 0 f a ny pu blic ag ency" i s also subject to the
requirements of the Public Records Act. See also Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const., providing
that the constitutional right 0 f ac cess top ublic records ex tends to" any publ ic body,
officer, or employee of the state, or persons acting on their behalf. . . ." (e.s.)
Thus, the Attorney General's Office has concluded that the records of an employee
advisory committee, established pursuant to special law to make recommendations to a
public hospital authority, are subject to Ch. 119, F .S., and Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const.
AGO 9 6-32. And see Inf. 0 p. toN icoletti, November 18, 19 87, stating that t he
Loxahatchee Council of Governments, Inc., formed by eleven public agencies to study
and make recommendations on local governmental issues w as an "agency" for
purposes of Ch. 119, F.S.
2. Private organizations
A more complex question is presented when a private corporation or entity provides
services for, or receives funds from, a governmental body. The term "agency" as used
in t he Public Records A ct includes pr ivate ent ities "acting on behalf 0 f any publ ic
agency." Section 119.011(2), F.S. The Florida Supreme Court has stated that this broad
definition 0 f "agency" ens ures t hat a public ag ency cannot avoid di sclosure by
contractually del egating to a pr ivate ent ity that which would ot herwise be an ag ency
responsibility. News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser
Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 1992). Cf Booksmart Enterprises, Inc.
v. Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 71 8 So. 2 d 22 7, 229n.4 (Fla. 3 d D CA
1998) (private company operating state university bookstores is an "agency" as defined
in s. 119.011(2), F.S., "[n]otwithstanding the language in its contract with the universities
that purports to deny any agency relationship"). While the mere act of contracting with,
or receiving public funds from, a public agency is not sufficient to subject a private entity
to Ch.119, F .S., t he following di scussion considers when t he statute has be en hel d
applicable to private entities.
a. Private entities created pursuant to law or by public agencies
The fact t hat a pr ivate entity i s incorporated as a nonprofit corporation i s not
dispositive as to its status under the Public Records Act, but rather the issue is whether
the entity is II acting 0 n be half of" a public agency. The Attorney General's 0 ffice has
issued numerous opi nions adv ising that if a pr ivate ent ity is created by I aw or by a
public agency, it is subject to Ch. 119 disclosure requirements. The following are some
examples of such ent ities: Pace Property Finance A uthority, Inc., created as a Florida
nonprofit corporation by Santa Rosa County to provide as sistance in t he funding and
administration 0 f certain governmental pr ograms, A GO 94-34; South Florida F air and
Palm Beach County Expositions, Inc., created pursuant to C h. 616, F .S., A GO 95-17;
rural heal th networks established as nonprofit legal entities to pi an an d del iver heal th
care services on a cooperative basis pursuant to s. 381.0406, F .S., I nf. Op. to Ellis,
March 4, 1994.
b. Private entities contracting with public agencies or receiving public funds
There i s nos ingle factor which i s controlling on t he question 0 f w hen a pr ivate
corporation, not otherwise connected with government, becomes subject to the Public
Records A ct. However, t he courts have hel d that t he mere ac t 0 f contracting with a
public agency i s not di spositive. See, e.g., News and Sun-Sentinel Company v.
Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., supra (private corporation does not
act II on behalf 0 f' a publ ic ag ency merely b y ent ering into a contract t 0 provide
architectural services to the agency); Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade
County, 429 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 3d D CA 1983); Stanfield v. Salvation Army, 695 So. 2d
501, 503 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (contract with county to provide services does not in and
of itself subject the organization to Ch. 119 disclosure requirements). And see Weekly
Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, 829 So. 2 d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA
2002) (fact that pr ivate development i s located 0 n I and t he developer I eased from a
governmental agency does not transform the leases between the developer and other
private entities into public records).
Similarly, t he receipt of pu blic funds, standing alone, i s not dispositive of t he
organization's status for pur poses 0 f C h. 119, F .S. See Sarasota Herald- Tribune
Company v. Community Health Corporation, Inc., 582 S o. 2d 73 0 (Fla. 2d D CA 1991)
(mere provision of public funds to the private organization is not an important factor in
this an alysis, al though the pr ovision 0 f a substantial share 0 f t he capitalization 0 f the
organization is important); Times Publishing Company v. Acton, No. 99-8304 (Fla. 13th
Cir. Ct. November 5, 1999) (attorneys retained by individual commissioners in a criminal
matter were not "acting on beh alf of' a pu blic ag ency for purposes of C h. 119, F .S.,
even though county commission subsequently voted t 0 pay the legal expenses i n
accordance with a county pol icy providing for reimbursement 0 f I egal ex penses to
officers su ccessfully defending charges filed ag ainst them ar ising out 0 f the
performance of their official duties); and State v. Bartholomew, No. 08-5656CF10A (Fla.
17th Cir. Ct. August 7, 2009) (status of Crimestoppers Council of Broward County, as a
private organization not subject to C h. 119, F .S., is unal tered by its receipt of money
from t he Attorney General's 0 ffice). And compare Inf. 0 p. toG aetz and Coley,
December 17, 2009 (mere receipt 0 f federal grant does not subject pr ivate ec onomic
development organization to Ch. 119, F .S.); and Inf. Op. to Cowin, November 14, 1997
(fact that nonprofit medical center is built on property owned by the city would not in and
of itself be determinative of whether t he medical center's meetings and records ar e
subject to open government requirements) with AGO 10-30 (subcommittee of a private
economic development adv isory council i s subject t 0 op en government I aws when
county has delegated Its authority to conduct public business).
The courts have relied on "two general sets of circumstances" in determining when a
private ent ity is II acting on be half of" a public ag ency and must therefore pr oduce its
records un der C h. 119, F .S. See Weekly Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough County Aviation
Authority, 829 So. 2d 970, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); B & S Utilities, Inc. v. Baskerville-
Donovan, Inc., 988 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) review denied, 4 So. 3d 1220 (Fla.
2009); and County of Volusia v. Emergency Communications Network, Inc., No. 5D09-
3417 (Fla. 5th DCA July 23, 2010). These circumstances are discussed below.
1. "Totality of factors" test
Recognizing t hat II the statute pr ovides no clear criteria f or determining w hen a
private ent ity is' acting on behal f 0 f' a pu blic ag ency, II the Supreme Court ad opted a
"totality of factors" approach to use as a guide for evaluating whether a private entity is
subject to Ch. 119, F.S. News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser
Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029,1031 (Fla. 1992). Accord New York Times
Company v. PHH Mental Health Services, Inc., 6 16 S o. 2d 27 ( Fla. 199 3) ( private
entities should look tot he factors an nounced i n Schwab to determine their pos sible
agency status under Ch. 119); Wells v. Aramark Food Service Corporation, 888 So. 2d
134 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 20 04). Cf Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal
Corporation, 729 So. 2d 37 3,381 ( Fla. 1999), noting that the II totality of factors" test
presents a "mixed question of fact and law." Thus, when a public agency contracts with
a private entity to provide goods or services to facilitate the agency's performance of its
duties, the courts have considered the "totality of factors" in determining whether there
is a significant level 0 f involvement by t he public ag ency so as to subject t he private
entity t 0 C h. 119, F .S. See Weekly Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough County Aviation
Authority, supra at 974.
The factors listed by the Supreme Court in Schwab include the following:
1) the level of public funding;
2) commingling of funds;
3) whether the activity was conducted on publicly-owned property;
4) whether the contracted services are an integral part of the public agency's
chosen decision-making process;
5) whether t he private entity i s per forming a governmental function or a
function which the public agency otherwise would perform;
6) the extent of the public agency's involvement with, regulation of, or control
over the private entity;
7) whether the private entity was created by the public agency;
8) whether the public agency has a substantial financial interest in the private
entity;
9) for whose benefit the private entity is functioning.
In explaining the totality test, the Court cited to several earlier district court opinions,
including the Fourth Dis trict's decision in Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire
Department, 352 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 358 So. 2d 132 (Fla.
1978), that held that a private nonprofit volunteer fire department, which had been given
stewardship over firefighting, which conducted its activities on county-owned property,
and which was funded in part by publ ic money, was an ag ency and i ts membership
files, minutes of its meetings and charitable activities were subject to disclosure.
Thus, the application of the totality of factors test will often require an analysis of the
statutes, ordinances or charter provisions which establish the function to be performed
by t he pr ivate en tity as w ell as t he contract, I ease or ot her document between t he
governmental entity a nd t he private or ganization. See, e.g., AGO 9 2-37 in which the
Attorney General's Office, following a review of the Articles of Incorporation and other
materials relating to the establishment and functions of the Tampa Bay Performing Arts
Center, Inc., concluded that the center was an "agency" subject to the Public Records
Act, noting that the center was governed by a board of trustees composed of a number
of city and county officials or appointees of the mayor, utilized city property in carrying
out its goals to benefit the public, and performed a governmental f unction. See also
AGOs 97-27 (documents created or received by the Florida International Museum after
the date of its purchase/lease/option agreement with city subject to disclosure under Ch.
119, F .S.), and 9 2-53 ( John an d Mable Ringling Museum 0 f Art Foundation, Inc.,
subject toP ublic Records A ct). But see AGO 8 7-44 ( records 0 f a pr ivate nonpr of it
corporation pertaining to a fund es tablished for improvements to city par ks were not
public records since the corporation raised and disbursed only private funds and h ad
not been delegated any governmental responsibilities or f unctions); I nf. 0 p. t 0
Michelson, January 27, 1992 (telephone company supplying cellular phone services to
city officials for city business is not an "agency" since company was not created by the
city, did not perform a city function, and did not receive city funding except in payment
for services rendered); and Inf. Op. to Gaetz and Coley, December 17, 2009 (private
economic development organization, which is not acting on behalf of a public agency, is
not subject to Ch. 119, F .S., merely because it encourages economic development in
the county and is funded by a federal grant).
Under the 'totality of factors" test, the courts have held the following businesses or
organizations to be outside the scope of the Public Records Act:
Architectural firm pr oviding ar chitectural services as sociated with t he
construction of school facilities: News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab,
Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., supra;
Manufacturer of breath analyzer machine used by law enforcement: State v.
Spalding, 13 F.L.W. Supp. 627 (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. February 28, 2006);
Private security force pr oviding services on Walt Disney World pr operty,
including traffic control an d ac cident reports: Sipkema v. Reedy Creek
Improvement District, No. CI 96114 ( Fla. 9 th C ir. C t. M ay 29, 199 6), per
curiam affirmed, 697 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review dismissed, 699
So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 1997);
Soft drink company cooperating with law enforcement in the testing of soda
bottles during an investigation of a poi soning death: Trepal v. State, 704 So.
2d 498 (Fla. 1997).
2. Delegation test
While t he mere ac t of contracting with a pu blic ag ency is not sufficient to bring a
private entity within the scope of the Public Records Act, there is a difference between a
party contracting with a public agency t 0 pr ovide services to the ag ency a nd a
contracting par ty which pr ovides services in place of the publ ic body. News-Journal
Corporation v. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc., 695 S o. 2d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA
1997), approved, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999); and Weekly Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough
County Aviation Authority, 829 S o. 2d 9 70, 974 ( Fla. 2d D CA 2002) (when a publ ic
entity del egates a statutorily aut horized function t 0 a private ent ity, t he records
generated by the private entity's performance of that duty become public records).
Stated another way, business records of entities which merely provide services for
an agency to use (e.g., legal professional services) are probably not subject to the open
government I aws. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc., supra. But, i f th e entity
contracts tor elieve the pu blic bo dy f rom the op eration 0 f a public obi igation such as
operating a jailor providing fire protection, the open government laws do apply. Id. And
see Dade Aviation Consultants v. Knight Ridder, Inc., 800 So. 2d 302, 307 (Fla. 3d DCA
2001) (consortium of private businesses created to manage a massive renovation of an
airport was an "agency" for purposes of the Public Records Act because it was created
for and had no purpose other than to work on the airport contract; "when a private entity
undertakes t 0 pr ovide a service ot herwise pr ovided by t he government, t he entity is
bound by the Act, as the government would be").
Thus, in Stanfield v. Salvation Army, 695 So. 2d 501, 502-503 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997),
the court ruled that the Salvation A rmy was subject tot he Public Records Act when
providing misdemeanor probation services pursuant to a contract with Marion County.
See also Putnam County Humane Society, Inc. v. Woodward, 740 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 5th
DCA 199 9) ( where county humane society as sumed t he governmental function t 0
investigate acts of animal abuse pursuant to statutory authority, the records created and
maintained in connection with this function were governed by the Public Records Act).
Similarly, a private company under contract with a sheriff to provide medical services
for inmates at the county jail must release its records relating to a settlement agreement
with an inmate. Since these records would normally be subject to the Public Records
Act if in the possession of the public agency, they are likewise covered by that law even
though i n t he pos session 0 f t he private corporation. Prison Health Services, Inc. v.
Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 7 18 S o. 2 d 20 4 ( Fla. 2 d D CA 1998), review
denied, 727 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999). And see Times Publishing Company v. Corrections
Corporation of America, No. 91 -429 C A 0 1 ( Fla. 5t h C ir. C t. December 4, 19 91),
affirmed per curiam, 611 S o. 2d 532 ( Fla. 5t h D CA 19 93) ( private corporation that
operates an d maintains county j ail pur suant to contract with t he county is II acting on
behalf of" the county and must make available its records for the jail in accordance with
Ch. 119); Mae Volen Senior Center, Inc. v. Area Agency on Aging, 978 So. 2d 191 (Fla.
4th DCA 2008), review denied, 1 S o. 3 d 1 72 (Fla. 2009) (private ag encies on ag ing
designated by the Department of Elder Affairs to coordinate and administer department
programs and to provide services for the elderly within a pi anning and service area are
subject toP ublic Records Law when considering a ny contracts requiring t he
expenditure of public funds).
In Multimedia Holdings Corporation Inc. v. CRSPE, Inc., No. 03 -CA-3474-G (Fla.
20th Cir. Ct. December 3, 2003), the circuit court required a consulting firm to disclose
its time sheets an d internal billing records generated pursuant to a subcontract with
another firm (CRSPE) which had entered into a contract with a town to prepare a traffic
study required by t he Department 0 f Transportation. Rejecting the subcontractor's
argument that Ch. 119, F .S., did not apply to it because it was a subcontractor, not the
contractor, the court found that the study was pr epared an d submitted jointly by bot h
consultants; both firms had acted in place of the town in performing the tasks required
by the department: "[T]he Public Records Act cannot be so easily circumvented simply
by CRSPE delegating its responsibilities to yet another private entity." And see AGOs
08-66 ( not-for-profit corporation contracting with city t 0 carry out affordable ho using
responsibilities an d screening a pplicant files for such housing is an ag ency within the
scope of Ch. 119),99-53 (while not generally applicable to homeowners associations,
Ch. 119 applies to architectural review committee of a homeowners association which is
required by county or dinance tor eview and appr ove ap plications for county bui Iding
permits as a prerequisite to consideration by the county building department), and 07-44
(property ow ners as sociation, delegated performance 0 f services ot herwise performed
by municipal services taxing unit, subject to Public Records Law when acting on be half
of the taxing unit).
The following are other examples of private entities that have been found to have
been delegated a governmental function and thus subject to the Public Records Act in
carrying out those functions:
Employment search firm: Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and
Associates, supra. Accord AGO 9 2-80 ( materials made or received by
recruitment company in the course of its contract with a public agency to seek
applicants and make recommendations to the board regarding the selection
of an executive director, subject to Ch. 119).
Engineering company providing ongoing engineering services to city: B
& S Utilities, Inc. v. Baskerville-Donovan, Inc., 988 So. 2 d 17 ( Fla. 1 s t DCA
2008), review denied, 4 So. 3d 1220 (Fla. 2009)
Towing company: Fox v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 545 So. 2d
941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
But see Sipkema v. Reedy Creek Improvement District, No. CI96114 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct.
May 29, 1996), per curiam affirmed, 697 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review
dismissed, 699 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 1997), in which the court, utilizing both the delegation
and totality of factors tests, held that reports prepared by Walt Disney World's private
security force regarding incidents on roads within the Disney property are not public
records even though Disney contracted to provide some security services for a public
entity, the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
c. Private company delegated authority to keep certain records
In Times Publishing Company v. City of Sf. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487, 494 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1990) , a pr ivate ent ity (the White S ox bas eball or ganization) refused t 0 allow
access t 0 draft I ease doc uments a nd other records generated i n connection with
negotiations between the White Sox and t he city for use of a municipal stadium. The
court determined t hat bot h the White S ox and t he city improperly at tempted to
circumvent t he Public Records A ct by ag reeing t 0 keep all ne gotiation documents
confidential and in the custody of the White Sox. Noting the dangers that exist if private
entities" are allowed t 0 dem and that they retain custody [and pr event inspection] 0 f
documents as a condition of doing business with a governmental body," the court ruled
that both the city and the White Sox had violated Ch. 119, F.S.
Relying in p art on t he White Sox case, t he court i n National Collegiate Athletic
Association v. The Associated Press, 18 S o. 3d 1 201 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 2009), review
denied, 37 So. 3 d 84 8 (Fla. 201 0), held that National Collegiate A thletic Association
records which were pr ovided t 0 a s tate university on t he NCAA's secure custodial
website for use by the university in preparing a response to possible NCAA sanctions
were public records. Although the documents in the White Sox case had been modified
at the request of the city, the court found that to be "a distinction without a difference."
Id. Holding that the records which were viewed and used by a public agency in carrying
out its official business were public records, the court stated:
[T]he public records law can be enforced against any person who has custody
of pu blic records, whether t hat person i s employed by t he public ag ency
creating or receiving the records or n ot. It makes no di fference t hat the
records i n question are i n t he hands of a private par ty. If they ar e pu blic
records, they are subject to compelled disclosure under the law.
Thus, i f a publ ic ag ency has del egated its responsibility t 0 maintain records
necessary toper form i ts functions, such records w ill be deemed ac cessible to the
public. See, e.g., Harold v. Orange County, 668 S o. 2d 1 010 ( Fla. 5t h D CA 199 6)
(where county hi red a pr ivate company to be t he construction manager on a county
project a nd delegated tot he company t he responsibility of maintaining records
necessary t 0 s how compliance with a II fairness i n pr ocurement or dinance," t he
company's records for this purpose were public records); Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v.
Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), review
denied, 72 9 S o. 2 d 3 89 (Fla. 199 9) (private company oper ating a campus bo okstore
pursuant to a contract with a state university is the custodian of public records made or
received by t he store in connection with university bus iness); WFTV, Inc. v. School
Board of Palm Beach County, No. CL 94-8549-AD (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. March 29, 1995),
affirmed per curiam, 675 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (school board which hired a
marketing firm to conduct a survey, then reviewed and commented upon survey
questionnaires designed by the firm but avoided taking possession of the documents,
unlawfully refused a public records request for the documents); Wisner v. City of Tampa
Police Department, 6 01 S o. 2d 296, 2 98 ( Fla. 2d D CA 1 992) ( city m ay not allow a
private ent ity tom aintain phy sical custody 0 f pol ygraph c hart us ed i n police internal
affairs investigation to circumvent Ch. 119, F .S.). And see AGO 98-54 (registration and
disciplinary records stored in a computer database maintained by a nat ional securities
association which ar e us ed by a state ag ency i n I icensing and regulating securities
dealers doi ng bus iness i n Florida ar e publ ic records). Cf B & S Utilities, Inc. v.
Baskerville-Donovan, Inc., 988 So. 2d 17,20 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review denied, 4 So.
3d 1220 (Fla. 2009) ("Florida's policy of guaranteeing that public records are open for
inspection contemplates the possibility that publ ic records may sometimes be found in
private hands. ").
d. Other statutory provisions
(1) Legislative appropriation
Section 1 1.45(3)(e), F .S., states t hat all records 0 f a no ngovernmental ag ency,
corporation, or person with respect to the receipt and expenditure of an appropriation
made by the Legislature to that entity "shall be public records and shall be treated in the
same manner as 0 ther public records a re un der g enerall aw. II Cf AGO 9 6-43
(Astronauts Memorial Foundation, a no nprofit corporation, is subject tot he Sunshine
Law when performing those duties funded under the General Appropriations Act).
(2) Public funds used for dues
Section 119.01 (3), F .S., provides that if a n agency spends public funds in payment
of du es or membership contributions t 0 a pr ivate ent ity, then t he pr ivate ent ity's
financial, business and membership records pertaining to the public agency are public
records and subject to the provisions of s. 119.07, F.S.
(3) State contracts
Section 2 87.058(1)(c), F .S., requires, with I imited ex ceptions, that every
procurement f or contracted services by a state ag ency be ev idenced by a written
agreement containing a provision allowing unilateral cancellation by the agency for the
contractor's refusal to allow publ ic ac cess to" all documents, papers, I etters, or ot her
material made or received by the contractor in conjunction with the contract, unless the
records are exempt" from disclosure.
3. Judiciary
a. Public Records Act inapplicable to judicial records
Relying on separation of powers principles, the courts have consistently held that the
judiciary is not an II agency" for purposes of Ch. 119, F .S. See, e.g., Times Publishing
Company v. Ake, 660 So. 2 d 255 (Fla. 1995) (the judiciary, as a coequal br anch 0 f
government, is not an II agency" subject to supervision or control by anot her coequal
branch of government) and Locke v. Hawkes, 59 5 S o. 2d 32 (Fla. 199 2). Cf. s.
119.0714(1), F .S., stating that II [n]othing in this chapter shall be construed to exempt
from [so 119.07(1), F .S.] a public record that was made a part of a court file and that is
not specifically closed by order of court. . . ." (e.s.). And see Tampa Television, Inc. v.
Dugger, 559 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1990) (Legislature has recognized the distinction
between documents sealed under court order and those no t s 0 sealed, a nd h as
provided for disclosure of the latter only).
However, the Florida Supreme Court has expressly recognized t hat II both civil and
criminal pr oceedings in Florida ar e public e vents" an d that it will "adhere to the well
established common law right of access to court proceedings and records." Barron v.
Florida Freedom Newspapers, 53 1 S o. 2 d 113, 116 (Fla. 1 988). See also Russell v.
Miami Herald Publishing Co., 570 So. 2d 979, 982 (Fla. 2 d DCA 1990), in which the
court stated: "[W]e recognize that the press has a general right to access of judicial
records. II
Although the judiciary is not an II agency" for purposes of Ch. 119, F .S., there is a
constitutional right of access to judicial records established by Art. I, s. 24, of the Florida
Constitution. This provision states that the public has a right of access to records in the
judicial branch of government, except for t hose records exempted in the Constitution,
records exempted by law in effect on July 1, 1993, records exempted pursuant to court
rules i n effect on November 3, 1 992 [ the dat e 0 f ad option of t he constitutional
amendment], a nd records ex empted by I aw i n t he future i n accordance with t he
procedures specified in s. 24(c), Fla. Const. See Amendments to the Florida Family Law
Rules of Procedure, 723 So. 2d 208, 209 (Fla. 1998), noting that under Art. I, s. 24, Fla.
Const., "any person has the right to inspect court files unless those files are specifically
exempted from public inspection."
b. Public access to judicial branch records, Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420
(1) Scope of the rule
In accordance with the directive in Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., access to records of the
judicial branch is governed by Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 (formerly
2.051), entitled "Public Access to Judicial Branch Records. II The rule, initially adopted in
1992, has been amended several times, including a recent amendment in 201 0 which
seeks II to balance t he publ ic's constitutional right to ac cess to court records with t he
courts' responsibility to protect from pu blic access court records that are confidential."
See In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.420 and the
Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, 31 So. 3d 756 (Fla. 2010).
According tot he Florida Supreme Court, rule 2. 420 i s "intended tor eflect t he
judiciary's responsibility to perform both an a dministrative function and an adj udicatory
function." In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration--Public
Access to Judicial Records, 608 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 1992). In its administrative role, the
judiciary is a governmental entity ex pending publ ic funds and employing government
personnel. Thus, II records generated while courts are acting i n an ad ministrative
capacity should be subject to the same standards that govern similar records of other
branches of government." Id. at 472-473. See also Media General Convergence, Inc. v.
Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 840 So. 2d 1 008, 1016 (Fla. 2003) (when
an individual complains t 0 a chief circuit judge ab out judicial misconduct involving
sexual harassment or sexually inappropriate behavior by a judge, the records made or
received by t he chief judge II constitute' judicial records's ubject to public di sclosure
absent an applicable exemption").
"Records 0 f t he judicial br anch" ar e defined to include II all records, regardless 0 f
physical form, characteristics, or means 0 f transmission, made or received i n
connection with the transaction 0 f official business by any judicial br anch e ntity" an d
consist of "court records" and "administrative records." Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(b)(1).
The term "judicial branch" means lithe judicial branch of government, which includes
the state courts system, the clerk 0 f court when ac ting as an arm 0 f t he court, The
Florida Bar, the Florida Board of Bar Examiners, the Judicial Qualifications Commission,
and all ot her entities established by or op erating und er t he a uthority of t he supreme
court or the chief justice." Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(b)(2).
The term II confidential, II as applied to information contained within a record of the
judicial branch, means that such information is exempt from the public right of access
under A rt. I, s . 24( a), Fla. C onst., a nd may be released onl y t 0 the per sons 0 r
organizations designated by law, statute, or court order. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(b)(4).
The term "exempt," as applied to information contained in a court file, means that such
information i s confidential. Id. Confidential information includes information that i s
confidential under the rule or under a court order entered pursuant to the rule; however,
to the extent reasonably practicable, the restriction of access to confidential information
shall be implemented in a manner t hat does not restrict ac cess to any portion 0 f the
record that is not confidential. Id.
In order to clarify the non-parties entitled to receive notice of certain filings under the
rule, the term "affected non-party" is defined to mean "any non-party identified by name
in a court records that contains confidential information pertaining tot hat n on-party. II
Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(b)(5).
The text of Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420, is included as Appendix E to this manual.
(2) Confidential judicial records
In t he absence 0 f an exemption, judicial records ar e subject t 0 disclosure. See
Tedesco v. State, 807 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), noting that the files in criminal
cases are included within the definition of "judicial records" contained in Florida Rule of
Judicial Administration 2.420(b), and that there is no exemption in the rule which would
preclude release of the progress docket or the clerk's minutes from a criminal case. Id.
And see Friend v. Friend, 866 So. 2d 116, 117 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (denial of access to
records in dissolution of marriage case "may not be based solely upon the wishes of the
parties to the litigation").
Rule 2. 420(c) contains a list 0 f confidential and ex empt judicial br anch records.
Examples include trial and appellate court memoranda, complaints alleging misconduct
against judges and other court personnel until probable cause is established, periodic
evaluations implemented solely t 0 as sist judges i n improving t heir per formance,
information ( other than na mes an d qualifications) abo ut per sons seeking to serve as
unpaid volunteers unless made public by the court based upon a showing of materiality
or good cause, an d copies 0 f ar rest an d search warrants unt il ex ecuted or unt ill aw
enforcement determines that execution cannot be made. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.240(c)(1)
through (6).
Although rule 2.420(c)(1 )-(6) lists specific confidential a nd exempt records,
subdivision (c)(8) of the rule provides a general exemption from disclosure for records
deemed to be confidential by court rule, Florida Statutes, prior Florida case law, and by
rules of the Judicial Qualifications Commission. Thus, an executed search warrant could
be withheld from disclosure pur suant t 0 the statutory ex emption f or ac tive criminal
investigative material even though subdivision ( c)(6) of t he rule ex empts 0 nly
unexecuted search warrants. Florida Publishing Company v. State, 706 So. 2d 54 (Fla.
1 st D CA 1998), review dismissed, 717 S o. 2d 5 31 ( Fla. 19 98). Accord State v.
Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714,718 (Fla. 1998) (documents that are exempt from public
access under Ch. 119, F .S., are likewise exempt under rule 2.420). In addition, Fla. R.
Jud. Admin. 2.420(c)(7) provides an exemption for "all records made confidential under
the Florida and United States Constitutions and Florida and federal law. II
Subdivision ( c)(9) of rule 2. 420 incorporates t he hol dings i n Barron v. Florida
Freedom Newspapers, 531 So. 2d 113 ( Fla. 19 88), a nd Miami Herald Publishing
Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982) by "establishing that confidentiality [of court
records] may be required to protect the rights of defendants, litigants, or third parties; to
further the administration of justice; or to otherwise promote a compelling governmental
interest." Commentary, In re Amendments to Rule of Judicial Administration 2.051.--
Public Access to Judicial Records, 651 So. 2d 1185, 1191 (Fla. 1995).
The degree, duration, and manner of confidentiality ordered by the court shall be no
broader than necessary to protect these interests. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2. 420(c)(9)(B).
And see Smithwick v. Television 12 of Jacksonville, Inc., 730 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA
1999) (trial court properly required defense counsel to return discovery documents once
it realized that its initial order permitting removal of the documents from the court file
had been entered in error because the requirements of rule 2.420 had not been met).
liThe burden of proof. . . shall always be 0 n the party seeking closure." Barron v.
Florida Freedom Newspapers, 531 S o. 2 d 113, 1 18 ( Fla. 19 88). "Our reasons f or
placing the burden on the party seeking closure and maintaining closure remains the
same today as it did when we issued Barron in 1988; that is, the strong presumption of
openness of court proceedings, and the fact that those challenging the closure order will
generally have little or no knowledge of t he specific grounds requiring closure. II
Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 853 So. 2d 303, 306 (Fla.
2003). Commentary, supra at 1191. See In re: Guardianship of Cosio, 841 So. 2d 693,
694 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), in which the court stated that "[a]ccess to court records may be
restricted to protect the interests of litigants only after a showing that the following three-
prong test has been met: (1) the measure limiting or denying access (closure or sealing
of records or both) i s necessary t 0 pr event a serious an d imminent threat tot he
administration of justice; (2) no less restrictive alternative measures are available which
would mitigate the danger; and (3) the measure being considered will in fact achieve the
court's protective purpose. II
In addi tion, rule 2 .420(d)(1)(B) identifies 1 9 statutory ex emptions that t he Court
refers t 0 as II type 1 II information. In re Amendments to the Florida Rule of Judicial
Administration 2.420 and the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, supra. The clerk of
court i s required t 0 designate a nd maintain as confidential II type 1 II information and
information listed under subdivision (c)(1) through (6). A person filing documents with
the court i s required t 0 identify type I information by filing a II Notice of Confidential
Information Within Court Filing," which the clerk must review and provide the filer with
notice of the determination regarding the confidentiality of such information. Fla. R. Jud.
Admin. 2.420(d)(2). Such information must be maintained as confidential for ten days,
unless the filer has filed amotion to determine confidentiality pursuant to subdivision
(d)(3). Id.
Information t hat may be confidential under subdivision ( c)(7) or (c)(8), but is not
automatically confidential, i.e., it does not fall within one of the statutory ex emptions
listed in subdivision (d)(1)(B), is referred to as "type 11" information. It is the duty of the
filer to determine the confidentiality of the information. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(d)(3). If
he or she believes in good faith the information to be confidential, the filer must request
that t he information b e maintained as confidential by filing a II Motion t 0 Determine
Confidentiality of Court Records. II Id. Any interested party may also request that "type 11"
information b e maintained as confidential by filing amotion. Id. And see Rule
2.420(d)(4) requiring a filer tog ive a non -party not ice 0 f certain filings involving
confidential information relating to the non-party.
(3) Requests to determine confidentiality of court records
(a) Trial court records in noncriminal cases
Requests to det ermine t he confidentiality of II type 11" information contained in trial
court records in noncriminal cases must b e made i n the form of a written motion
captioned "Motion to Determine Confidentiality of Court Records" and must identify the
particular court records, or portions t hereof, to be determined to be confidential, t he
basis f or making such a det ermination, and the specific I egal aut hority and any
applicable legal standards for making such a determination. Fla. R. J ud. Admin.
2.420(e)(1). A motion must include a signed certification by t he par ty making t he
request, or the party's attorney, that the motion is made in good faith and is supported
by a sound factual and legal basis. Id. Information subject to the motion must be treated
as confidential by the clerk pending the court's ruling on the motion; however, the case
number, docket number or other number used by the clerk's office to identify the case
file are not confidential. Id.
Unless specified in the motion that all parties agree to the relief requested, the court
must hold a public hearing no later than 30 days after the filing of the motion, and may
hold a hearing on an uncontested motion. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(e)(2). Such hearing
must be an open proceeding except that any person may request the court to conduct
all or part of the hearing in camera to protect the interests set forth in subdivision (c) of
the rule. Id. The court may, in its discretion, require prior public notice of the hearing and
must issue a ruling on the motion within 30 days of the hearing. Id. An order granting
the motion in whole or in part must state with specificity the grounds for determining the
confidentiality of the records. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(e)(3). Except as provided by law
or court rule, notice of any order granting the motion, in whole or in part, must be given
to the public as provided by the rule. Such notice is not required, however, for orders
determining court records confidential under subdivision ( c)(7) [ records made
confidential under t he s tate or federal constitution or s tate or federal I awl, or (c)(8)
[records deemed confidential by court rule, pr ior case I awor rules 0 f t he Judicial
Qualifications Commission]. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(e)(4).
A nonparty may file a written motion to vacate a sealing order. Fla. R. J ud. Admin.
2.420(e)(5). T he court must hol d a hearing on any contested motion and may hold a
hearing on uncontested motions; such hearing must be an open proceeding except that
a party may request the court to conduct all or part of the hearing in camera to protect
the interests set forth in subdivision (c)(9)(A) of the rule. Id.
Provision is made for the expedited consideration of and rulings on t he motions as
well as posting of orders. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(e)(2), (4), and (5). The rule also
authorizes t he imposition 0 f sanctions i n connection with ba d-faith des ignations 0 f
confidential information or sealing motions or f or t he failure t 0 comply with th e
requirements for filing confidential information. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(e)(6).
(b) Appellate court records in noncriminal cases
Subdivision ( g) of the rule ad dresses requests to de termine t he confidentiality of
appellate court records in nonc riminal cases and ism odeled after subdivision (e). It
includes provisions relating to notice, posting of orders, and sanctions; however, unlike
subdivision ( e), subdivision ( g) does no t pr ovide f or hol ding a hearing t 0 seal such
records. Records of a lower tribunal determined by that court to be confidential must be
treated as confidential during any review process. Subdivision (g), however, does not
preclude review b y a n appellate court under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure
9.100(d) or affect the standard of review by an appellate court of an order by the lower
court determining a record to be confidential.
(c) Trial and appellate court records in criminal cases
The procedures for a request to determine confidentiality in subdivisions (e) and (g),
discussed supra, for noncriminal t rial and appellate court records generally appl y to
requests to determine the confidentiality of court records in criminal cases. Subdivision
(f)(3), however, es tablishes more restrictive provisions for records pertaining to a plea
agreement, substantial assistance agreement, or that reveal the identity of a confidential
informant or active criminal investigative information. Only certain procedures set forth
in subdivisions (e) and (g) apply to subdivision (f)(3) records. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin.
2.420(f)(3)(B).
A subdivision (f)(3) motion must be based on a request for confidentiality unde r
subdivisions (c)(9)(A)(i) (prevention of a serious or imminent threat to the administration
of justice), (c )(9)(iii) (protection of a compelling governmental interest), ( c)(9)(A)(v)
(avoidance of a substantial injury to innocent third parties), or ( c)(9)(A)(vii) (compliance
with established public policy). The motion is treated as confidential and is indicated on
the court docket by generic title only, pending a ruling on the motion or further order of
the court. Fla. R . J ud. Admin. 2. 420(f)(3). T he information that i s t he subject 0 f a
subdivision (f)(3) motion must be treated as confidential by the clerk pending a ruling on
the motion and a filing containing such information must be indicated on the docket in a
manner that does not reveal t he confidential nat ure 0 f t he information. Fla. R . J ud.
Admin. 2.420(f)(3)(A). And see Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(f)(4) stating that subdivision (f)
does not authorize the falsification of court records or progress dockets.
(4) Procedures for accessing judicial branch records under rule 2.420
"Requests and responses to requests for access to records under this rule shall be
made in a reasonable manner." Fla. R . J ud. Admin. 2. 420(i). Requests must be in
writing and di rected to the custodian. Id. See Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 13
So. 3d 12 0 ( Fla. 1 s t DCA 2009) , i n which t he court de nied a Florida new spaper's
records request for an audi 0 tape related to a shooting since t he request was made
orally instead of i n writing as required by t he rule. In a commentary tot he decision
incorporating t he written request pr ovision, t he Court cautioned that t he II writing
requirement is not intended to disadvantage any person who may have difficulty writing
a request; if any difficulty exists, the custodian should aid the requestor in reducing the
request tow riting." Commentary, In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on
Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla. 2002).
A public records request II shall provide sufficient specificity to enable the custodian
to identify t he requested records. The reason for t he request i s not required t 0 be
disclosed.II Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(i)(1).
The custodian "is required to pr ovide ac cess t 0 or copies 0 f records bu tis n ot
required either to provide information from records or to create new records in response
to a request. II Commentary, In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public
Records, 825 So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla. 2002).
The custodian shall determine whether the requested records are subject to the rule,
whether there are any exemptions, and the form in which the record is provided. Fla. R.
Jud. Admin. 2.420(i)(2). If the request is denied, the custodian shall state in writing the
basis for the denial. Id.
(5) Review of denial of access to administrative records
Expedited review of denials of access to administrative records of the judicial branch
shall be pr ovided through an ac tion for mandamus, or other ap propriate relief. Fla. R.
Jud. Admin. 2.420(h). Cf Mathis v. State, 722 So.2d 235,236 (Fla. 2d D CA 1998)
(petition for writ of mandamus II is t he pr oper vehicle to seek review of t he denial 0 f
access to judicial r ecords"). Where a judge who has de nied a request for ac cess to
records is the custodian, the action shall be filed in the appellate court having appellate
jurisdiction tor eview the dec is ions 0 f the judge denying ac cess. Fla. R. J ud. Admin.
2.420(h)(1). Upon or der issued by t he appellate court, t he judge deny ing ac cess to
records shall file a sealed copy of the requested records with the appellate court. Id. All
other actions shall be filed in the circuit court where the denial of access occurred. Fla.
R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(h)(2).
c. Electronic judicial records
The Florida Supreme Court, in Administrative Order of the Supreme Court 09-30
(http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/adminorders/2009/AOSC09-30.pdf).ad 0 pted
statewide standards for electronic access to the courts. Recognizing that lithe transition
of Florida's courts from paper-based information management to systems that rely
primarily on di gital records represents a fundamental change in the internal operations
of t he courts, II t he Court stated that II care must be taken to ensure that this
transformation i s accomplished i n a del iberate a nd responsible manner" as "'these
issues are not merely technical but are central to the future functioning of the courts and
to relations between citizens and their government.'" Id., quoting In Re: Implementation
of Report and Recommendations of the Committee on Privacy and Court Records, 06-
20 (Fla. June 30, 2006).
Administrative Order 09 -30 provides for the es tablishment 0 f a single statewide
Internet portal for electronic access to and transmission of court records to and from all
Florida courts. Section 4. 1.18 pr ovides that public ac cess t 0 electronically filed
documents "must be provided in accordance with the judicial branch policy on access to
court records" and comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act,
the federal law known as Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
which lists standards nec essary tom ake el ectronic an d information technology
accessible t 0 persons with di sabilities, an d t he Florida Accessible Electronic a nd
Information Technology Act, SSg 282 .601-282.606, F .S. Section 4.1.15 requires a filer
who el ectronically files a doc ument containing exempt information to indicate that the
document contains confidential information by pi acing t he notation" confidential" in the
comments section. Documents that ar e ex empt or claimed to be exempt f rom public
access shall be processed pursuant to Rule 2.420. Id.
d. Discovery material
The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that there i s no First Amendment right of
access to unfiled discovery materials. Palm Beach Newspapers v. Burk, 504 So. 2d 378
(Fla. 1987) (discovery in criminal proceedings); and Miami Herald Publishing Company
v. Gridley, 510 S 0.2 d 884 ( Fla. 198 7), cert. denied, 10 8 S .Ct. 1224 ( 1988) (civil
discovery). But see SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796, 798
(Fla. 4th DCA 2002), noting that even though there is no constitutional right of access to
prefiled discovery materials, II it does not necessarily follow that there is a constitutional
right to prevent access to discovery." (emphasis supplied by the court).
Even though unfiled discovery material is not accessible under the First Amendment,
it may be ope n to inspection und er C h. 11 9, F .S., if t he doc ument is a publ ic record
which is otherwise subject to disclosure under that law. See, e.g., Tribune Company v.
Public Records, 493 So. 2 d 480, 485 (Fla. 2d D CA 1986), review denied sub nom.,
Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987), in which the court reversed a
trial judge's ruling limiting inspection of police records produced in discovery to those
materials which were made part of an open court file because II this conflicts with the
express provisions of the Public Records Act." Cf Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v.
McCrary, 520 S o. 2d 32 ( Fla. 198 8), i n which t he Court not ed that where pr etrial
discovery material de veloped for the prosecution of a criminal case h ad reached the
status of a public record un der C h. 1 19, F .S., t he material w as subject to public
inspection as required by that statute in the absence of a court order finding that release
of the material would jeopardize the defendant's right to a fair trial. See also Rameses,
Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3 d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 20 10) (government not precluded from
asserting ap plicable statutory ex emptions to publ ic records that have been di sclosed
during discovery to a criminal defendant). And see Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida,
Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992) (public's statutory right of ac cess to pretrial
discovery information i n a criminal case must be balanced against a nonparty's
constitutional right to privacy).
e. Florida Bar
"Given that The Florida Bar is 'an official arm of the court,' see R. Regulating Fla.
Bar, I ntroduction, [the Florida Supreme] Court has previously rejected the Leg islature's
power to regulate which Florida Bar files were subject to pu blic records law. . . . II The
Florida Bar v. Committee, 916 So. 2d 741, 745 (Fla. 2005). See also The Florida Bar, In
re Advisory Opinion Concerning the Applicability of Ch. 119, Florida Statutes, 398 So.
2d 446, 448 (Fla. 1981) (Ch. 119, F.S., does not apply to unauthorized practice of law
investigative files maintained by t he Bar). Cf Florida Board of Bar Examiners Re:
Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to
the Bar, 676 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1996) (no merit to argument that under Art. I, s. 24, Fla.
Const., all records i n pos session 0 f Board 0 f Bar Examiners should be open for
inspection by applicant and the public).
f. Judicial Qualifications Commission and judicial nominating commissions
Proceedings by or bef ore t he Judicial Qualifications Commission ar e confidential
until formal charges against a justice or judge are filed by the Commission with the clerk
of the Florida Supreme Court; upon a finding of probable cause and the filing of formal
charges with the clerk, the charges and all further proceedings before the Commission
are public. See Art. V, s. 12(a)(4), Fla. Const; Media General Convergence, Inc. v. Chief
Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 840 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 2003).
With regard t 0 judicial no minating commissions, A rt. V , s . 11 (d), Fla. C onst.,
provides that "[e]xcept for deliberations of the. . . commissions, the proceedings of the
commissions and their records s hall be open tot he public." See Inf. 0 p. t 0 Frost,
November 4, 1 987, concluding that correspondence between a member 0 f a judicial
nominating commission and per sons wishing to obtain an a pplication for a vacant seat
on a District Court of Appeal is a public record subject to disclosure. Accord Inf. Op. to
Russell, August 2 , 1 991 ( documents made or received by a judicial nominating
commission in carrying out its duties are open to inspection).
However, records pertaining to voting, including vote sheets, ballots, and ballot tally
sheets" are clearly part 0 f t he del iberation process" and, therefore, ar e not subject to
public di sclosure. The Justice Coalition v. The First District Court of Appeal Judicial
Nominating Commission, 82 3 S o. 2d 1 85, 192 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 2002). In addi tion,
personal notes of individual commission members made during the deliberation process
are not subject t 0 disclosure bec ause they ar e mere" precursors" 0 f governmental
records, and thus fall outside the definition of "public record." Id., citing to Shevin v.
Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and Associates Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980).
g. Jury records
(1) Grand jury
Proceedings before a grand jury are secret; therefore, records prepared for use of
the grand j ury dur ing t he regular per formance 0 fits duties ar e not subject t 0 s .
119.07(1), F .S. See Buchanan v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 206 So. 2d 465
(Fla. 3d D CA 1 968), modified, 230 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1969) (grand j ury pr oceedings are
"absolutely privileged"); and In re Grand Jury, Fall Term 1986, 528 So. 2d 51 ( Fla. 2d
DCA 198 8), a ffirming a trial court order barring publ ic di sclosure 0 f motions filed in
accordance with s . 90 5.28, F .S., tor epress or ex punge stemming f rom a grand j ury
presentment not accompanied by a true bill or indictment. See also AGO 90-48 (as an
integral part of the grand j ury pr oceeding to secure witnesses, gr and j ury subpoenas
would f all under t he "absolute pr ivilege" of the grand j ury and not be subject to
disclosure under Ch. 119, F.S.).
Thus, a letter written by a city of ficial tot he grand j ury i s not subject t 0 public
inspection. AGO 73 -177. Nor ar e t he na mes and addresses 0 f the members 0 f the
grand jury subject to public disclosure under s. 119.07(1), F .S., because this information
is privileged as part of the grand jury proceedings. Inf. Op. to Alexander, September 8,
1995. However, the clerk of court is not authorized to redact the name of a grand jury
foreperson or the acting foreperson from an indictment after it has been made public.
AGO 99-09.
It is important to emphasize, however, that the exemption from disclosure for grand
jury records does not apply to those records which were prepared by a publ ic agency
independent of a grand j ury investigation. Thus, public records which ar e made or
received by an ag ency i n t he per formance of its of ficial duties do not become
confidential simply because they are subsequently viewed by the grand jury as part of
its investigation. As t he court stated in In re Grand Jury Investigation, Spring Term
1988, 543 So. 2d 757,759 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989):
Nor can we allow the grand jury to become a sanctuary for records which are
otherwise accessible to the public. The mere fact that documents have been
presented to a grand jury does not, in and of itself, cloak them in a permanent
state of secrecy.
Accordingly, a state attorney and sheriff must provide public access to investigative
records regarding a judge that were compiled independently 0 f and pr ior to a grand
jury's investigation 0 f t he judge. In re Grand Jury Investigation, Spring Term 1988,
supra. See also In re Subpoena To Testify Before Grand Jury, 864 F .2d 1559 (11th Cir.
1989) ( trial court's au thority t 0 pr otect grand j ury pr ocess ena bled court t 0 pr event
disclosure 0 f materials pr epared for grand j ury pr oceedings; however, court n ot
empowered to prohibit disclosure of documents assembled independent of grand jury
proceedings).
There are a n umber of statutes which relate to secrecy of grand jury proceedings.
See ss. 905 .24-905.28, F .S., and s . 9 05.395, F .S. ( statewide grand jury). But see
Butterworth v. Smith, 110 S .Ct. 1376 ( 1990) (provisions 0 f s. 905.27, F .S., which
prohibit "a grand juror. . . reporter. . . or any other person" appearing before a grand
jury from ever di sclosing testimony be fore the grand j ury ex cept pursuant to a court
order were unconstitutional insofar as they prohibit a g rand jury witness from disclosing
his own testimony after the term of the grand jury has ended).
(2) Trial jury
In Kever v. Gilliam, 886 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), the appellate court ruled
that the clerk of court was required to comply with appellant's public records request for
names and addresses 0 f trial court jurors e mpanelled in his t rial. Accord AGO 0 5-61
(statute requiring Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to provide driver
license information to courts for purposes 0 f es tablishing j ury s election I ists do es n ot
operate to exempt from public disclosure jurors' names and addresses appearing on a
jury list compiled by the clerk of court). Cf Sarasota Herald- Tribune v. State, 916 So. 2d
904, 909 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (while "[t]here are unquestionably times when it might be
necessary f or a trial judge t 0 impose media restrictions on t he publ ication 0 f juror
information, . . ." t rial court order prohibiting news media from pu blishing na mes and
addresses of prospective or seated jurors in the high profile murder trial constituted a
prior restraint on speech).
h. Sunshine in Litigation Act
The Sunshine in Litigation Act, s. 69.081, F.S., provides, with limited exceptions, that
no court shall enter an order or judgment which has the purpose or effect of concealing
a public hazard or which has the purpose or effect of concealing any information which
may be useful to members of the public in protecting themselves from injury which may
result from a public hazard. See Jones v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 871 So.
2d 899 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), review denied, 886 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 2004) (jury finding in
favor of mechanic who was injured by an exploding tire established that the tire was a
"public hazard" for purposes of the Sunshine in Litigation Act; thus, reversal of pretrial
confidentiality order was required). See also State v. American Tobacco Company, No.
CL 95 -1466-AH ( Fla. 15t h C ir. C t. July 28, 19 97) ( Sunshine i n Li tigation A ct i s
constitutional) .
Additionally, s. 69.081(8), F.S., provides that any portion of an agreement which has
the purpose or effect of concealing information relating to the settlement or resolution of
any claim or action against an agency is void, contrary to public policy, and may not be
enforced. Settlement records must be maintained in compliance with Ch. 119, F .S. See
Inf. 0 p. to Barry, June 24, 1998, citing to s. 69.081 (8)(a), a nd stating that" a state
agency may not enter into a settlement ag reement or other contract which contains a
provision aut horizing t he concealment 0 f information relating t 0 a di sciplinary
proceeding or other adverse employment decision from the remainder of a personnel
file." However, this subsection does not apply to trade secrets protected under Ch. 688,
F.S., pr oprietary confidential bus iness information, or ot her information that i s
confidential under state or federal law. Section 69.081 (8), F.S.
4. Legislature
The Public Records Act does not apply to the legislative branch. Locke v. Hawkes,
595 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1 992) (definition 0 f "agency" in the Public Records Act does n ot
include t he Leg islature or its m embers). There is, however, a constitutional right 0 f
access to legislative records pr ovided in Art. I, s. 24, Fla. C onst., which provides that
"[e]very person has the right to inspect or copy any pu blic record made or received in
connection with t he 0 fficial business 0 f a ny publ ic body . . . ." T his right of ac cess
specifically includes t he legislative br anch. Article I, s . 2 4(a), Fla. C onst. The
Legislature, however, may provide by general law for the exemption of records provided
that such law must state with specificity the publ ic nec essity justifying t he ex emption
and be no broader than necessary to accomplish the stated purpose of the law. Article I,
s. 24( c), Fla. C onst. Each ho use 0 f t he Leg islature i s aut horized t 0 ado pt rules
governing the enforcement of this section in relation to records of the legislative branch.
Id. Any statutes providing limitations on access which were in effect on July 1, 1993,
continue in force and apply to records of the legislative branch until repealed. Article I, s.
24( d), Fla. Const.
Section 11.0431(2), F .S., lists legislative records which are exempt from inspection
and copying. T he text 0 f s. 11.0431, F .S., is s et forth in Appendix F . And see s.
11.26(1), F .S. (legislative employees are forbidden from revealing to anyone outside the
area of their direct responsibility the contents or nature of any request for services made
by any member of the Legislature except with the consent of the legislator making the
request); and s. 15.07, F.S. (the journal of the executive session of the Senate shall be
kept free from inspection or disclosure except upon order of the Senate itself or some
court of competent jurisdiction). Cf Media General Operation, Inc. v. Feeney, 849 So.
2d 3, 6 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 200 3), in which t he court rejected t he ar gument t hat records
containing telephone numbers for calls made by I egislative em ployees i n connection
with official business could be redacted because disclosure of the numbers could result
in" unreasonable consequences tot he per sons called"; however, under t he
circumstances 0 f t he case, em ployees could redact those por tions 0 f t he records
reflecting personal calls.
5. Governor and Cabinet
The Governor and Cabinet have duties which derive from both the Constitution and
the Leg islature. Because 0 f separation 0 f powers pr inciples, t he legislatively created
Public Records Act does not apply to records gathered in the course of carrying out a
specific duty or function which has been assigned to the Governor and Cabinet by the
Constitution rather than by statute. See AGO 86-50, stating that materials collected by
the Parole a nd Probation Commission pursuant t 0 di rection 0 f t he Governor an d
Cabinet for par dons or ot her forms 0 f clemency aut horized by A rt I V, s. 8( a), Fla.
Const., are not subject to Ch. 119, F.S.
The Public Records A ct, however, does app Iy tot he Governor and Cabinet when
sitting i n their capacity as a boar d created b y the Leg islature or w hose powers ar e
prescribed by the Legislature, such as the Board 0 f Trustees 0 f t he Internal
Improvement Trust Fund. In such cases, the Governor and Cabinet are not exercising
powers derived from the Constitution but are subject to the "dominion and control" of the
Legislature.
In addition, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., establishes a constitutional right of access by
providing that" every person" shall have aright 0 f ac cess top ublic records of t he
executive branch an d of" each constitutional officer, board, and commission, or entity
created pursuant to law or this Constitution" except as otherwise provided in this section
or specifically made confidential in the Constitution.
6. Commissions created by the Constitution
A board or commission created by the Constitution is not subject to C h. 119, F .S.,
inspection requirements when such board or commission i s carrying out i ts
constitutionally prescribed duties. See AGO 86-50 (Ch. 119, F .S., is not applicable to
materials gathered by the Parole and Probation Commission regarding an application
for clemency since t he clemency power i s ex clusively constitutional). Cf Kanner v.
Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (judicial nominating commissions are not
subject t 0 s. 286.011, F .S.), a nd A GO 77-65 (Ch. 120, F .S., i s inapplicable t 0
Constitution Revision Commission established by Art. XI, s. 2, Fla. Const., because the
commission is authorized in that section to adopt its own rules of procedure).
Accordingly, the Florida Supreme Court has ruled that the Public Records Act does
not apply tot he clemency investigative files and reports pr oduced by t he Parole
Commission on behalf of the Governor and Cabinet relating to the granting of clemency.
Release of such materials is governed by the Rules of Executive Clemency adopted by
the Governor and Cabinet, sitting as t he clemency boar d. Parole Commission v.
Lockett, 620 So. 2 d 1 53 (Fla. 1993). Accord Jennings v. State, 626 So. 2d 1 324 (Fla.
1993).
There is, however, a difference between the status of a commission created by the
Constitution which exercises constitutional duties and a commission whose creation is
merely authorized by the Constitution and whose duties are established by law. While
the former is not subject to the Public Records Act, it has been held that a commission
performing dut ies assigned t 0 i t by t he Legislature must comply with t he open
government I aws. See Turner v. Wainwright, 3 79 S o. 2d 1 48 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 1 980),
affirmed and remanded, 3 89 S o. 2d 1 181 ( Fla. 19 80), holding that t he Parole
Commission, which Art. IV, s. 8(c), Fla. Const., recognizes may be created by law, is
subject t 0 s . 2 86.011, F .S., in carrying out its statutory dut ies and responsibilities
relating to parole.
Moreover, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., provides a constitutional right of access for public
records 0 f each branch 0 f government, and" each constitutional 0 fficer, bo ard, and
commission, or entity created pursuant to law or this Constitution." The only exceptions
to the right of access are those records exempted pursuant to s. 24 or specifically made
confidential by the Constitution. Article I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const. See King v. State, 840 So.
2d 1047 (Fla. 2003) (clemency records exempt pursuant to s. 14.28, F.S., providing that
records made or received by any state ent ity pursuant t 0 aBoard 0 f Executive
Clemency investigation are not subject to public disclosure).
D. WHAT KINDS OF AGENCY RECORDS ARE SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC
RECORDS ACT?
1. Computer records
a. Computer records are public records
Information stored in a publ ic ag ency's computer" is as much a public record as a
written page in a book or a tabulation in a file stored in a filing cabinet. . . ." Seigle v.
Barry, 422 S o. 2d 6 3, 65 ( Fla. 4t h DCA 1982), review denied, 431 So. 2 d 988 (Fla.
1983).
Numerous Attorney General 0 pinions have cited Seigle for t he principle that t he
Public Records A ct includes computer records as w ell as paper doc uments, tape
recordings, and 0 ther more tangible materials. See, e.g., A GO 98-54 (application and
disciplinary reports maintained in a computer system operated by a nat ional securities
dealers as sociation which ar e received el ectronically by state ag ency f or use i n
licensing and regulating securities dealers doing bus iness in Florida are public records
subject t 0 C h. 119) ; AGO 91 -61 (agency must pr ovide copy 0 f computer di sk i n
response to Ch. 119 request); and AGO 85-03 (computer tape subject to disclosure).
Thus, information such as el ectronic calendars, dat abases, a nd word pr ocessing
files stored i n ag ency computers, c an all constitute pu blic records bec ause records
made or received i n t he course 0 f 0 fficial bus iness a nd intended toper petuate,
communicate 0 r formalize knowledge of some type, fall within the scope of C h. 119,
F.S. AGO 8 9-39. Compare AGO 8 5-87 ( to t he ex tent that" machine-readable
intermediate files" may be intended to" communicate" knowledge, any such
communication takes place completely within t he data pr ocessing eq uipment an din
such form as tor ender any inspection pursuant to C h. 119, F .S., unintelligible and,
except perhaps to the computer itself, meaningless; therefore, these files are analogous
to notes used to prepare some other documentary material, and are not public records).
Moreover, t he definition 0 f " public records" specifically includes" data pr ocessing
software" an d es tablishes t hat a record made or received i n connection with 0 fficial
business is a public record, regardless of physical form, characteristics, "or means of
transmission." See s. 119.011(12), F.S. "Providing access to public records is a duty of
each agency." Section 119.01 (1), F .S. "Automation of public records must not erode the
right of access to those records." Section 119.01 (2)(a), F .S. "As each agency increases
its us e 0 f an d dep endence on el ectronic r ecordkeeping, eac h agency must pr ovide
reasonable public ac cess tor ecords el ectronically maintained an d must ensure that
exempt or confidential records are not disclosed except as otherwise permitted by law."
Id. Cf s. 287.042(3)(h), F.S., providing for the Department of State, in consultation with
the Agency Chief Information 0 fficers Council, to develop pr ocedures to be us ed by
state agencies w hen procuring information technology commodities an d contractual
services to ens ure compliance with publ ic records requirements a nd records retention
and archiving requirements.
Accordingly, el ectronic publ ic records ar e governed by t he same rule as written
documents and other public records--the records are subject to public inspection unless
a statutory exemption exists which removes the records from disclosure. See National
Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 1 st DCA
2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (public records law is not limited to
paper documents but applies to documents that exist only in digital form). Cf AGO 90-
04, stating that a county official is not authorized to assign the county's right to a publ ic
record (a computer program developed by a former employee while he was working for
the county) as part of a settlement compromising a lawsuit against the county.
b. "E-Mail"
"E-mail" messages made or received by ag ency em ployees i n connection with
official bus iness ar e public records and subject t 0 disclosure i n t he absence 0 fan
exemption. AGO 96-34. Such messages are subject tot he statutory restrictions on
destruction of public records. See s. 257.36(6), F.S., stating that a public record may be
destroyed or ot herwise di sposed 0 f onl y i n ac cordance with retention schedules
established by t he Division of Library and I nformation Services ( division) of t he
Department 0 f State; and s .11 9.021(2)(b), F .S., providing that eac h agency shall
comply with rules es tablishing retention schedules and di sposal processes for public
records which are adopted by the records and information management program of the
division. And see In re Amendments to Rule of Judicial Administration 2.051.-- Public
Access to Judicial Records, 651 So. 2d 11 85, 1186 (Fla. 19 95) (definition of "judicial
records" [now in Rule 2.420 of Fla. R. Jud. Admin.] "includes information transmitted by
an e-mail system").
The nature of information--that is, that it is electronically generated and transferred--
has been determined not t 0 al ter i ts character as a public record un der the Public
Records A ct. AGO 0 1-20. Thus, the e-mail communication 0 f factual bac kground
information and position papers from 0 ne official t 0 another i s a pu blic record an d
should be retained in accordance with the retention schedule for other records relating
to performance of the agency's functions and formulation of policy. Id. Similarly, e-mails
sent by city commissioners in connection with the transaction of official bus iness ar e
public records subject to di sclosure even though t he e -mails contain undisclosed or
"blind" recipients and their e-mail addresses. AGO 07-14.
(1) Personal e-mail
The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that pr ivate e-mail stored i n government
computers does not automatically bec ome a pu blic record by virtue 0 f that storage.
State v. City of Clearwater, 8 63 So. 2d 1 49 ( Fla. 2 003). "Just a s an ag ency cannot
circumvent t he Public Records A ct by allowing a pr ivate ent ity to maintain physical
custody 0 f doc uments t hat fall within t he definition 0 f ' public records,'. .. private
documents cannot be deemed public records solely by virtue of their placement on an
agency-owned computer." Id. at 154. The Court cautioned, however, that t he case
before i t di d not involve e -mails" that may have been isolated by a government
employee whose j ob required him or her to locate employee misuse 0 f government
computers." Id. at 151 n.2. Cf Bent v. State, No.4 D10-2726 (Fla. 4 th DCA filed
September 29, 2010) ( recordings of per sonal telephone calls between minors in jail
awaiting t rial and third par ties made by sheriff's office are no t public records when
contents 0 f t he ph one c ails do n ot involve criminal ac tivity or a security br each).
Compare Miami-Dade County v. Professional Law Enforcement Association, 997 So. 2d
1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (personal flight log of pilots paid by county which are required
as part of pi lot's administrative duties are distinguishable from personal e-mails in City
of Clearwater case and are subject to disclosure). Cf Grapski v. Machen, Case No. 01-
2005-CA-4005 J (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. May 9, 2006), affirmed per curiam, 949 So. 2d 202
(Fla. 1 s t D CA 2007) (spam or bul k mail received by a publ ic ag ency does not
necessarily constitute a public record).
(2) E-mail address public records disclosure statement
Section 668.6076, F .S., requires t hat any agency as defined ins. 119.011 (1), F .S.,
or legislative ent ity that op erates a w ebsite and uses electronic mail must post the
following statement in a conspicuous location on its website:
Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records.
If y ou do n ot want your e-mail addr ess released i n response t 0 a pu blic
records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this
office by phone or in writing.
c. Facebook and Text Messages
(1) Facebook
The Attorney General's Office has stated that the placement of material on a city's
Facebook page presumably would be in connection with the transaction of official
business and thus subject to Ch. 119, F.S., although in any given instance, the
determination would have to be made based upon the definition of "public record"
contained in s. 119.11, F.S AGO 09-19. To the extent that the information on the city's
Facebook page constitutes a public record, the city is under an obligation to follow the
public records retention schedules established by law. Id.
(2) Text Messages
While the Attorney General's Office is not aware of any court cases ruling on
whether text messages are public records, in March 2010, the Attorney General wrote a
letter to the Department of State (which is statutorily charged with development of public
records retention schedules) and said that the "same rules that apply to e-mail should
be considered for electronic communications including Blackberry PINS, SMS
communications (text messaging, MMS communications (multimedia content), and
instant messaging conducted by government agencies." (See
http://myfloridalegal.com/webfilesnsf/WF/MRAY-83MJ8D/$file/Browning Letter. pdt). In
response, the department revised its records retention schedule to note that text
messages may be public records and that retention of text messages could be required
depending upon the content of those texts. (See General Records Schedule GS1-SL for
State and Local Government Agencies, V., Electronic Records, Electronic
Communications, and Transitory Messages).
d. Formatting issues
Each agency that maintains a public record in an el ectronic recordkeeping system
shall provide to any person, pursuant to C h. 119, F .S., a copy of any public record in
that system which is not exempted by law from public disclosure. Section 119.01(2)(t),
F.S. An ag ency must pr ovide a copy 0 f the record in the medium requested if t he
agency maintains the record in that medium, and the agency may charge a fee which
shall be in accordance with Ch. 119, F .S. Id. Thus, a custodian of public records must, if
asked for a copy of a computer software disk used by an agency, provide a copy of the
disk in its or iginal format; a typed transcript would not satisfy t he requirements 0 f s .
119.07(1), F.S. AGO 91-61. Cf AGO 06-30, stating that an agency may respond to a
public records request requiring t he pr oduction 0 f thousands of documents by
composing astatic web page where the responsive pu blic doc uments ar e posted for
viewing i f t he requesting par tyag rees tot he pr ocedure an d agrees t 0 pay t he
administrative costs, in lieu of copying the documents at a much greater cost.
However, an ag ency is not generally required tor eformat i ts records tom eet a
requestor's particular needs. As stated in Seigle v. Barry, supra, the intent of Ch. 119,
F.S., is "to make available to the public information which is a matter of public record, in
some meaningful form, not necessarily that which the applicant prefers." 422 So. 2d at
66. Thus, in AGO 97-39, the Attorney General's Office concluded that a school district
was not required to furnish electronic publ ic records in an el ectronic format other than
the standard format routinely maintained by the district.
Despite the general rule, however, the Seigle court recognized that an ag ency may
be required to provide access through a specially designed program, prepared by or at
the expense of the requestor, where:
1) available pr ograms do not ac cess all of t he public records stored in the
computer's data banks; or
2) the information i n t he computer ac cessible by t he us e 0 f available
programs would include ex empt information nec essitating a special
program to delete such exempt items; or
3) for any reason the form in which the information is proffered does not fairly
and meaningfully represent the records; or
4) the court determines other exceptional circumstances exist warranting this
special remedy. 422 So. 2d at 66-67.
For the purpose of satisfying a publ ic records request, the fee to be charged by an
agency if it elects to provide a copy of a public record in a medium that is not routinely
used by the agency, or if it elects to compile information that is not routinely developed
or maintained by t he agency or t hat requires a substantial a mount of manipulation or
programming, must be in accordance with s. 119.07(4), F.S. (authorizing imposition of a
special service charge i f extensive information technology resources or labor ar e
required). Section 119.01 (2)(f), F.S.
When designing or acquiring an el ectronic recordkeeping system, an agency must
consider whether such system is capable of pr oviding dat a ins ome common format
such as, but not limited to, t he American Standard C ode for Information Interchange.
Section 119.01 (2)(b), F.S. An agency may not enter into a contract for the creation 0 r
maintenance of a public records database if that contract impairs the ability of the public
to inspect or copy the public records of that agency, including public records that are on-
line or stored i n an el ectronic r ecordkeeping system us ed by t he ag ency. Section
119.01(2)(c), F.S. And see s. 119.01(2)(a), F.S., stating that the "[a]utomation of public
records must not erode the right of access to those records. As each agency increases
its us e 0 f an d dep endence on el ectronic r ecordkeeping, eac h agency must pr ovide
reasonable public ac cess to records el ectronically maintained an d must ensure that
exempt or confidential records are not disclosed except as otherwise permitted by law."
The importance 0 f en suring publ ic ac cess t 0 computer records is recognized b y
statute and i n t he electronic r ecordkeeping rules of t he Division 0 f Li brary and
Information Services of the Department of State. Section 287.042(3)(h), F .S., requires
the Department 0 f Management Services to develop, in consultation with t he Agency
Chief Information 0 fficers Council, pr ocedures t 0 be us ed by state ag encies when
procuring information technology commodities and contractual services t 0 ens ure
compliance with publ ic-records requirements an d records-retention a nd ar chiving
requirements. See s. 257. 14, F .S., es tablishing r ulemaking aut hority of t he Division
regarding records management. Rule 1 B-26.003(6)(g)3., F .A.C., pr ovides t hat each
agency shall "[e]nsure t hat agencyel ectronic r ecordkeeping systems meet state
requirements for public access to records in accordance with Chapter 119, F .S." Cf Inf.
Op. to Moore, October 19, 1993, noting that an ag ency considering the acquisition of
computer software should be responsive to the need for preserving public access to the
information through use 0 f t he computer's software and that "[t]he des ign a nd
development of t he software, therefore, should ensure that t he system has the
capability of redacting confidential or exempt information when a public records request
is made."
e. Remote access
Section 1 19.07(2)(a), F.S., states that "[a]s an ad ditional means 0 f inspecting or
copying publ ic records," a custodian may provide access to pu blic records by remote
electronic means, provided exempt or confidential information is not disclosed. Thus, an
agency i s aut horized but n ot required t 0 permit r emote electronic ac cess top ublic
records. And see s. 119.01(2)(e), F .S., establishing that "[p]roviding access to public
records by remote el ectronic means is an additional method of access that ag encies
should strive t 0 pr ovide tot he ex tent feasible," and t hat agencies pr oviding remote
access should do so" in the most cost-effective and ef ficient manner available tot he
agency providing the information." Cf Rea v. Sansbury, 504So.2d 1315,1317-1318
(Fla. 4t h D CA 1987), review denied, 513 S o. 2 d 1 063 (Fla. 1987) ( while county
possesses statutory authority t 0 facilitate inspection 0 f public records by el ectronic
means, this" does not mean t hat every means ad opted by the county to facilitate the
work of county employees ipso facto requires that the public be allowed to participate
therein").
Section 119.07(2)(b), F.S., requires the custodian to provide safeguards to protect
the contents of the public records from unauthorized electronic access or alteration and
to pr event t he disclosure or modification of t hose portions 0 f t he records which ar e
exempt from disclosure.
Unless ot herwise required by law, t he custodian m ay charge a fee for remote
electronic access, granted under a contractual arrangement with a user, which fee may
include the direct and indirect costs of providing such access. However, fees for remote
electronic ac cess pr ovided tot he general publ ic must b e i n accordance with t he
provisions of s. 119.07, F.S. Section 119.07(2)(c), F.S.
f. Security exemptions
Risk a nalysis in formation relative t 0 security threats t 0 data, information, and
information technology resources of a n ag ency i s confidential a nd ex empt. Section
282.318(4)(c), F.S. And see s. 282.0041(1), F.S., defining "agency" for purposes of Ch.
282, F.S., as having the same meaning as in s. 216.011(1)(qq), F.S. Internal policies
and procedures to assure the security of the data and information technology resources
which, if disclosed, could facilitate the una uthorized modification, disclosure, or
destruction 0 f data, information, or information technology resources ar e confidential
and exempt. Section 282.318(4)(d), F.S. Results of periodic audits and evaluations of a
security pr ogram f or an ag ency's dat a and information technology resources ar e
confidential and exempt. Section 282.318(4)(f), F .S. Risk analysis information, internal
policies and procedures and results of periodic audits and evaluations made confidential
by the above subsections shall be available to the Auditor General and the Agency for
Enterprise I nformation Technology f or performing pos tauditing dut ies. Section
282.318(4)(c), (d) and (f), F.S.
g. Software created by an agency
(1) Copyrighted agency-created software
Section 11 9.084(2), F .S., authorizes ag encies to hol d a nd enforce copyrights for
data processing software created by t he agency. The agency may s ell or license the
copyrighted software and may establish a license fee for its use. The prices or fees for
the s ale or I icensing of t he copyrighted software may be bas ed 0 n market
considerations.
However, t he pr ice or f ee for pr oviding agency-created and copyrighted dat a
processing software t 0 an individual solely f or appl ication t 0 data or information
maintained or generated by the agency that created the software must be limited to the
fees pr escribed in s . 119 .07(4), F .S. Thus, while s .119.084, F .S., allows publ ic
agencies to copyright software which they have created and to charge a fee based on
market considerations, if the pu blic must us e the software in or der to ac cess ag ency
public records, the agency must charge the fee provided in s. 119.07(4), F.S., and not
the market-based fee.
(2) "Sensitive" agency-created software
Agency-produced data pr ocessing software which is sensitive is exempt from
disclosure. Section 1 19.071 (1 )(f), F .S. Section 119 .011 (13), F .S., de fines t he term
"sensitive" to mean "only those portions of [agency-produced] data processing software,
including t he specifications and doc umentation" which ar e us ed t 0 collect, process,
store a nd retrieve ex empt information, financial management information such a s
payroll and ac counting records, or t 0 control and di rect ac cess aut horizations an d
security measures for automated systems. See AGO 90-104, applying the exemption to
agency-produced software used to process voter registration information.
h. Trade secret exemptions
The Legislature has created an exemption for data processing software which has
been obtained by an agency under a licensing agreement prohibiting its disclosure and
which is a trade secret as de fined ins. 81 2.081, F.S. Section 119.071 (1 )(f), F .S. In
order for t he exemption t 0 apply, t wo conditions must b e pr esent: The licensing
agreement must pr ohibit di sclosure 0 f the software, an d the software must meet the
statutory definition of "trade secret" found in s. 812.081, F.S. See AGOs 90-104 and 90-
102.
Section 81 5.04(3)(a), F .S., provides that data, pr ograms, or supporting
documentation which is at rade secret as defined in s. 812.081, F .S., and resides or
exists internal or external to a computer, computer system, or computer system network
held by an agency is confidential and ex empt from s. 119.07(1), F .S. This exemption
applies tot rade secrets marked as confidential a nd sent v ia el ectronic mail t 0 an
agency. Sepro Corporation v. Department of Environmental Protection, 839 So. 2d 781 ,
785 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2003), review denied sub nom., Crist v. Department of Environmental
Protection, 911 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 2005).
2. Election records
a. Ballots
Election records are generally open t 0 pu blic inspection. An individual or group is
entitled to inspect the ballots and may take notes regarding the number of votes cast.
AGO 9 3-48. See also Rogers v. Hood, 906 So. 2d 122 0, 1223 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 2005) ,
review denied, 919 So. 2d 4 36 (Fla. 2005) (voted ballots are public records because
they have "memorialized the act of voting").
Section 119.07(5), F .S., prohibits any person other than the supervisor of elections
orthe supervisor's employees from touching the ballots. And see s. 101.572, F.S. (no
persons other than the supervisor, supervisor's em ployees, or the county canvassing
board shall handle a ny official b allot or ballot card). However, t his restriction does not
prohibit the supervisor f rom producing copies 0 f 0 ptically s canned ballots which were
cast in an el ection in response to a pu blic records request. AGO 04-11. And see AGO
01-37 (supervisor of elections required to segregate overvote and undervote ballots by
use 0 f the county's opt ical scanning eq uipment pur suant to a public records request
even though the overvote and undervote ballots had already been segregated manually,
provided that t he requestor pay s f or t he costs 0 f t he mechanical segregation i n
accordance with the Public Records Act).
b. Voter registration and voter records
Each supervisor of elections shall maintain for at least two years and make available
for public inspection and copying, all records concerning implementation of registration
list maintenance programs and activities conducted pursuant to ss. 98.065 and 98.075,
F.S. Section 98.045(3), F .S. The records must include lists of the name and address of
each person tow hom a no tice w as sent and information as tow hether eac h such
person responded to the mailing, but may not include any information that is confidential
or exempt from public records requirements under the Election Code. Id.
Section 9 7.0585, F .S., states that t he following information i s confidential an d
exempt from public disclosure requirements and may be used only for purposes of voter
registration: declinations to register to vote; information relating to the place where a
person registered to vote or updated a v oter registration; the social security number,
driver's license nu mber, and t he Florida identification number 0 f a voter registration
applicant or voter. The signature of a voter registration applicant or a v oter is exempt
from copying requirements. Id. And see s. 741.465(2), F.S., providing an exemption for
the n ames, a ddresses, an d telephone numbers 0 f participants i n t he Address
Confidentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence contained in voter registration
and voting records. In addition, s. 97.0585(3), F.S., provides that the names, addresses,
and telephone n umbers of s talking or ag gravated s talking victims ar e ex empt from
disclosure i n t he same manner as such information of participants i n t he Address
Confidentiality Program for Victims 0 f Domestic Violence under s . 741 .465, F .S., is
exempt, provided that the stalking victim has filed a sworn statement of stalking with the
Attorney General's Office and otherwise complies with the procedures in ss. 741.401-
741.409, F.S.
Verified petition cards submitted by a candidate qualifying by the alternative method,
however, are not registration records subject to restrictions 0 n inspection and copying
under the Florida Election Code. AGO 02-63. See also AGO 02-67 (designation that a
change of address h as oc curred does not make a candidate petition card a voter
registration record). Compare AGO 04-18, concluding that the supervisor of elections
must maintain t he confidentiality 0 f personal information (home address, telephone
number) for certain officers and employees which appe ars i n pe titions or campaign
papers if t he a ffected employee or officer or hi s or her employing ag ency has filed a
written request for confidentiality tot he supervisor as aut horized in s. 119. 07(3)(i)4.,
F .S. [see now s. 119.071 (4)( d)2., F .S.].
3. Financial records
Many agencies prepare or receive financial records as part of their official duties and
responsibilities. As with ot her publ ic records, these materials ar e generally open t 0
inspection unless a specific statutory ex emption ex ists. See AGO 9 6-96 ( financial
information submitted by harbor pilots in support of a pilotage rate increase application
is not exempt from disclosure requirements).
a. Audit reports
(1) Auditor General audits
The audit report prepared by the Auditor General is a publ ic record once finalized.
Section 11. 45(4)(c), F.S. The audit w orkpapers an d not es ar e not a public record;
however, those w orkpapers nec essary to support t he computations in t he final audit
report may be made available by a majority vote of the Legislative Auditing Committee
after a public hearing showing proper cause. Id. And see AGO 79-75 (lithe term 'audit
work papers and notes' should be construed narrowly and I imited to such 'raw data' as
is commonly considered to constitute the work papers of an accountant").
At the conclusion of the audit, the Auditor General provides the head of the agency
being audited with a list of the adverse findings so that the agency head may explain or
rebut them before the report is finalized. Section 11.45(4)(d), F .S. This list of adverse
audit findings is a public record. AGO 79-75.
(2) Local government audits
The au dit report of ani nternal au ditor prepared for or on be half of a u nit of local
government becomes a publ ic record when t he a udit becomes final. Section
119.0713(3), F .S. The audit becomes final when the audit report is presented to the unit
of local government; unt il t he audit becomes final, t he au dit w orkpapers an d no tes
related to such audit report are confidential. Id.
Thus, a draft audit report of a county legal department prepared by the clerk of court,
acting in her capacity as county auditor, did not become subject to disclosure when the
clerk submitted copies 0 f h er dr aft report tot he county adm inistrator for review and
response. Nicolai v. Baldwin, 715 So. 2d 1161, 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). According to
the exemption, the report would become "final," and hence subject to disclosure, when
presented to the county commission. Id.
The term II internal au ditor" is not defined for purposes of this exemption. However,
the term would appe ar t 0 enc ompass a n 0 fficial within county government w ho is
responsible under t he county c ode for conducting a n a udit. A GO 99 -07. Thus, t he
exemption would apply to the Miami-Dade Inspector General when conducting audits of
county contracts pursuant to the county code. Id. Compare AGO 04-33 (exemption does
not apply to audit of guardianship files prepared by clerk of court because that audit II is
not an internal a udit performed by or on behalf 0 f a ny of the specified uni ts 0 f local
government").
(3) State agency inspector general audits
Section 20.055, F .S., requires each state agency to appoint an inspector general to
conduct a udits of the ag ency and pr epare audi t reports 0 f t he findings. Such audi t
reports and w orkpapers ar e public records tot he ex tent t hat they do no t include
information which has been made confidential and ex empt from di sclosure. Section
20.055(5)(b), F.S. Compare s. D.4.b.(4), infra, relating to whistle-blower investigations.
b. Bids
Section 119.071 (1 )(b)1.a, F.S., provides an exemption for "sealed bids or proposals
received by an agency pursuant to invitations to bid or requests for proposals" until such
time as the ag ency pr ovides not ice 0 f a de cision or intended decision pur suant to s .
120.57(3)(a), F .S., or within 10 days after bid or proposal opening, whichever is earlier.
And see s. 1 19.071 (1)(b)1. b. , F .S., pr oviding a temporary ex emption if an agency
rejects all bids or proposals submitted in response to an invitation to bid or request for
proposals and t he ag ency concurrently pr ovides not ice 0 fits intent tor eissue t he
invitation t 0 bi d or request for pr oposals; s .119 .071(1)(b)2.a., F .S., pr oviding a
temporary ex emption for a competitive sealed reply i n response t 0 an invitation to
negotiate, as defined in s. 287.012, F .S.; and s. 11 9.071 (1)(b)2.b., F .S., providing a
temporary exemption if an agency rejects all competitive sealed replies in response to
an invitation to negotiate and concurrently pr ovides not ice of its intent to reissue the
invitation t 0 neg otiate and reissues t he invitation t 0 neg otiate as pr ovided i n t he
exemption.
Any financial statement t hat an ag ency requires a pr ospective bi dder to submit in
order to prequalify for bidding or for responding to a proposal for a road or any other
public works pr oject is ex empt from di sclosure requirements. Section 11 9.071 (1 )(c),
F.S. See also s. 119.0713(4), F.S., providing a limited exemption for materials used by
municipal utilities to prepare bids.
c. Budgets
Budgets and working pa pers us ed t 0 pr epare them ar e nor mally subject t 0
inspection. Bay County School Board v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 382
So. 2d 7 47 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 1980); Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2 d 977 ( Fla. 2d D CA
1976); and City of Gainesville v. State ex. reI. International Association of Fire Fighters
Local No. 2157,298 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Accord Inf. Op. to Pietrodangelo,
Nov. 29, 19 72 ( financial oper ating budg et 0 f a thletic department 0 f state university
constitutes a public record). Cf News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson, 410
So. 2d 546,548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), holding that the preponderant interest in allowing
public participation in the budget process justified the inclusion of an agency's internal
budget committee within the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Law.
The exemption afforded by s. 447.605(3), F.S., for work products developed by the
public employer in pr eparation for collective bargaining neg otiations does n ot remove
the working pap ers used in pr eparing an agency budg et from disclosure. Warden v.
Bennett, supra. See also AGO 92-56 (budget of a public hospital would not, in a nd of
itself, appear to constitute either a trade secret or marketing pi an for purposes of a
statutory ex emption for doc uments revealing a hos pital's marketing pi an or trade
secrets) .
d. Economic development records
(1) Convention center booking business records
Booking business records of a public convention center, sports facility, or auditorium
are exempt from public di sclosure. Section 255 .047(2), F .S. The statute de fines
"booking bus iness r ecords" to include "client calendars, client lis ts, exhibitor lis ts, and
marketing f iles." Section 255 .047(1)(a), F .S. The term does n ot include "contract
negotiation documents, I ease ag reements, rental rates, event invoices, event work
orders, ticket sales information, box 0 ffice records, attendance figures, payment
schedules, certificates of insurance, accident reports, incident reports, or
correspondence specific to a confirmed event. II Id.
(2) Business location or expansion plans
Upon written request from a pr ivate entity, information held b y an ec onomic
development ag ency concerning t he pi ans, intentions, or interests 0 f such entity t 0
locate or ex pand i ts business activities i n Florida i s confidential and ex empt from
disclosure for 12 months after the d ate a n economic development ag ency receives a
request f or confidentiality or unt il t he information is ot herwise di sclosed, whichever
occurs first. Section 288.075(2)(a), F .S. Confidentiality may be extended for up t 0 an
additional 12 months upon the written request of the private entity if the agency finds
that t he pr ivate ent ity is still ac tively considering locating or ex panding its bus iness
activities in Florida. Section 288. 075(2)(b), F.S. A public officer 0 r em ployee may not
enter into a bi nding ag reement with an entity who has requested confidentiality of the
information under this subsection unt il 90 days af ter t he information ism ade pu blic
unless: 1. The public 0 fficer or employee i s ac ting i n a n 0 fficial capacity; 2. T he
agreement does not accrue to the personal benefit of such public officer or employee;
and 3 . I n t he pr ofessional judgment 0 f t he 0 fficer or employee, t he ag reement i s
necessary to effectuate an economic development project. Section 288.075(2)(c), F.S.
Development pi ans, financial records, financial commitment I etters and dr aft
memoranda of understanding between a Florida city and a company that is interested in
locating its business activities i n t he city a nd developing a large pr oject there would
appear t 0 be" records which c ontain or would pr ovide information concerning pi ans,
intentions, or interests of such private corporation. . . to locate, relocate, or expand any
of it s business activities" in Florida. AGO 0 4-19. However, t he bur den i s on t he
economic development agency lito carefully and in good faith distinguish between those
documents clearly covered by the exemption and those not covered." Id.
A written request for confidentiality und er s . 288 .075(2), F .S., may constitute or
contain information required to be held confidential under that statute; however, such a
determination must be made by the custodian on a case-by-case basis as to whether a
particular record or portion of a record falls within the scope of the exemption. AGO 07-
15. The section, however, may be cited by the records custodian as statutory authority
for withholding information from public inspection and copying under the Public Records
Law without violating the required confidentiality provisions of the statute. Id.
Trade secrets, as defined in s. 812.081, F.S., contained in the records held by an
economic development agency are confidential and exempt from di sclosure. Section
288.075(3), F .S. Cf AGO 80-78 (county industrial development authority permitted to
withhold access only to those records II clearly falling" within the exemption provided in
s. 288.075; "policy considerations" do not justify nondisclosure of public records).
Proprietary confidential bus iness information hel d by an ec onomic development
agency is confidential and exempt until such information is otherwise publicly available
or is no longer treated by the proprietor as proprietary confidential business information.
Section 2 88.075(4), F .S. Federal employer identification nu mbers, une mployment
compensation ac count nu mbers, or Florida sales tax registration numbers held by an
economic development agency are confidential and exempt. Section 288.075(5), F.S. In
addition, section 288.075(6), F .S., makes certain other information held by an economic
development agency pursuant to the administration of an economic incentive program
for qualified businesses confidential and exempt for a period not to exceed the duration
of t he incentive agreement, including a n a greement a uthorizing a t ax refund or t ax
credit, or upon termination of the incentive agreement.
The term II economic development agency" means t he s tate Office 0 f Tourism,
Trade, and Economic Development, an industrial development authority, Space Florida,
the public economic development agency of a county or municipality, or a research and
development authority. Also included are the county or municipal officers or employees
assigned the duty to promote the general business interests or industrial interests of
that county or municipality or the related responsibilities, if the county or municipality
does not have a publ ic economic development agency. The term also includes private
persons or agencies authorized by the state, a county or a municipality to promote the
general business interests 0 f t he s tate or t hat municipality or county. Section
288.075(1 )(a), F.S. Cf s. 288.9551, F.S. (Scripps Florida Funding Corporation).
(3) Tourism promotion records
There ar e several statutes which ex empt certain information obtained or held by
state or local tourism agencies. For ex ample, s. 125 .0104(9)(d)1., F.S., ex empts
information given t 0 a county tourism promotion ag ency, which, if released, would
reveal the identity 0 f those who provide information in response to a sales pr omotion,
advertisement, or research project or whose names, addresses, meeting or convention
plan information or a ccommodations or 0 ther visitation ne eds become booking or
reservation list data.
Section 12 5.01 04(9)(d)2., F .S., provides an ex emption for t he following records
when held by a county tourism promotion agency: booking business records, as defined
in s. 255.047, F .S.; a trade secret as de fined ins. 812.081, F .S.; trade secrets an d
commercial or financial information gathered from a per son and privileged or
confidential, as defined and interpreted und er cited f ederall aw. See also ss.
288.1224(7) an d 288.1226(8), F .S. (confidentiality of certain data submitted as part of
marketing or advertising research projects undertaken by state tourism agencies).
e. Personal financial records
In the absence of statutory exemption, financial information prepared or received by
an agency is usually subject to Ch. 119, F .S. See Wallace v. Guzman, 687 So. 2d 1351
(Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (personal income tax returns and financial statements submitted by
housing finance authority members as part of the authority's application to organize a
bank are subject to disclosure).
For example, county records of payments made by individuals for waste collection
services ar e publ ic records. A GO 88 -57. See also AGO 04-16 (financial documents
contained in licensing file); A GO 9 2-09 ( customer del inquency information held by a
utilities commission is subject to di sclosure); and Inf. Op. to Lovelace, April 3 , 1 992
(records identifying mortgage recipients hel d by a bank ac ting as ag ent 0 f a housing
finance authority in granting mortgages funded by the authority are public records). Cf
AGO 73-278 (reports submitted to agency in connection with permit application open to
inspection unless submitted by a consumer reporting agency whose reports are subject
to nondisclosure provisions in federal I aw; in t hat event, reports are subject to public
inspection only as authorized in federal law).
There ar e some specific ex emptions, ho wever, that ar e appl icable t 0 certain
payment records or information. Bank account n umbers a nd debit, charge, and credit
card numbers held by an ag encyar e exempt from public disclosure. Section
119.071 (5)(b), F .S. See also s. 119.0714(1 )U), F.S. (bank account num bers and debit,
charge, and credit card nu mbers held in court records ar e ex empt as pr ovided ins.
119.071[5][b]); and s. 119.0714(2)(a)and (e)1., F .S. (until January 1, 2012, if a bank
account, debit, charge, or credit card number is included in a court file, such number
may be included as part of the court record available for public inspection and copying
unless redaction is requested by the holder of such number or by the holder's attorney
or legal guardian; after that da te nor equest for redaction is required t 0 keep such
records confidential a nd ex empt as provided ins. 1 19.071 [5][b], F .S.). And see s.
119.0714(3)(b), F .S., providing that if a bank ac count, debit, charge, or credit card
number is included in an official record, such number may be made available as part of
the 0 fficial records available f or publ ic inspection an d copying unless redaction i s
requested by t he hol der 0 f such nu mber or t he hol der's at torney or legal guardian;
however, ifsuch record is in electronic format, on or after January 1,2011, the county
recorder must use his or her best effort, to keep complete bank account, debit, charge,
and credit card numbers exempt as provided for ins. 119.071 (5)(b), without a request
for redaction. The holder of a bank account, debit, charge, or credit card number, or the
holder's attorney or legal guardian, may request that a county recorder redact from an
image or copy 0 fan official record pi aced on a county recorder's publ icly available
Internet website or on a publicly available Internet website used by a county recorder to
display public records, or otherwise made electronically available to the public, his or
her bank account, debit, charge, or credit card number contained in that official record.
Section 119.0714(3)(c), F.S.
Health or property insurance information furnished by an applicant for or participant
in federal, s tate, or local hous ing as sistance pr ograms i s confidential. Section
119.071 (5)(f), F.S. And see s. 7 17.117(8), F .S. ( property identifiers contained i n
unclaimed pr operty reports hel d by the Department 0 f Financial Services ar e
confidential); and s. 624.23, F .S. (personal financial information of a consumer held by
the Department of Financial Services or the Office of Insurance Regulation, relating to a
consumer's complaint or inquiry is confidential).
Section 338.155(6), F .S., provides an exemption for personal identifying information
obtained by the Department 0 f Transportation, a county, 0 ran expressway aut hority
relating to payment of tolls by credit card, charge card, or check. And see s. 414.295(1),
F.S. ( personal identifying information of a temporary c ash as sistance pr ogram
participant is confidential).
f. Security interests
Records regarding ownership of, or security interests in, registered public obligations
are not open to inspection. Section 279.11, F.S.
g. Taxpayerrecords
There are a n umber of statutes providing for confidentiality of taxpayer records held
by the Department of Revenue. Unless ot herwise specified by law, Florida taxpayers
have the right to have tax information kept confidential. Section 213.015(9), F .S. See,
e.g., s. 213.053(2)(a), F.S. (all information contained in returns, reports, accounts, or
declarations received by the Department of Revenue, including investigative reports and
information a nd I etters of technical adv ice, is confidential ex cept for official pur poses
and ex empt from s. 119.07[1], F .S.); s . 2 13.21 (3), F .S. ( records of compromises 0 f
taxpayer liability not subject t 0 di sclosure); and s . 2 13.27(6), F .S. ( confidential
information shared by t he Department 0 f Revenue with debt collection or au diting
agencies under contract with the department is exempt from public disclosure and such
debt collection or auditing agencies are bound by the same confidentiality requirements
as the department).
In light 0 f t he position taken by the Department 0 f Revenue that its form en titled
"Original Application for Ad Valorem Tax Exemption" constitutes a "return," such form
should be treated as a "return" that is confidential pursuant to s. 193.074, F .S. AGO 05-
04. Accord AGO 95-07. And see NYT Management Services, Inc. v. Florida Department
of Revenue, Case No. 2006-CA-0896 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. April 25, 2006) (declarations or
written statements filed with the Department of Revenue pursuant to the state's revenue
laws would be a return and thus confidential under s. 193.074, F.S.). However, taxpayer
information that i s confidential i n t he hands 0 f certain specified 0 fficers un der s .
193.074, F .S., is subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act when it has been
submitted by a taxpayer to a value adj ustment board as ev idence in a n as sessment
dispute. AGO 01-74. Cf Inf. Op. to Echeverri, April 30, 2010 (while property appraiser
may use confidential records submitted to the value adjustment board by the taxpayer, it
is not clear whether property appraiser may independently submit confidential material
to t he board i n t he absence 0 fat axpayer's submission although bo ard mayor der
production of confidential records). Similarly, absent a specific statutory exemption for
assessment rolls an d publ ic information cards, such documents made or received by
the property appraiser are public records subject to the Public Records Act, regardless
of the confidentiality of a return that may contain information used in their creation. AGO
05-04.
h. Telephone bills
Records of telephone calls made from agency telephones are subject to disclosure
in the absence of statutory exemption. See Gillum v. Times Publishing Company, No.
91-2689-CA (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. July 10, 1991). See also Media General Operation, Inc. v.
Feeney, 849 So. 2d 3, 6 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2003), rejecting the argument that redaction of
telephone nu mbers for calls made in t he course of official bus iness could be justified
because disclosure could result in "unreasonable consequences" to the persons called.
Compare Bent v. State, N o. 4D 10-2726 ( Fla. 4t h D CA filed September 29, 2 010)
(recordings 0 f per sonal telephone c ails between minors in j ail a waiting t rial and third
parties made by sheriff's office are not public records when contents of the phone calls
do not involve criminal activity or a security breach). Cf AGO 97-05 (exemption now
found ins. 119.071 [5][d], F .S., for records supplied by a telecommunications company
to a state or local governmental ag ency which contain the nam e, ad dress, an d
telephone nu mber 0 f subscribers, applies tot elecommunications records 0 f a c ity-
operated telecommunications company when t he records ar e supplied by t he city to
another state or local governmental agency).
The Attorney General's 0 ffice has advised that telephone nu mbers i n a school
district's records of calls made on ag ency telephones ar e public records even when
those calls may be personal and the employee pays or reimburses the school district for
the calls. AGO 99-74. And see Bill of Rights, Inc. v. City of New Smyrna Beach, No.
2009-20218-CINS (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. April 8, 2010), in which the court, striking the city's
affirmative de fense, stated t hat lias a matter 0 flaw, . . . bi lIing documents regarding
personal calls made and received by city em ployees on city-owned or city-leased
cellular telephones are public records, when t hose doc uments ar e received and
maintained i n connection with t he transaction 0 f 0 fficial bus iness; and, t he ' official
business' of a city includes paying for telephone service and obt aining reimbursement
from employees for personal calls. II Compare Media General Operation, Inc. v. Feeney,
supra, in which t he court hel d that under t he circumstances 0 f that case ( involving
access to records of cellular phone service provided by a pol itical party for legislative
employees), records of personal or pr ivate calls 0 f t he employees f ell outside t he
definition of public records. Cf Inf. to Michelson, January 27, 1992 (cellular telephone
company which provided city with statements reflecting amount of usage of cell phones
by city staff rather than listing individual calls, di d not appear to b e a n "agency" for
purposes 0 f C h. 119, F .S., making company's records of individual calls subject t 0
disclosure).
i. Trade secrets and proprietary confidential business information
(1) Trade Secrets
The Legislature has created a number of specific exemptions from Ch. 119, F.S., for
trade secrets. See, e.g., s . 10 04.78(2), F .S. (trade secrets pr oduced in technology
research within community colleges); s. 365.174, F .S. (proprietary confidential business
information and trade secrets submitted by wireless 911 provider to specified agencies);
s. 570. 544(7), F .S. (trade secrets contained in records of t he Division of Consumer
Services of t he Department 0 f Agriculture and Consumer Services); and s
627.6699(8)(c), F.S. (trade secrets involving small employer health insurance carriers).
In addition, the First District has concluded that s. 815.045, F.S., "should be read to
exempt from di sclosure as public records al I trade secrets as de fined in [ s.
812.081(1)c), F .S.].. .." Sepro Corporation v. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, 839 So. 2d 781,785-787 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), review denied sub nom., Crist
v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 911 S o. 2 d 792 ( Fla. 2 005). In
Sepro, the court ruled that while "a conversation with a state employee is not enough to
prevent [alleged trade secrets] from being made available to anyone w ho makes a
public records request," documents submitted by a private party which constituted trade
secrets as defined in s. 812.081, and which were stamped as confidential at the time of
submission to a state agency, were not subject to public access. Sepro, at 784. And see
Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. v. Miami-Dade County, 899 So. 2d 453, 454 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2005) (company, which supplied documents to an agency and failed to mark them
as "confidential" and which continued to supply them without asserting even a legally
ineffectual post-delivery claim to confidentiality for some thirty days, failed adequately to
protect a n alleged trade secret claim); Seta Corporation of Boca, Inc. v. Office of the
Attorney General, 756 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); and James, Hoyer, Newcomer,
Smiljanich, & Yanchunis, P.A., v. Rodale, Inc., 41 So.3d 386 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 20 10),
rejecting company's claim that information i n customer complaints a nd company
responses were trade secrets; such information "is not secret and is not [the company's]
to control"). See also AGO 0 9-02 ( authorized representatives of Division of Plant
Industry in Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services prohibited from disclosing
trade secrets un der C h. 58 1, F .S., to a ny unaut horized per son, provided such trade
secrets fall within the statutory definition in s. 812.081, F.S., and owner of trade secrets
has taken measures tom aintain t he information's secrecy). Cf Allstate Floridian Ins.
Co. v. Office of Ins. Regulation, 981 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2008), review denied, 987
So. 2d 7 9 ( Fla. 200 8) (to t he ex tent A IIstate be lieved any doc uments s ought by t he
Office of Insurance Regulation were privileged as trade secrets, Allstate was required to
timely seek a protective order in circuit court).
For more information on computer trade secrets, please refer to the discussion on
that topic in s. D.1.h., supra.
(2) Proprietary Confidential Business Information
The Leg islature has created a number 0 f exemptions from Ch. 119, F.S., f or
proprietary confidential bus iness information. The term i s generally def ined by t he
statute creating t he exemption and frequently includes trade secrets. See, e.g., s .
215.44, F .S. (State Board of Administration); s. 288.075, F .S. (economic development
agency); s . 288. 9626, F .S. ( Florida 0 pportunity Fund an d I nstitute for t he
Commercialization of Public Research); ss. 364.183,366.093,367.156, and 368.108,
F.S. (Public Service Commission). Cf Florida Power & Light Company v. Public Service
Commission, 31 So. 3d 8 60 ( Fla. 1s t D CA 20 10) ( listed categories 0 f proprietary
confidential bus iness information ins. 366.093, F .S., as ex empt are no t ex haustive;
information relating to employees' compensation warranted confidential classification as
it would have impaired utility's competitive interests). Compare Southern Bell Telephone
and Telegraph Company v. Beard, 597 S o. 2d 873, 876 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1992) (Public
Service Commission's determination that statutory exemption for proprietary confidential
business information should be narrowly construed an d di d not appl y t 0 company's
internal self-analysis was "consistent with t he liberal construction afforded t he Public
Records Act in favor of open government").
4. Investigative records of non law enforcement agencies
a. Investigative records subject to Ch. 119, F .S., in absence of legislative
exemption
In the absence 0 f a specific I egislative ex emption, investigative records made 0 r
received by publ ic agenc ies ar e 0 pen top ublic inspection pur suant to C h. 11 9, F .S.
State ex reI. Veale v. City of Boca Raton, 353 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert.
denied, 360 So. 2d 1 247 (Fla. 1 978). And see Caswell v. Manhattan Fire and Marine
Insurance Company, 399 F .2d 41 7 ( 5th C ir. 1968) ( ordering t hat certain investigative
records of the State I nsurance Commission be produced for inspection under C h. 119,
F.S.). Accord AGO 91-75 (documents containing information compiled by school board
employees during an investigation of school district departments are open to inspection
in t he absence of statutory ex emption); A GO 8 5-79 (interoffice memoranda,
correspondence, inspection reports of restaurants, grocery stores and other such public
premises, nui sance complaint records, a nd not ices 0 f violation 0 f public heal th laws
maintained by county public health units are subject to disclosure in the absence of any
statutory exemption or confidentiality requirement); and AGO 71-243 (inspection reports
made or received by a school board in connection with its official investigation of the
collapse 0 f a school roof constitute pu blic records). Cf Canney v. Board of Public
Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973) (no quasi-judicial exception to
the Sunshine Law which would allow closed door he arings or del iberations w hen a
board or commission is acting in a "quasi-judicial" capacity).
Disclosure of records of investigative proceedings is not violative of privacy rights
arising under the state or federal Constitutions. See Garner v. Florida Commission on
Ethics, 415 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1982), review denied, 424 So. 02d 761 (Fla. 1983)
(public's right t 0 view commission files pr epared i n connection with investigation 0 f
alleged violations 0 f t he Code 0 f Ethics ou tweighs an individual's di sclosural pr ivacy
rights). For more information on privacy issues, please see s. E.15., infra.
The investigative exemptions now found in paragraphs (2)(c) through (f), (h) and (i)
of s. 119.071 (2), F .S., limit disclosure of specified law enforcement records, and thus do
not a pply to investigations conducted by ag encies outside the criminal justice system.
See Douglas v. Michel, 410 So. 2d 936,939 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), questions answered
and approved, 464 So. 2d 545 ( Fla. 1 985) (exemption for II information revealing
surveillance techniques or pr ocedures or personnel" [now found at s. 1 19.071 (2)(d)]
does n ot ap ply to a hos pital's per sonnel files). See also AGO 9 1-75, stating th at th e
active criminal investigation a nd intelligence ex emption do es n ot appl y to information
compiled in a school board investigation into the conduct of certain school departments;
and A GO 87 -51, concluding that complaints from s tate I abor department employees
relating to departmental integrity and efficiency do no t constitute criminal intelligence
information or criminal investigative information.
Thus, the contents of an investigative report compiled by the Inspector General for a
state ag ency i n carrying out hi s dut Y t 0 det ermine pr ogram compliance ar e not
converted into criminal intelligence information merely because the Florida Department
of Law Enforcement a Iso conducts a n investigation or because such report or a copy
thereof has been transferred to the department. Inf. Op. to Slye, August 5, 1993.
b. Statutory exemptions
A number of exemptions exist for certain investigatory records. For a more complete
listing, please refer to Appendix D.
(1) Ethics investigations
The complaint an d records relating tot he complaint or t 0 any pr eliminary
investigation 0 f t he Florida Ethics Commission, a Commission on Ethics and Public
Trust established by a county or municipality, or by any county or municipality that has
established a local investigatory process to enforce more stringent standards of conduct
and disclosure requirements as pr ovided ins. 1 12.326, F .S., a re confidential and
exempt until the complaint is dismissed as legally insufficient, until the alleged violator
requests in writing that such records be made public, or until the commission or county
or municipality t hat has es tablished such a local investigatory pr ocess determines,
based on such investigation, whether probable cause exists to believe that a violation
has occurred. Section 112. 324(2)(a) an d (c), F.S. See also s. 112.3215(8)(b) and ( d),
F.S. ( providing confidentiality f or certain records relating toE thics Commission
investigation of alleged violations of lobbying laws).
However, nothing in s. 112.324, F.S., provides confidentiality for similar or identical
information in t he possession 0 f ot her ag encies 0 f government. AGO 9 6-05. Thus, a
police report of an investigation of a public employee that has been concluded and is in
the pos session 0 f the pol ice dep artment is not made confidential by t he fact that the
same issue and the same individual are the subject of an ethics complaint pursuant to
Part III, C h. 1 12, F .S., or bec ause a copy 0 f t he police report may be included i n
information 0 btained by t he Ethics Commission pur suant to its powers to investigate
complaints of ethics violations. Id.
(2) State inspector general investigations
Audit w orkpapers an d reports 0 f state ag ency inspectors general app ointed in
accordance with s. 20.055, F.S., are public records to the extent that they do not include
information which has been made confidential and ex empt from s . 119. 07(1), F .S.
Section 20.055(5)(b), F.S.
However, s.112.31901(2), F.S., authorizes the Governor, inthecase of the Chief
Inspector General, or ag ency head, in t he case 0 f an employee des ignated as t he
agency inspector general under s. 112.3189, F.S., to certify that an investigatory record
of the Chief Inspector General or an agency inspector general requires an exemption in
order to protect t he integrity of t he investigation or avoid unwarranted da mage to a n
individual's good name or reputation. If so certified, the investigatory records are exempt
from s. 119.07(1), F.S., until the investigation ceases to be active, or a report detailing
the investigation is provided to the Governor or the agency head, or 60 days from the
inception of the investigation for which the record was made or received, whichever first
occurs. Section 11 2.31901 (1), F .S. The pr ovisions of this section do n ot ap ply t 0
whistle-blower investigations conducted pu rsuant tot he whistle-blower ac t. Section
112.31901 (3), F .S. Cf s. 943.03(2), F .S., providing for confidentiality of Department of
Law Enforcement records relating to an active investigation of official misconduct.
(3) State licensing investigations
Pursuant to s . 455.225(10), F .S., complaints ag ainst a licensed pr ofessional filed
with t he s tate I icensing boar d or the Department 0 f Business an d Professional
Regulation ar e confidential an d ex empt from di sclosure u ntil1 0 days after pr obable
cause has been found to exist by the probable cause panel of the licensing board or by
the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, or the professional waives his
or her privilege of confidentiality whichever occurs first. A similar exemption a pplies to
complaints a nd investigations conducted by t he Department 0 f Health a nd licensing
boards within that department as provided in s. 456.073(10), F.S.
Complaints filed by a municipality against a licensed professional are included within
the confidentiality pr ovisions. AGO 0 2-57. However, while t he complaint filed by t he
municipality with the state licensing agency is exempt, the exemption afforded by the
statute does not extend to other records held by the city related to the nature of the
alleged offense by the licensed professional. Id.
(4) Whistle-blower investigations
Section 112.3188(1), F .S., provides, with I imited exceptions, for the confidentiality of
the identity of a whistle-blower who di scloses i n good faith t 0 the Chief Inspector
General, an ag ency inspector general, a local chief executive of ficer, or other
appropriate local 0 fficial information t hat alleges t hat an employee or agent of an
agency or independent contractor has v iolated or is suspected 0 f having v iolated any
federal, s tate, or I ocall aw, rule or regulation, thereby creating and pr esenting a
substantial an d specific da nger tot he pu blic's heal th, safety, or welfare; or has
committed or i s suspected 0 f having committed an ac t 0 f gross mismanagement,
malfeasance, misfeasance, gross waste 0 f pu blic funds, or gross neg lect of duty. A
complainant may waive the right to confidential treatment of his or her name or identity.
AGO 9 5-20. However, an individual may not b e required t 0 sign a waiver 0 f
confidentiality as a condition of processing a complaint. AGO 96-40.
In or der t 0 qualify as a whistle-blower complaint, par ticular information must b e
disclosed to the statutorily des ignated 0 fficials; a general complaint 0 f wrongdoing to
officials other than those specifically named in s. 112.3188(1), F .S., does not entitle the
complainant tow histle-blower pr otection. AGO 9 8-37. And see AGO 9 9-07 ( county
inspector general qualifies as an "appropriate local official" for purposes of the whistle-
blower I aw); and A GO 96 -40 (town et hics commission constitutes II appropriate local
official" for purposes of processing complaints under the whistle-blower law).
Section 1 12.3188(2)(a), F .S., states t hat except as specifically aut horized ins.
112.3189, F .S., all information received by the Chief Inspector General or an ag ency
inspector general or information pr oduced or derived from fact-finding or ot her
investigations conducted by t he Florida Commission on Human R elations or t he
Department of Law Enforcement is confidential and exempt if the information is being
received or derived from allegations as set forth in s. 112.3188(1)(a) or (b), F.S., and an
investigation is "active" as defined s. 112.3188(2)(c), F.S.
Information received by an appropriate local official or local chief executive officer or
produced or derived from fact-finding or investigations by local government pursuant to
s. 112. 3187(8)(b), F .S. [ authorizing adm inistrative pr ocedures for handling w histle-
blower complaints filed by local public employees] is confidential and exempt, provided
that t he information i s bei ng received or der ived from al legations s et forth ins.
112.3188(1) a nd an investigation i s ac tive as de fined i n the section. Section
112.3188(2)(b), F .S. The ex emption ap plies tor ecords received by a municipality
conducting an ac tive investigation of a whistle-blower complaint, and is not limited to
records received as part of an active investigation of a complaint of retaliation against a
whistle-blower. A GO 98 -37. The ex emption applies whether t he al legations 0 f
wrongdoing were received from an anonymous source or a nam ed individual; in either
case information received or generated during the course of the investigation is subject
to the exemption. AGO 99-07.
However, while the name or identity of the individual di sclosing this information is
confidential, t he initial report 0 f wrongdoing received by t he municipality is a publ ic
record, since that information was received before an investigation began. AGO 98-37.
5. Litigation records
a. Attorney-client communications
The Public Records A ct applies t 0 communications between at torneys an d
governmental ag encies; there is no judicially created pr ivilege which ex empts these
documents from disclosure. Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420
(Fla. 197 9) ( only t he Leg islature a nd n ot t he judiciary c an ex empt at torney-client
communications from C h. 119, F.S.). See also City of North Miami v. Miami Herald
Publishing Company, 468 S 0.2 d 218 ( Fla. 19 85) (although s. 90.502, F .S., 0 f t he
Evidence Code es tablishes an at torney-client pr ivilege for public and private ent ities,
this ev identiary statute do es n ot remove communications between an ag ency an d its
attorney from the open inspection requirements of Ch. 119, F.S.).
Moreover, public disclosure of these documents does not violate the public agency's
constitutional rights of due process, effective assistance of counsel, freedom of speech,
or the Supreme Court's exclusive jurisdiction over The Florida Bar. City of North Miami
v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, supra. And see Seminole County, Florida v.
Wood, 512 So. 2d 1000, 1001 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586 (Fla.
1988) (the rules of ethics provide that an attorney may divulge a communication when
required by law; the Legislature has plenary authority over political subdivisions and can
require disclosure of otherwise confidential materials); and AGO 98-59 (records in the
files of the former city attorney, who served as a contract attorney for the city, which
were made or received i n carrying out he r duties as city at torneyan d which
communicate, perpetuate, or formalize knowledge constitute pu blic records a nd are
required to be turned over to her successor).
On the other hand, the Florida Supreme Court has ruled that files in the possession
of the Capital Collateral Representative (CCR) in furtherance of its representation of an
indigent client are not subject to public disclosure under Ch. 119, F .S. The Court noted
that the files are not governmental records for purposes of the public records law but
are the "private r ecords" of t he C CR client. Kight v. Dugger, 574 S o. 2 d 1066 ( Fla.
1990). And see Times Publishing Company v. Acton, No.9 9-8304 (Fla. 13 th C ir. C t.
November 5, 1999) (private attorneys retained by individual county commissioners in a
criminal case were not "acting on behalf' of a public agency so as to become subject to
the Public Records Act, even though the board of county commissioners subsequently
voted t 0 pay t he commissioners' I egal ex penses i n ac cordance with a county pol icy
providing f or reimbursement of I egal expenses to individual county 0 fficers w ho
successfully defend criminal charges filed against them arising out of the performance
of their official duties).
b. Attorney work product
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Legislature and not the judiciary has exclusive
authority to exempt litigation records from the scope ofCh. 119, F.S. Wait v. Florida
Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979). See also Edelstein v. Donner, 450
So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), approved, 471 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1985), noting that in the
absence of I egislation, a work pr oduct ex emption is "non-existent;" and Hillsborough
County Aviation Authority v. Azzarelli Construction Company, 436 So. 2d 153, 154 (Fla.
2d D CA 1983), stating that the Supreme Court's dec ision in Wait "constituted a tacit
recognition that work product can be a public record."
With t he enactment of s .1 19.071(1)(d), F .S., t he Legislature created a narrow
statutory exemption for certain I itigation work product of ag ency attorneys. See City of
Orlando v. Desjardins, 493 So. 2d 1027, 1029 (Fla. 1986), in which the Court noted that
the exemption was enacted because of "developing case law affording public entities no
protection under either the work product doctrine or the attorney-client privilege. . . ."
Section 119.071(1)(d)1., F.S., states:
A publ ic record t hat was pr epared by an ag ency at torney ( including an
attorney em ployed or retained by t he ag ency or em ployed or retained by
another public 0 fficer or ag ency to pr otect or represent the interests 0 f t he
agency having custody of the record) or prepared at the attorney's express
direction, that reflects a mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy, or
legal theory of the attorney or the agency, and that was prepared exclusively
for civil or criminal I itigation or for adversarial adm inistrative proceedings, or
that w as pr epared i n ant icipation 0 f imminent civil or c riminall itigation or
imminent adversarial adm inistrative proceedings, is exempt [from disclosure]
until the conclusion of the litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings.
For pur poses of capital c ollaterall itigation as s et forth ins. 27.7001, t he
Attorney General's 0 ffice is ent itled to claim t his ex emption for those pu blic
records prepared for direct appeal as well as for all capital collateral litigation
after direct appeal until execution of sentence or imposition of a life sentence.
Note that this statutory exemption applies to attorney work product that has reached
the status of becoming a public record; as discussed more extensively in s. D.5.e., of
this manual, relating to II attorney notes," certain preliminary trial preparation materials,
such as handwritten notes for the personal use of the attorney, are not considered to be
within the definitional scope of the term "public records" and, therefore, are outside the
scope ofCh. 119, F.S. See Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1998). Under
the terms of the statute, the work product exemption "is not waived by the release of
such public record to another public employee or officer of t he same ag ency or a ny
person consulted by the agency attorney." Section 119.071(1)(d)2., F.S. See also AGO
94-77 (work product exemption continues to apply to records prepared by the county
attorney when these records are transferred to the city attorney pursuant to a transfer
agreement whereby the city is substituted for the county as a party to the litigation).
An agency asserting the work product exemption must identify the potential parties
to th e I itigation or pr oceedings. Section 11 9.071 (1)( d)2., F .S. If a court finds that the
record w as improperly withheld, t he party seeking t he record s hall be awarded
reasonable at torney's fees an d costs in addition to any ot her remedy or dered by the
court. Id. A s on e court has not ed, t he inclusion 0 f an attorney's fee sanction "was
prompted by t he legislature's concern t hat government entities might claim t he work
product pr ivilege whenever publ ic ac cess to their records i s demanded.II Smith &
Williams, P.A. v. West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority, 640 S o. 2d 2 16, 2 18
(Fla. 2d DCA 1994).
(1) Scope of exemption
(a) Attorney bills and payments
Only those records which reflect a "mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy,
or legal t heory" ar e included within t he parameters 0 f t he work pr oduct exemption.
Accordingly, i n A GO 85 -89, the Attorney General's 0 ffice concluded t hat a contract
between a county and a pr ivate I aw firm f or legal counsel and doc umentation f or
invoices submitted by such firm t 0 the county do not fall within t he work pr oduct
exemption. Accord AGO 00-07 (records of outside attorney fee bills for the defense of
the county, as well as its employees who are sued individually, for alleged civil rights
violations are public records subject to disclosure).
If t he bi lis an d invoices contain some ex empt work pr oduct--i.e., II mental
impression[s], c onclusion[s], litigation s trateg[ies], or legal t heor[ies],"--the ex empt
material m ay be deleted and t he remainder di sclosed. AGO 8 5-89. However,
information such as the hours worked or the hourly wage clearly would not fall within the
scope of the exemption. Id. And see Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir.
Ct. June 9, 1998) ("Obviously, an entry on a [billing] statement which identifies a specific
legal strategy t 0 be considered or puts a specific a mount 0 f settlement au thority
received from the client, would fall within the exemption. On the other hand, a notation
that the file was opened, or that a letter was sent to opposing counsel, would not.").
Thus, a n ag ency which II blocked 0 ut" most not ations on invoices pr epared i n
connection with services rendered by and fees pai d t 0 a ttorneys representing t he
agency, "improperly withheld" nonexempt material when it failed to limit its redactions to
those items "genuinely reflecting its 'mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy,
or legal theory. '" Smith & Williams, P.A. v. West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority,
supra. And see Davis v. Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 480 S o. 2d 20 3 (Fla.
2d DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1986), holding in part that a citizen
seeking to examine records of a public hospital board concerning the payment of legal
fees was entitled to examine actual records, not merely excerpts taken from information
stored in the hospital's computer.
(b) Investigations
Section 11 9.071(1)(d), F .S., does not create a blanket ex ception tot he Public
Records Act for all attorney work product. AGO 91-75. The exemption is narrower than
the work product privilege recognized by the courts for private litigants. AGO 85-89. In
order to qualify for the work product exemption, the records must have been prepared
exclusively f or or i n ant icipation 0 f imminent or pe nding litigation or adversarial
administrative proceedings; records prepared for other purposes may not be converted
into ex empt material simply bec ause they ar e al so used in or related tot he litigation.
See, e.g., Lightbourne v. McCollum, 969 So. 2d 326,333 (Fla. 2007), cert. denied, 553
U.S. 1059 (2008) (memoranda prepared by corrections department attorney regarding
lethal injection procedures does not constitute exempt attorney work product because
memorandum does n ot relate t 0 a ny pen ding I itigation nor appears t 0 have bee n
prepared ex clusively f or litigation); MHM Correctional Services, Inc. v. State,
Department of Corrections, N 0.20 09 C A 210 5 (Fla. 2d J ud. C ir., June 10, 2 009)
(department wrongfully withheld portions of an e-mail stream regarding the bid process
as pr otected work pr oduct or pr ivileged communications as none 0 f the e mails were
prepared in contemplation of litigation as required by the statute).
Moreover, only those records which are prepared by or at the express direction of
the agency attorney and reflect "a mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy, or
legal theory of the attorney or the agency" ar e ex empt f rom disclosure un til t he
conclusion 0 f t he pr oceedings. (e.s.) See City of North Miami v. Miami Herald
Publishing Company, 468 So. 2d 218, 219 (Fla. 1985) (noting application of exemption
to II government agency, at torney-prepared litigation files dur ing t he pe ndency 0 f
litigation"); and City of Miami Beach v. DeLapp, 4 72 So. 2d 5 43 (Fla. 3d D CA 1985)
(opposing counsel not ent itled to city's legal memoranda as such material is exempt
work pr oduct). And see City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 493 S o. 2d 102 7, 1028 ( Fla.
1986) ( trial court must ex amine city's I itigation file i n ac cident case an d prohibit
disclosure 0 nly of those records reflecting mental impression, conclusion, litigation
strategy or legal theory of attorney or city); Jordan v. School Board of Broward County,
531 S o. 2d 97 6, 97 7 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 1988) (record di d not constitute ex empt work
product because it "was not prepared at an attorney's express direction nor did it reflect
a conclusion and mental impression of appellee"); and Lightbourne v. McCollum, supra
(exemption inapplicable as memoranda conveyed specific factual information rather
than mental impressions or litigation strategies).
Thus, a circuit judge refused to apply the exemption tot apes, witness statements
and interview notes taken by police as part of an investigation of a drowning accident at
a city summer c amp. See Sun-Sentinel Company v. City of Hallandale, N o. 9 5-
13528(05) ( Fla. 17th Cir. C t. 0 ctober 11, 1995). Similarly, in AGO 0 5-23, the Attorney
General's Office advised that notes taken by the assistant city attorney during interviews
with co-workers of certain city em ployees in or der to as certain if em ployee di scipline
was warranted are not exempt from disclosure. See also AGO 91-75 (work product
exemption not applicable to documents generated or received by school di strict
investigators, acting at the direction of the school board to conduct an investigation of
certain school district departments). Cf Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So. 2d 1053,1055 (Fla.
3d DCA 1982), review denied sub nom., Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency v.
Sanchez, 426 S o. 2d 27 ( Fla. 198 3) ( documents which ar e given by a client t 0 a n
attorney in the course of seeking legal advice are privileged in the attorney's hands only
if t he doc uments were pr ivileged in the client's han ds; thus, 0 therwise publ ic records
made or received by agency personnel do not become privileged merely by transferring
them to the agency attorney).
(2) Commencement and termination of exemption
Unlike the open meetings exemption in s. 286.011 (8), F.S., for certain attorney-client
discussions between a governmental agency and its attorney, s. 119.071 (1 )(d), F .S., is
not limited to records created for pending litigation or proceedings, but applies also to
records pr epared II in anticipation of imminent civil 0 r c riminallit igation 0 r im minent
adversarial ad ministrative pr oceedings." (e.s.) See AGO 9 8-21, di scussing the
differences between the public records work product exemption in s. 119.071(1)(d) and
the Sunshine Law exemption in s. 286.011.
The exemption from disclosure provided by s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., is temporary and
limited in dur ation. City of North Miami v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., supra. T he
exemption exists only until the "conclusion of the litigation or adversarial administrative
proceedings" even i f di sclosure 0 f t he information i n t he concluded case could
negatively impact the agency's position in related cases or claims. See State v. Coca-
Cola Bottling Company of Miami, Inc., 582 So. 2 d 1 ( Fla. 4t h DCA 1990); Seminole
County v. Wood, 512 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586
(Fla. 1988); Tribune Company v. Hardee Memorial Hospital, No. CA-91-370 (Fla. 10th
Cir. Ct. August 19, 1991); and Lightbourne v. McCollum, supra (rejecting a "continuing
exemption" claim by the s tate). See also Wagner v. Orange County, 960 So. 2d 785
(Fla. 5th DCA 2007), stating that the phrase "conclusion of the litigation or adversarial
administrative pr oceedings" enc om passes post-judgment collection efforts such as a
legislative claims bill. Cf State v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Miami, Inc., supra
(although state cannot claim work pr oduct ex emption for litigation records after
conclusion of litigation, Ch. 119 does not cover oral testimony; thus, opposing counsel
not entitled t 0 take depositions of s tate representatives regarding t he concluded
litigation).
(a) Settlement records
Settlement documents ar e nor mally subject tor elease once litigation i s over
between the parties, even if other issues remain, because the work product exemption
does not apply once the litigation is no longer pending. And see s. 69.081(8)(a), F.S.,
stating, subject to I imited ex ceptions, that "[a]ny portion of an agreement or contract
which has the purpose or effect of concealing information relating to the settlement or
resolution of any claim or ac tion ag ainst t he state, its ag encies or subdivisions or
against any municipality or constitutionally created body or commission is void, contrary
to public policy, and may not be enforced;" and Inf. Op. to Barry, June 24, 1998, citing to
s. 69. 081 (8)(a), F.S., and stating that a state agency may not enter into a settlement
agreement or other contract which contains a provision authorizing the concealment of
information relating to a di sciplinary proceeding or other adverse em ployment decision
from the remainder of a personnel file.
For example, if the state settles a claim against one company accused of conspiracy
to fix pr ices, the state h as concluded the litigation ag ainst that company. Thus, t he
records prepared in anticipation of litigation against that company are no longer exempt
from disclosure even though the state has commenced litigation against the alleged co-
conspirator. State v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Miami, Inc., 582 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1990). And see Tribune Company v. Hardee Memorial Hospital, No. CA-91-370
(Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. August 19, 1991) (settlement agreement not exempt as attorney work
product even though another related case was pending, and agency attorneys feared
disclosure 0 f t heir as sessment of t he merits 0 f t he settled case and their litigation
strategy would have a detrimental effect upon the agency's position in the related case).
Cf Prison Health Services, Inc. v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 718 So. 2d
204, 2 05 ( Fla. 2 d D CA 1998), review denied, 7 27 S o. 2d 9 09 ( Fla. 1999) (private
company un der contract with sheriff to provide medical services for inmates at county
jail must release records relating to a settlement ag reement with an inmate because all
of i ts records that would normally be subject tot he Public Records A ct i fin t he
possession of the public agency, are likewise covered by that law, even though in the
possession of the private corporation).
Regarding draft settlements received by an ag ency in I itigation, a circuit court held
that draft settlement agreements furnished to a state agency by a federal agency were
public records despite the department's agreement with the federal agency to keep such
documents confidential. Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc. v. Department of
Environmental Regulation, N 0.91 -2108 (Fla. 2 d Cir. Ct. September 20, 1991), per
curiam affirmed, 606 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 1 992). And see Florida Sugar Cane
League, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, No. 91-4218 (Fla. 2d
Cir. C t. June 5, 1992) (technical doc uments or dat a which were not pr epared for the
purpose of carrying litigation forward but rather were jointly authored among adversaries
to promote settlement are not exempted as attorney work product).
(b) Criminal cases
In a criminal case, the "conclusion of the litigation" for purposes of the termination of
the work pr oduct ex emption oc curs when t he conviction an d sentence have become
final. State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 1990). However, the state attorney may still
claim t he work pr oduct ex emption for his or her current file in a pending motion for
postconviction relief because there i s 0 ngoing litigation with respect tot hose
documents. See Walton v. Dugger, 6 34 S o. 2d 105 9 (Fla. 1993) (state at torney not
required to di sclose information f rom a current file relating to a postconviction relief
motion).
The Florida Supreme Court, however, has noted the state's obligation in a criminal
case to" disclose any ex culpatory doc ument within its pos session or tow hich it has
access, even i f such doc ument i s n ot subject tot he public records I aw. Brady v.
Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194,10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)." Walton v. Dugger, 634
So. 2d at 1062. Accord Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1998).
c. Other statutory exemptions relating to litigation records
Section 7 68.28(16)(b), F .S., provides an exemption for claim files maintained by
agencies pursuant to a risk management program for tort liability until the termination of
all litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident. See Wagner v.
Orange County, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007), stating that the phrase "settlement
of all claims arising out of the same incident" included a legislative claims bill.
The exemption afforded by s. 768.28(16), F.S., is limited to tort claims for which the
agency may be I iable under s. 768.28, F .S., and do es not apply to federal civil rights
actions un der 4 2 U .S.C. s. 1983. A GOs 00 -20 and 00 -07. And see Sun-Sentinel
Company v. City of Hallandale, No. 95-13528(05) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. October 11,1995)
(exemption now found at s. 758.28[16][b], F .S., for risk management files did not apply
to tapes, witness statements and interview not es taken by pol ice as p art 0 f an
investigation of a drowning accident at a city summer camp). Moreover, the exemption
does not include outside attorney invoices indicating ho urs worked an d a mount to be
paid by the public agency, even though the records may be maintained by the agency's
risk management office pursuant to a risk management program. AGO 00-07. And see
AGO 9 2-82 (open meetings ex emption pr ovided by s. 768.28, F.S., ap plies onl y to
meetings held after a tort claim is filed with the risk management program).
Section 624.311 (2), F. S., provides that the "records of i nsu rance claim neg otiations
of any state agency or political subdivision are confidential and exempt [from disclosure]
until termination 0 f alii itigation and settlement 0 fall claims ar ising out 0 f t he same
incident." A county's self-insured workers compensation program is the legal equivalent
of II insurance" for pur poses 0 f t his ex emption. Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98 -22
(Fla. 2d C ir. C t. June 9, 199 8). And see AGO 8 5-102 (s. 624.311, F .S., ex emption
includes correspondence regarding insurance claims neg otiations between a county's
retained counsel and its insurance carriers until termination of litigation and settlement
of claims ar ising out 0 f t he same incident). Compare s. 284.40(2), F .S. ( claim files
maintained by the risk management division of the Department of Financial Services are
confidential, s hall be onl y f or t he us e of t he de partment, and ar e exempt from
disclosure); and s. 1004.24(4), F .S. (claim files of s elf-insurance program a dopted by
Board 0 f Governors, or t he boar d's de signee, ar e confidential and ex empt);
627.3121(1), F .S. (claims files held by t he Florida Workers' Compensation Joint
Underwriting Association, Inc., are confidential and exempt).
d. Attorney notes
Relying on i ts conclusion i n Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and
Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980), the Florida Supreme Court has recognized
that II not all t rial preparation materials are public records. II State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d
324, 327 (Fla. 1 990). In Kokal, the Court ap proved the decision of the Fifth District in
Orange County v. Florida Land Co., 450 So. 2d 341, 344 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review
denied, 458 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 1984), which described certain documents as not within
the term II public r ecords" because they were n ot us ed toper petuate, formalize, or
communicate knowledge:
Document No.2 is a list in rough outline form of items of evidence which may
be needed for trial. Document No.9 is a I ist of questions the county attorney
planned t 0 as k a witness. Document N o. 10 i s a pr oposed t rial out line.
Document No. 11 contains handwritten notes regarding the county's sewage
system an d a meeting with Florida La nd's at torneys. Document No. 15
contains notes ( in rough form) regarding t he deposition of an anticipated
witness. These documents are merely notes from the attorneys to themselves
designed f or their own per sonal us e i n remembering certain things. They
seem to be simply preliminary guides intended to aid the attorneys when they
later formalized t he knowledge. We cannot imagine that t he Leg islature, i n
enacting the Public Records Act, intended to include within the term' public
records' this type of material. [Emphasis supplied by Court]
Similarly, in Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985, 987 (Fla. 1998), the Court ruled
that "outlines, time lines, page notations regarding information in the record, and other
similar items" in the case file, do not fall within the definition of public record, and thus
are not subject to disclosure. See also Patton v. State, 784 So. 2d 380, 389 (Fla. 2000)
(prosecutor's personal notes, i.e., handwritten details of specific questions to ask jurors
during v oir-dire, not es on potential jurors, a time-line 0 f events, or specific detailed
questions for witnesses, are not pu blic records); Scott v. Butterworth, 734 So. 2d 391,
393 ( Fla. 19 99) ( handwritten not es an d dr afts 0 f pleadings ar e not public records);
Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203, 205 (Fla. 1 998) ("attorney's notes and ot her such
preliminary doc uments ar e not pu blic records an d ar e never subject to pu blic records
disclosure"); Valle v. State, 705 So. 2d 1331,1335 (Fla. 1997) (prosecutors' notes to
themselves f or t heir ow n per sonal us e, including out lines 0 f opening a nd closing
arguments and notes of witness depositions are not public records); Lopez v. State, 696
So. 2 d 7 25, 727 (Fla. 199 7) (handwritten notes dealing with trial strategy and c ross-
examination of witnesses are not public records); and Atkins v. State, 663 So. 2d 624,
626 (Fla. 1995) (notes of s tate attorney's investigations a nd a nnotated photocopies of
decisional case law are not public records).
By contrast, documents pr epared t 0 communicate, perpetuate, or formalize
knowledge constitute public records an d ar e, therefore, subject t 0 di sclosure i n t he
absence 0 f statutory ex emption. See Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid &
Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633, 640 (Fla. 1980), stating that "[i]nter-office memoranda
and intra-office memoranda communicating information from 0 ne public employee to
another or merely prepared for filing, even though not a part of an agency's later, formal
public pr oduct, would non etheless constitute publ ic records inasmuch as they supply
the final ev idence 0 f knowledge obt ained in connection with the transaction 0 f 0 fficial
business. II
Thus, in Coleman v. Austin, 521 So. 2d 247,248 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), the court
observed that "although notes from attorneys to themselves might not be public records
when intended for their own personal use, inter-office and intra-office memoranda may
constitute public records even though enc ompassing trial pr eparation materials. II And
see Hillsborough County Aviation Authority v. Azzarelli Construction Company, 436 So.
2d 153 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (rejecting an agency's contention that when a public body is
engaged i n litigation, t he pi eadings and evidence it pr esents i n court constitute t he
formal agency statement 0 n t he subject matter a nd all el se is merely pr eliminary or
preparatory and, therefore, not a pu blic record). Accord Orange County v. Florida Land
Company, supra, in which the court concluded that trial preparation materials consisting
of interoffice and i ntraoffice memoranda communicating information from 0 ne pu blic
employee to another or merely prepared for filing, even though not part of the agency's
formal work pr oduct, were publ ic records although such circulated trial pr eparation
materials might be exempt from disclosure pursuant to s. 119.071 (1 )(d), F .S., while the
litigation is ongoing. See also AGO 05-23 (notes taken by city's assistant labor attorney
and used to communicate information tot he I abor at torney regarding pos sible future
personnel actions were public records available for inspection).
6. Personnel records
a. Personnel records open to inspection unless exempted by law
The general rule with regard toper sonnel records is the same as for ot her pu blic
records; unless the Legislature has expressly exempted an agency's personnel records
from disclosure or authorized the agency to adopt rules limiting access to such records,
personnel records are subject to public inspection and copying under s. 119.07(1), F .S.
Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1985). And see Alterra Healthcare Corporation
v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936, 940n.4 (Fla. 2002) ("only the custodian of such
records can assert any applicable exemption; not the employee").
In accordance with this principle, the following are some of the personnel records
which have been determined to be subject to disclosure:
Applications for employment--AGOs 77-48 and 71-394;
Communications from third parties--Douglas v. Michel, 410 So. 2d 936 (Fla.
5th DCA 198 2), questions answered and approved, 464 S o. 2d 545 (Fla.
1985);
Grievance records--Mills v. Doyle, 407 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981);
Resumes--Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379
So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980);
Salary i nformation--Lewis v. Schreiber, N o. 92 -8005(03) (Fla. 17th C ir. C t.
June 12,1992), per curiam affirmed, 611 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992);
AGO 73-30;
Travel v ouchers--Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and Associates,
Inc., supra; Lewis v. Schreiber, supra.
Accordingly, an ag ency should as sume t hat all information i n a per sonnel file is
subject to inspection unless a specific statutory ex emption ex ists which would per mit
withholding a par ticular doc ument from di sclosure. F or more information on t he
exemptions applicable to law enforcement officers, please refer to the discussion of law
enforcement per sonnel records found at s. G.11., infra. Exemptions that pertain t 0
personnel records of educators are discussed in s. J.2., infra.
b. Employment search or consultant records
"[D]ocuments provided to a consultant in relation to hi s acting on behalf of a pu blic
agency are pu blic doc uments." Wallace v. Guzman, 687 S o. 2d 1351, 1 353 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1997). Thus, if an agency uses a recruitment company to conduct an employment
search for the agency, records made or received by the private company in connection
with t he search are public records. AGO 9 2-80. See also Shevin v. Byron, Harless,
Schaffer, Reid and Associates, 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980) (firm of consultants hired to
conduct an employment search for position of managing director of a public agency was
"acting on behalf of' a public agency and thus letters, memoranda, resumes, and travel
vouchers made or received by consultants as part of search were public records).
c. Privacy concerns
The courts have rejected claims that constitutional privacy interests operate to shield
agency personnel records from disclosure. See Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545, 546
(Fla. 1985), holding that the state constitution II does no t pr ovide aright of pr ivacy in
public records" and that a state or federal right of disclosural privacy does not exist.
"Absent an applicable statutory exception, pursuant to Florida's Public Records Act
(embodied in chapter 119, Florida Statutes), public employees (as a general rule) do not
have privacy rights in such records. II Alterra Healthcare Corporation v. Estate of Shelley,
827 So. 2d 936, 940n.4 (Fla. 2002). See also Forsberg v. Housing Authority of City of
Miami Beach, 455 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1984); Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and
Associates, Inc., supra; an d Mills v. Doyle, supra. But see Fadjo v. Coon, 633 F .2d
1172, 1175n.3 (5th Cir. 1981), noting that "it is clear that the legislature cannot authorize
by statute an unconstitutional invasion of privacy." For additional information on general
privacy issues, please refer to the discussion in s. E.15., infra.
Additionally, the judiciary has refused to deny access to personnel records based on
claims that the release of such information could prove embarrassing or unpleasant for
the employee. A s t he Florida Supreme Court poi nted ou tin News-Press Publishing
Company v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646, 648 (Fla. 1977):
No pol icy of t he state pr otects a pu blic em ployee from t he em barrassment
which results from hi s or her pu blic employer's di scussion or action 0 n the
employee's failure to perform his or her duties properly.
See also News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Gadd, 388 So. 2d 276, 278 (Fla.
2d DCA 1980) (absent a statutory exemption, a court is not free to consider public policy
questions regarding the relative significance 0 f t he public's interest in disclosure an d
damage t 0 an individual or institution resulting from such di sclosure); Browning v.
Walton, 351 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (city cannot refuse to allow inspection of
records containing t he nam es and addresses 0 f city em ployees who have filled ou t
forms requesting that the city maintain the confidentiality of their personnel files); and
AGO 87-48 (statute prohibiting the placement of anonymous materials in district school
employee's personnel file does not create an exemption from disclosure requirements of
Ch. 119, F.S.). Cf United Teachers of Dade v. School Board of Dade County, No. 92-
17803 (01) (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Nov. 30, 1992) (home telephone numbers and addresses
of school di strict em ployees not pr otected by constitutional right to pr ivacy; onl y t he
Legislature can exempt such information).
Public employers should note, however, that a court has held that an ag ency must
provide a discharged employee with an opportunity for a post-termination name-clearing
hearing when stigmatizing information concerning the employee is made a part of the
public records or is otherwise published. Buxton v. City of Plant City, Florida, 871 F.2d
1037 (11th Cir. 1989). See also Garcia v. Walder Electronics, Inc., 563 So. 2d 723 (Fla.
3d D CA 1990), review denied, 5 76 So. 2d 287 ( Fla. 1990) (public em ployer has a n
affirmative duty to inform a discharged employee of his right to seek a post-termination
name-clearing hearing). Cf Cannon v. City of West Palm Beach, 250 F .3d 1299, 1303
(11th Cir. 2001) (failure to provide name-clearing hearing to employee who alleged that
he was denied a promotion due to stigmatizing information in his personnel file does not
violate the employee's due process rights, because "in this circuit a 'discharge or more'
is required").
d. Conditions for inspection of personnel records
An ag ency i s not authorized t 0 unilaterally impose special conditions for t he
inspection of personnel records. An automatic delay in the production of such records is
invalid. Tribune Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed
sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985) (automatic 48 hour
delay unauthorized by Ch. 119, F.S.).
(1) Presence of employee
In the absence of express legislative authority, the inspection of personnel records
may not be delayed in order to allow the employee to be notified or present during the
inspection 0 f t he public records relating tot hat employee. As stated by the Supreme
Court, the "[Public Records] Act does not provide that the employee be present during
the inspection, nor even that the employee be given notice that an inspection has been
requested or m ade." Tribune Company v. Cannella, 458 S o. 2d at 1078. Compare s.
1012.31(3)(a)3., F.S., providing that no material derogatory to a public school employee
may be inspected until 10 days after the employee has been notified by certified mail or
personal delivery as provided in s. 1012.31 (2)(c), F.S.
(2) Separate files
An agency is not authorized to maintain personnel records of its employees under
two headings, one open and one confidential, in the absence of statutory authorization.
AGO 73-51. Nor may a city, absent a statutory exemption for such records, ag ree to
remove counseling slips and written reprimands from an employee's personnel file and
maintain such documents i n a separate di sciplinary file. AGO 9 4-54. Similarly, a n
agency is not authorized to "seal" disciplinary notices and thereby remove such notices
from di sclosure und er the Public Records A ct. AGO 94-75. Cf s. 69.081 (8)(a), F .S.,
providing, subject to I imited ex ceptions, t hat any portion 0 f an ag reement or contract
which has the purpose or effect of concealing information relating to the settlement or
resolution of any claim or action against an agency is "void, contrary to public policy,
and may not be enforced;" and Inf. Op. to Barry, June 24, 1998, citing to s. 69.081 (8)(a),
and stating that "a s tate agency m ay not enter into a settlement ag reement or ot her
contract which contains a pr ovision authorizing the concealment of information relating
to a di sciplinary proceeding or other adverse employment decision from the remainder
of a personnel file. II
e. Collective bargaining
(1) Relationship of collective bargaining agreement to personnel records
A collective bar gaining agreement between a publ ic employer and i ts employees
may not validly make the personnel records of public employees confidential or exempt
the same from the Public Records Act. AGO 77-48. Thus, employee grievance records
are disclosable even though classified as confidential in a collective bargaining contract
because lito allow the elimination of public records from the mandate of Chapter 119 by
private contract would sound the death knell of the Act. II Mills v. Doyle, 407 So. 2d 348,
350 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Cf Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher's Association v.
School Board of Palm Beach County, 411 S o. 2 d 1 375, 1376 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 1982)
(collective bar gaining agreement cannot be us ed II to circumvent the requirements 0 f
public meetings" in s. 286.011, F.S.).
Similarly, unl ess authorized by I aw, a city m ay not ag ree through collective
bargaining tor emove references tot he initial pr oposed disciplinary ac tion i n an
employee's personnel file when a settlement agreement results in a reduced disciplinary
action. AGO 94-54. Accord AGO 94-75 (city may not remove and destroy disciplinary
notices, with or without the employee's consent, during the course of resolving collective
bargaining grievances, ex cept in ac cordance with t he es tablished retention schedule
approved by t he Division 0 f Li brary and Information Services 0 f t he Department 0 f
State) .
(2) Collective bargaining work product exemption
Section 447.605(3), F.S., provides:
All work pr oducts de veloped by t he pu blic employer i n preparation for
negotiations, and during negotiations, shall be confidential and exempt from
the provisions of s. 119.07(1), F.S.
The exemption is I imited and does not remove budg etary or fiscal information from
the purview of C h. 119, F .S. See Bay County School Board v. Public Employees
Relations Commission, 382 So. 2d 74 7, 749 (Fla. 1 s t D CA 1 980), not ing that records
which are prepared for other purposes do not, as a result of being used in negotiations,
come within the s. 447.605(3) exemption; and Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2d 977 (Fla.
2d D CA 1976) , or dering that working paper s us ed i n pr eparing a college budg et b e
produced for inspection by a labor organizer.
Thus, proposals a nd counter pr oposals pr esented during t he course 0 f collective
bargaining would app ear t 0 be subject t 0 public di sclosure. However, written notes
taken by the representative of a fire control district during collective bargaining sessions
for use in preparing for subsequent bargaining sessions which reflect the impressions,
strategies an d opi nions 0 f t he di strict representative ar e ex empt pursuant to s .
447.605(3), F.S. Inf. Op. to Fulwider, June 14,1993.
f. Statutory exemptions
As emphasized i n t he pr eceding di scussion, t he exclusive aut hority t 0 ex empt
personnel records from disclosure is vested in the Legislature. A number of exemptions
have be en enacted relating to various kinds 0 f personnel records. T he following ar e
examples of some of the exemptions provided by statute. For a more complete listing of
exemptions, please see Appendix D.
(1) Annuity or custodial account activities
Records identifying individual par ticipants i n any annui ty contract or custodial
account under s. 112.21, F .S. (relating to tax-sheltered annuities or custodial accounts
for em ployees 0 f governmental ag encies) and t heir per sonal ac count ac tivities ar e
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. Section 112.21(1), F.S.
(2) Complaints
Complaints filed ag ainst law enforcement officers are discussed ins. G .11.a., infra,
of this manual. Complaints against public school system employees are discussed in s.
J.2., infra, of this manual.
Complaints and ot her records i n t he custody of a ny ag ency which relate t 0 a
complaint 0 f di scrimination based 0 n race, color, religion, s ex, national or igin, ag e,
handicap, or marital status in connection with hi ring pr actices, position cl assifications,
salary, bene fits, di scipline, discharge, employee per formance evaluation, or related
activities are exempt from 119.07(1), F .S., until a pr obable cause finding is made, the
investigation bec omes inactive, or t he complaint or ot her record ism ade p art 0 f t he
record 0 f a hear ing or court pr oceeding. Section 11 9.071 (2)(g), F .S. See City of Sf.
Petersburg Junior College, No. 93 -000421 0-CI-13 (Fla. 6t h C ir. C t. January 3, 1994)
(exemption no longer applicable once city has issued a "letter of cause" determination
following its investigation of a discrimination complaint). And see AGO 96-93 (prior to
completion 0 f an investigation and a finding of pr obable cause, records 0 f a county
equal opportunity board are exempt from disclosure). But see AGO 09-10 stating that
when an ag ency ha s reached a settlement with an individual w ho has filed a
discrimination complaint, the claimant is considered to have pursued the claim and may
not request confidentiality pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(g)2., F.S.
(3) Criminal history information
In some cases, criminal or juvenile records information obtained by specific agencies
as part of a background check required for certain positions has been made confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., or use of the information is restricted. See, e.g., s.
11 0.1127(3)(d) and ( e), F .S. ( positions i n pr ograms pr oviding care t 0 children, t he
developmentally di sabled, or v ulnerable adults, or positions having ac cess to abuse
records); s. 1002.36(7)(d), F .S. (School for the Deaf and the Blind); and s. 39.821, F .S.
(guardian ad litem).
Federal confidentiality pr ovisions m ay al so appl y t 0 criminal hi story information
received from t he U.S. government. See AGO 9 9-01 ( criminal hi story information
shared with a public school di strict by t he Federal Bureau 0 f Investigation retains its
character as a federal record to which only limited access is provided by federal law and
is not subject to public inspection under Florida's Public Records Act).
Sections 943.0585 and 943.059, F.S., prohibit a records custodian who has received
information relating to the existence of an expunged or sealed criminal history record
from disclosing the existence of such record. AGO 94-49.
(4) Deferred compensation
All records identifying individual pa rticipants i n any de ferred compensation pi an
under the Government Employees' Deferred Compensation Plan Act and their personal
account ac tivities s hall be confidential and ex empt from s . 11 9.07(1), F .S. Section
112.215(7), F.S.
(5) Department of the Lottery
Department 0 f t he Lot tery em ployee per sonnel information unr elated t 0
compensation, du ties, qualifications, or responsibilities of employees, which t he
Department has deemed confidential by rule i n ac cordance with t he terms a nd
conditions of the subsection is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F .S. Section
24.105(12)(a), F .S.
(6) Direct deposit
Direct deposit records made prior to October 1, 1986, are exempt from s. 119.07(1),
F.S. With respect to direct deposit records made on or after October 1, 1986, the names
of the authorized financial institutions and the account numbers of the beneficiaries are
confidential and exempt. Section 17.076(5), F.S.
(7) Drug test results
Drug test results and ot her information received or pr oduced by a s tate agency
employer as a result of a drug-testing program in accordance with s. 112.0455, F.S., the
Drug-Free Workplace Act, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., and may
not be di sclosed ex cept as authorized in the statute. Section 112.0455(11), F .S. See
also s. 112.0455(8)(1) and (u), F.S.
While the provisions of s. 112.0455, F.S., are applicable to state agencies and not to
municipalities, ss. 440.101-440.102, F .S., may be used by a municipality or other entity
that is an "employer" for purposes of these statutes, to establish a drug-free workplace
program. See AGO 9 8-38. Section 44 0.1 02(8)(a), F .S., pr ovides for confidentiality 0 f
drug test results or other information received as a result of a drug-testing program. Cf
AGO 9 4-51 ( city not au thorized t 0 delete or remove consent forms or records of
disciplinary action relating to city employees' drug testing from personnel records when
drug testing w as not conducted pursuant t 0 s . 4 40.102, F .S.); and I nf. 0 p. t 0
McCormack, May 13, 1997 (s. 440.102[8], F.S., applies to public employees and not to
drug test results of public assistance applicants). And see s. 443.1715(3), F .S., relating
to confidentiality of dr ug test information and limited di sclosure i n pr oceedings
conducted for pur poses 0 f determining compensability under t he unemployment
compensation law.
In AGO 96-58, the Attorney General's Office advised that the medical di rector for a
city f ire a nd rescue department m ay submit drug test results t 0 the s tate he alth
department pursuant to s. 401.265(2), F .S., requiring a medical director to report to the
department any emergency medical technician or paramedic who may have acted in a
manner constituting g rounds for di scipline under t he I icensing I aw. The tests were
conducted during routine pre-employment and annual fitness for duty examinations and
not pursuant to ss. 440.101-440.102, F.S.
(8) Employee assistance program
An employee's per sonal identifying information contained i n records hel d by t he
employing ag ency relating to that employee's participation in an employee assistance
program i s confidential and ex empt from di sclosure. See ss. 110. 1091 ( state
employees), 125.585 (county employees), and 166.0444 (municipal employees), F.S.
(9) Evaluations of employee performance
There are ex emptions from s . 11 9.07(1), F .S., for evaluations 0 f employee
performance contained in I imited access records which are prescribed by a hos pital or
other facility licensed under Ch. 395, F .S., for employees of the facility, s. 395.3025(9),
F.S.; or prescribed by the State Board of Education for community college personnel, s.
1012.81, F .S.; or prescribed by a university board 0 ft rustees for its employees, s.
1012.91, F .S. Employee evaluations of public school system employees are confidential
until the end of the school year immediately following the school year during which the
evaluation was made; however, no evaluations made pr ior to July 1, 1983, s hall be
made public. Section 1012.31(3)(a)2., F.S.
For more information on this subject, pi ease refer t 0 s. 1.3.a.(1), infra (hospital
records) and s. J.2., infra (education personnel records).
(10) Examination questions and answer sheets
Examination questions and answer sheets 0 f examinations administered by
governmental entities f or t he purpose 0 f I icensure, certification, or employment are
exempt from mandatory di sclosure requirements. Section 119 .071 (1 )(a), F.S. See
Dickerson v. Hayes, 543 So. 2d 836,837 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (applying exemption to
portions 0 f rating sheets us ed by pr omotion boar d which contained summaries 0 f
applicants' responses to oral examination questions where the oral questioning "was a
formalized pr ocedure with identical questions as ked 0 f each applicant [which] 'tested'
the applicants' response both as to style and content").
A per son w ho has taken an ex amination h as t he right tor eview hi s or her 0 wn
completed examination. Section 119.071(1)(a), F .S. See AGO 76-210, stating that an
examinee has the right to inspect the results 0 f a completed civil service pr omotional
examination, including question an d answer sheets, after the ex amination has been
completed. However, the examinee possesses only the right to review his or her own
completed examination and may not make or obtain copies of that examination. AGO
81-12.
The exemption f rom disclosure ins. 119.071 (1 )(a), F .S., applies t 0 examination
questions a nd answers, and do es n ot include t he II impressions and grading 0 f the
responses" by the examiners. See Dickerson v. Hayes, supra at 837. See also Gillum v.
Times Publishing Company, No.9 1-2689-CA ( Fla. 6t h C ir. Ct. July 10, 1991)
(newspaper ent itled to a ccess to employment pol ygraph records lito t he ex tent such
records consist of polygraph machine graph strips and examiners' test results, including
the bottom portion of the machine graph denoted' Findings and Comments' or similar
designation"; however, ag ency could redact II any ex aminee's ac tual answers t 0
questions or summaries thereof'). Compare s. 455.229(1), F.S., providing confidentiality
for II examination questions, a nswers, pap ers, grades, a nd grading k eys" us ed i n
licensing ex aminations ad ministered by t he Department 0 f Business and Professional
Regulation. And see s. 472.0201, F .S., providing a similar exemption for such records
used in surveyor and mapper licensure by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services.
(11) Home addresses and telephone numbers, photographs, family information
As a rule, home addresses and telephone numbers of public officers and employees
are no t ex empt from di sclosure. See AGO 9 6-88 (home addresses a nd telephone
numbers and bus iness addresses and telephone numbers 0 f members 0 f s tate a nd
district human rights advocacy committees are public records).
Section 119.071(4)(d), F.S., however, contains a number of exemptions for specified
categories 0 f public officials an d employees and their families. For ex ample, s .
119.071 (4)(d)1.a., F .S., ex empts from disclosure t he home addresses, telephone
numbers, photographs, and social security num bers 0 f t he following of ficers an d
employees, as w ell as t he home addresses, telephone numbers, social security
numbers, photographs, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such
officers and personnel and t he na mes and locations 0 f t he schools and d ay care
facilities at tended by their children; active or former I awen forcement per sonnel,
including correctional and correctional pr obation 0 fficers; Department 0 f Children a nd
Family Services per sonnel whose dut ies include t he investigation 0 f ab use, neglect,
exploitation, fraud, t heft, or ot her criminal activities; Department of Health personnel
whose duties are to support the investigation of child abuse or neglect; and Department
of Revenue or local government personnel whose responsibilities include revenue
collection and enforcement or child support enforcement.
A similar exemption for current or former state attorneys, assistant state attorneys,
statewide pr osecutors, or as sistant statewide pr osecutors i s pr ovided ins .
119.071 (4)(d)1.d, F .S. See AGO 96-57 stating that the exemption for personnel of the
Department of Revenue or local governments with revenue responsibilities requires that
such duties include both revenue collection and enforcement responsibilities. The above
exemption for telephone numbers 0 flaw en forcement 0 fficers, however, does not
exempt from di sclosure the cellular telephone nu mber 0 f telephones pr ovided to law
enforcement 0 fficers and us ed in performing law enf orcement duties. See Inf. Op. to
Laquidara, July 17, 2003.
Home ad dresses and telephone numbers of Florida Supreme Court justices a nd
district court of appeal, circuit court, and county judges are exempt as are the home
addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of justices a nd judges and t he n ames a nd locations 0 f t he schools a nd d ay care
facilities attended by their children. Section 119.071 (4)(d)1.c., F .S. A similar exemption
exists f or general magistrates, judges 0 f compensation claims, adm inistrative I aw
judges and child support enforcement hearing officers provided the officer has provided
a written statement t hat he or s he h as made reasonable efforts t 0 pr otect such
information from being accessible through other means available to the public. Section
119.071(4)(d)1.e., F.S.
Home addresses, telephone nu mbers, and phot ographs 0 f firefighters certified in
compliance with s . 63 3.35, F .S., as well as t he names, home ad dresses, telephone
numbers, an d places 0 f employment 0 f spouses and children 0 f such 0 fficers an d
personnel and the names and locations of the schools and day care facilities attended
by their children, are exempt. Section 119.071 (4)(d)1.b., F.S. A similar exemption exists
for: current or former human resource, labor relations, or employee relations di rectors,
assistant directors, managers, or assistant managers of any local government agency
or water management di strict whose du ties include hiring and firing em ployees, labor
contract negotiation, adm inistration, or ot her per sonnel-related duties are ex empt, s .
119.071 (4)(d)1.f., F .S.; current or former code enforcement 0 fficers, s .
119.071 (4)(d)1.g., F.S.; current and former juvenile probation and detention officers and
supervisors, house parents and supervisors, g roup treatment leaders and supervisors,
rehabilitation therapists, and social services counselors of the Department of Juvenile
Justice, s. 119.071(4)(d)1.i., F .S.; and current or former public defenders, assistant
public de fenders, criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, a nd as sistant criminal
conflict and civil regional counsel, s. 119.071(4)(d)1.j., F.S.
The home addresses, telephone numbers, places of employment, and photographs
of current or former guardians ad litem, as defined in s. 39.820, F.S., as well as the
names an d ot her identifying information a bout t he spouses an d children 0 f such
persons and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the
children of such persons, are exempt from disclosure requirements, if the guardian ad
litem provides a written statement that he or she has made reasonable efforts to protect
such information from bei ng ac cessible through ot her means available tot he pu blic.
Section 11 9.071 (4 ) ( d) 1 . h ., F. S .
An ag ency that is the custod ian 0 f the personal information specified a bove but is
not the employer of the officer, employee, justice, judge or other person, shall maintain
the exempt status of the personal information only if the officer, employee, judge, other
person, or the employing agency of the designated employee submits a written request
for maintenance of the exemption to the custodial agency. Section 119.071 (4)(d)2., F.S.
See AGOs 05-38 ( clerk 0 f value adj ustment board), 04-20 ( request submitted t 0
property appraiser), 04-18 (supervisor of elections), and 97-67 (clerk of court). And see
AGO 05-38 (exemption II governs the protection of identifying information and does not
discriminate as to the documents and records in which the information may be found").
See also Inf. Op. to Cook, December 22, 2008 (nothing in the statute indicates that such
a written request may be made after a request for the public record has been made and
generally, the dat e in determining whether a doc ument is subject to di sclosure is the
date t he pu blic records request ism ade, making t he I aw i n effect on t hat date
applicable).
It should be noted that the exemptions afforded by s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S., apply only
to records held by a publ ic ag ency or a pr ivate ent ity ac ting on beh alf 0 f a public
agency; i t does not apply t 0 or pr eclude a pr ivate company from releasing such
information unl ess that company falls within t he definition 0 f "Agency" bec ause it is
acting on behalf of a public agency. Inf. Op. to Gomez, November 3, 2008.
Section 119 .071 (5)(i), F .S., pr ovides an ex emption for identification an d location
information, de fined a s t he home address, telephone n umber and photograph 0 f a
current or former United States attorney, assistant United States attorney, United States
Court of Appeals judge, United States district court judge or United States magistrate,
as well as the home address, telephone number, photograph, and place of employment
of t he spouse or child or t he na me a nd location 0 f t he school or day care facility
attended by t he child 0 f such at torney, judge or magistrate. The statute requires t he
attorney, judge or magistrate t 0 submit tot he ag ency hav ing custody of such
information a written request to exempt such information from public disclosure as well
as a written statement that that he or she has made reasonable efforts to protect such
information from being available to the public.
Section 39 5.3025(10), F .S., es tablishes that t he home ad dresses, telephone
numbers, and photographs of hospital or surgical center employees who provide direct
patient care or security services, as well as specified information about the spouses and
children of such employees, are confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements.
The same information must also be held confidential by the facility upon written request
by other employees who have a reasonable belief, based upon specific circumstances
that have been reported in accordance with the procedure adopted by the facility, that
release of the information may be us ed to threaten, intimidate, harass, inflict violence
upon, or de fraud t he em ployee or any member 0 f t he employee's family. Section
395.3025(11), F.S.
(12) Medical information
Medical information per taining to a pr ospective, current, or former 0 fficer or
employee 0 fan ag ency wh ich, if disclosed, would identify that 0 fficer or employee is
exempt from s. 119.07(1), F .S. Section 119.071 (4)(b )1., F .S. Such information may be
disclosed if the person or the person's legal representative provides written permission
or pur suant t 0 court order. Id. See AGO 9 8-17 (exemption "appears t 0 extend t 0
governmental employees t he protection for personal medical records that is generally
enjoyed by private sector employees").
While medical information of a prospective, current or former officer or employee of
an agency is exempt, identifying information regarding participants in a school district's
health insurance pi an do es not clearly constitute pr otected medical information.
Chandler v. School Board of Polk County, N o. 20 08CA-004389 ( Fla. 10t h C ir. C t.
October 9, 2008). And see Inf. Op. to Dockery, November 10, 2008. Subsequent to the
issuance 0 f these 0 pinions, t he Leg islature enacted an ex emption f or personal
identifying information of a dependent child of a current or former officer or employee of
an agency, w hose de pendent child (as defined in 4 09.2554, F .S.) is insured by t he
agency's group insurance plan. Section 119.071 (4)(b)2., F .S. The exemption applies to
personal identifying information held by an agency before, on, or after the effective date
of t his ex emption. Id. While personal identifying information relating tot he dependent
child's participation in an ag ency's group insurance pi an is now confidential, personal
identifying information relating tot he current or former 0 fficer's or em ployee's
participation in such plan is subject to disclosure.
Every em ployer w ho pr ovides or ad ministers he alth insurance ben efits or life
insurance benefits t 0 i ts em ployees s hall maintain t he confidentiality of information
relating to the medical condition or status of any person c overed by such insurance
benefits. Such information is exempt from s. 119.07 (1), F. S. Section 760 .50( 5), F. S.
Patient medical records and medical claims records of current or former employees
and el igible dep endents enr oiled i n group insurance pi ans 0 f specified governmental
entities are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F .S.; such records shall not be
furnished to any person other than the employee or the employee's legal representative,
except as au thorized i n t he subsection. Sections 11 0.123(9) (state employees),
112.08(7) (county or municipal employees), and 1 12.08(8) (water management di strict
employees), F .S. See AGO 91-88, citing to News-Press Company, Inc. v. Kaune, 511
So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), stating that the exemption applies broadly and is not
limited solely to medical records filed in conjunction with an employee's participation in a
group insurance plan; rather, the exemption applies to all medical records relating to
employees enrolled in a g roup insurance plan. And see AGOs 94-78 (monthly printout
of medical claims paid under city group health insurance plan that identifies the public
employees who obtained medical services and the amounts of the claims, together with
some account information, i s ex empt from pu blic inspection), and 9 4-51 ( agency
"should be vigilant in its protection of the confidentiality provided by statute for medical
records of [its] employees").
Public school system employee medical records are confidential and exempt from s.
11 9.07 ( 1 ), F. S . Section 1 01 2.31 (3) ( a ) 5., F. S.
If a city owns and operates a medical clinic for the use and benefit of its employees,
the pat ient records at t he clinic ar e confidential and m ay be released onl y upon t he
written consent of t he pat ient or un der t he specific circumstances pr ovided under
Florida law. AGO 01-33. Under its duty to ensure the confidentiality of such records, the
city may allow access to such records to city employees whose duties are related to the
furnishing of medical services to the patient/employee. Id.
(13) Retiree names and addresses
The names and addresses of retirees are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1),
F.S., to the extent that no state or local governmental agency may provide the names or
addresses of such persons in aggregate, compiled or list form except to public agencies
engaged inofficial business, to collective bargaining ag ents or to retiree organizations
for of ficial bus iness use. Section 12 1.031 (5), F .S. And see s. 121. 4501 (19), F .S.
(personal identifying information regarding participants in the Public Employee Optional
Retirement Program is exempt).
(14) Ridesharing information
Any information pr ovided t 0 a n ag ency f or t he pur pose 0 f forming r idesharing
arrangements, which reveals the identity of an individual who has provided his or her
name for ridesharing, as defined ins. 341.031, F .S., is exempt from public di sclosure
requirements. Section 119.071 (5)(e), F.S.
7. Social security numbers
Section 119.071 (5)(a)5., F .S., states that social security numbers held by an agency
are confidential a nd ex empt from public di sclosure requirements; however, t he
exemption does not supersede any federal law prohibiting the release of social security
numbers or any ot her appl icable public records ex emptions for such n umbers. See,
e.g., s. 193.114(5), F .S. (social security nu mber submitted on an appl ication for a tax
exemption is confidential); and s. 119.071(4)(a), F.S. (social security numbers of current
and former employees held by the employing agency are confidential and exempt from
disclosure).
Disclosure t 0 an other ag ency or governmental ag ency is aut horized if: ex pressly
required by federal or state law or by court order; necessary for the agency to perform
its duties and responsibilities; expressly authorized in writing by the individual to whom
the social security number relates; made to comply with the federal Patriot Act, Pub. L.
No. 107 -56, or Presidential Executive 0 rder 13224; for t he ad ministration 0 f health
benefits to agency employees or their dependents; for the administration of a pension
fund a dministered for ag ency em ployees, de ferred compensation plan or defined
contribution plan; or for t he administration of t he Uniform Commercial C ode by t he
Office of the Secretary of State. Section 119.071 (5)(a)6., F.S. Cf Florida Department of
Education v. NYT Management Services, Inc., 895 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
(federal I aw does not authorize new spaper to obt ain social security num bers ins tate
teacher certification database).
Pursuant t 0 s .119 .071(5)(a)7.b., F .S., an ag ency m ay not de ny a commercial
agency engaged in commercial activity access to social security numbers, provided the
social security numbers will be us ed only in the performance of a commercial activity
and pr ovided t he commercial ent ity makes a written request for t he social security
numbers as prescribed therein. "Commercial activity" is defined to mean the permissible
uses set forth in the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1993, 18 U .S.C. ss. 2721
et seq., the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. ss. 1681 et seq., the Financial Services
Modernization Act of 1999, 15 U.S.C. ss. 6801 et seq., or verification of the accuracy of
personal information received by a commercial ent ity i n t he no rmal course of i ts
business, including identification or pr evention of fraud or matching, verifying, or
retrieving information. Section 119.071 (5)(a)7.a.(I), F .S. It does not include the display
or bulk sale of social security numbers to the public or the distribution of such numbers
to any customer not identifiable by t he commercial en tity. Id. And see AGO 1 0-06,
stating th at while s. 119. 071 (5)(a)6. an d 7 ., F .S., authorize t he di sclosure 0 f social
security numbers to commercial entities engaged in the commercial activities identified
in the statute, these provisions authorize the agency holding social security numbers to
request additional information that is reasonably necessary to verify the identity of the
commercial entity and the specific purposes for which the social security num bers will
be used.
Pursuant to s. 119.0714(1)(i), F.S., social security numbers held in court records are
exempt as provided in s. 119.071 (5)(a). Section 119.0714(2)(a)and (e)1., F.S., however,
provide that until January 1, 2012, if a social security number is included in a court file,
such number may be included as part of the court record available for public inspection
and copying unl ess redaction i s requested by t he holder 0 f such nu mber or by t he
holder's attorney or legal guardian; after t hat date, such records are confidential and
exempt as provided in s. 119.071 (5)(a), F.S.
Social security numbers included in an official record may be made available as part
of t he official records available for publ ic inspection a nd copying unl ess redaction is
requested by t he hol der 0 f such nu mber or t he hol der's at torney or legal guardian;
however, ifsuch record is in electronic format, on or after January 1,2011, the county
recorder must use his or her best effort to keep the social security num ber confidential
and exempt as provided for ins. 119.071 (5)(a), F .S. Section 119.0714(3)(b), F .S. The
holder of asocial security num ber, or t he hol der's at torney or legal guardian, m ay
request that a county recorder redact from an image or copy of an official record placed
on a county recorder's publ icly a vailable Internet website or on a publ icly available
Internet website used by a county recorder to display public records, or otherwise made
electronically available to the public, his or her social security number contained in that
official record. Section 119.0714(3)(c), F.S. Cf AGO 05-37, concluding that the clerk of
court, in recording documents in the Official Records that are required to contain social
security num bers, m ay not redact social security num bers 0 r ot her confidential
information upon receipt; however, the clerk is required to maintain the confidentiality of
that information.
E. TO WHAT EXTENT MAY AN AGENCY REGULATE OR LIMIT INSPECTION
AND COPYING OF PUBLIC RECORDS?
1. Mayan agency impose its own restrictions on access to or copying of public
records?
a. Agency-imposed restrictions invalid
Section 119.07(1)(a), F .S., establishes aright of access to public records in plain
and unequivocal terms:
Every person who has custody of a public record shall permit the record to be
inspected and copied by any per son desiring t 0 do s 0, at any reasonable
time, under reasonable conditions, and under supervision by the custodian of
the public records.
A custodian of public records may not impose a rule or condition of inspection which
operates to restrict or circumvent a person's right of access. AGO 75-50. See also Davis
v. Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 480 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review
denied, 488 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1 986) (person making a pu blic records request under s.
119.07(1), F .S., entitled to see the actual nonexempt records of legal fees paid by the
hospital board and not merely extracts from such records). And see State v. Webb, 786
So. 2d 60 2 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 2001) (requirement that persons with custody 0 f pu blic
records allow records t 0 be examined II at any reasonable time, un der reasonable
conditions" i s no t unconstitutional as applied top ublic records custodian w ho w as
dilatory in responding to public records requests).
The custodian II is at all times responsible for the custody of the [public] records but
when a citizen applies to inspect or make copies of them it is his duty to make provision
for this to be done in such a manner as will accommodate the applicant and at the same
time safeguard the records. II Fuller v. State ex reI. O'Donnell, 17 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 1944).
Thus, t he right 0 f inspection m ay not be frustrated or circumvented through indirect
means such as the use of a code book. State ex reI. Davidson v. Couch, 158 So. 103,
105 (Fla. 1 934) ( right 0 f inspection was II hindered an d obs tructed" by city II imposing
conditions to the right of examination which were not reasonable nor permissible under
the law"). Accord AGO 05-12 (city may not require the use of a code to review e-mail
correspondence of city's police department and human resources department).
Accordingly, the II reasonable conditions" referred to ins. 119.07(1), F .S., do no t
include anything that would hamper or frustrate, directly or indirectly, a person's right of
inspection and copying. The term "refers not to conditions which must be fulfilled before
review is per mitted b ut tor easonable regulations that would permit t he custodian of
records to protect them from alteration, damage, or destruction and also to ensure that
the person reviewing the records is not subjected to physical constraints des igned to
preclude review. II Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 3 72 So. 2d 420, 425 (Fla.
1979). See also State ex reI. Davis v. McMillan, 38 So. 666 (Fla. 1905); a nd Tribune
Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075,1078 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom.,
DePerte v. Tribune Company, 105 S .Ct. 2 315 ( 1985) (the s ole purpose 0 f custodial
supervision is to protect the records from alteration, damage, or destruction).
Any local enac tment or pol icy which pur ports t 0 di ctate additional conditions 0 r
restrictions 0 n ac cess top ublic records i s 0 f dubious validity since t he legislative
scheme of the Public Records Act h as preempted a ny local regulation of this subject.
Tribune Company v. Cannella, supra at 1 077. A policy of a governmental ag ency
cannot exempt it from the application of Ch. 119, F .S., a general law. Douglas v. Michel,
410 So. 2d 936,938 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), questions answered and approved, 464 So.
2d 5 45 (Fla. 1985). Accord AGO 9 2-09 ( utilities commission n ot au thorized t 0 al ter
terms of Ch. 119, F .S.); and AGO 75-50 (local agency has no di scretion to alter Ch.
119, F .S., requirements bec ause the s tate possesses ex clusive control over ac cess,
maintenance, retention an d di sposal of pub lic records). And see AGO 90-04 (county
official not authorized to assign county's rights to a public record as part of a settlement
agreement compromising a lawsuit against the county).
b. Mail procedures
The Public Records Act is appl icable to I etters or ot her doc uments received by a
public official in his or her official capacity. AGO 77-141. As with other public records,
upon receipt 0 f a public records request f or correspondence, t he custodian should
retrieve t he records, review t hem for ex emptions and allow publ ic inspection 0 f t he
nonexempt material. Mail addressed to the mayor or a city council member at City Hall
and received at City Hall should not be forwarded unopened to the private residence of
the mayor or council member, bu t r ather the original or a copy of t he mail that
constitutes a public record should be maintained at city offices. AGO 04-43.
c. Inspection at off-premises location
A trial court erred when it failed to hold a hearing before denying a request to require
a di strict top ermit inspection at t he di strict 0 ffices, rather than at an off-premises
location. James v. Loxahatchee Groves Water Control District, 820 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2002). The agency argued that it would be II disruptive" to require that the records
inspection b e conducted a tits 0 ffices. Id. However, t he appeals court ruled t hat a
hearing should have been held to determine whether the requestor, who was in litigation
with the district, should be allowed to view the records at the district offices, and if so,
under what conditions. Id.
2. What individuals are authorized to inspect and receive copies of public
records?
Section 119.01, F.S., provides that "[i]t is the policy of this state that all state, county,
and municipal records are open f or per sonal inspection a nd copying by any person. II
(e.s.) A state citizenship requirement w as deleted from the I aw i n 19 75. A publ ic
employee is a person within the meaning of Ch. 119, F .S. and, as such, possesses the
same right of inspection as any other person. AGO 75-175. Likewise, a county is "any
person" who is allowed to seek public records under Ch. 119, F .S. Hillsborough County,
Florida v. Buccaneers Stadium Limited Partnership, N o. 9 9-0321 (Fla. 13t h C ir. C t.
February 5, 1999), affirmed per curiam, 758 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Thus, lithe law provides any member of the public access to public records, whether
he or she be the most outstanding civic citizen or the most heinous criminal. II Church of
Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February
27, 19 97). "[A]s long as t he citizens of this s tate des ire an d insist upon' open
government' a nd liberal publ ic records disclosure, as a cost of t hat freedom public
officials have to put up with demanding citizens even when they are obnoxious as long
as they violate no I aws." State v. Colby, No. MM96-317A-XX (Fla. Highlands Co. Ct.
May 23, 1996). "Even though a public ag ency may bel ieve t hat a person or g roup are
fanatics, harassers or are extremely annoying, the public records are available to all of
the citizens of the State 0 f Florida. II Salvadore v. City of Stuart, N o. 91-812 C A ( Fla.
19th Cir. Ct. December 17, 1991). And see Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736, 741 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2002) (defendant's conduct in making over 40 public records requests concerning
victim constituted a II legitimate purpose," and thus cannot v iolate the s talking I aw
"because the right to obtain the records is established by statute and acknowledged in
the state constitution").
3. Must an individual show a "special interest" or "legitimate interest" in public
records before being allowed to inspect or copy same?
No. Chapter 119, F .S., requires no showing of pur pose or II special i nterest" as a
condition of access to public records. liThe motivation of the person seeking the records
does not impact the person's right to see them under the Public Records Act. II Curry v.
State, 811 So. 2 d 7 36, 742 (Fla. 4 th D CA 2002). See also Timoney v. City of Miami
Civilian Investigative Panel, 917 So. 2d 885, 886n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) ("generally, a
person's motive in seeking access to public records is irrelevant"); Staton v. McMillan,
597 So. 2d 940, 941 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin,
605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992) (petitioner's reasons for seeking access to public records
"are i mmaterial"); Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330, 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review
denied, 475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985) (legislative objective underlying the creation of Ch.
119 w as t 0 insure to t he people of Florida t he right freely tog ain access t 0
governmental records; t he pur pose 0 f such inquiry i s immaterial); and News-Press
Publishing Company, Inc. v. Gadd, 388 S o. 2d 27 6, 278 ( Fla. 2 d D CA 1 980) ( lithe
newspaper's motives [for seeking t he doc uments], as well as t he hos pital's financial
harm a nd public h arm defenses, are irrelevant in an action to compel compliance with
the Public Records Act").
"[T]he fact that a person seeking access to public records wishes to use them in a
commercial enterprise does not alter hi s or her rights und er Florida's pu blic records
law. II Micro de cisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 S o. 2d 87 1, 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review
denied, 902 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005). See also State
ex reI. Davis v. McMillan, 38 S o. 666 ( Fla. 1 905) ( abstract companies may copy
documents from the clerk's office for their own use and sell copies to the public for a
profit); Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So.
2d 22 7, 2 28n.2 ( Fla. 3d D CA 199 8), review denied, 72 9 S o. 2d 38 9 ( Fla. 199 9)
("Booksmart's reason for wanting to v iew an d copy the documents is irrelevant tot he
issue of whether the documents are public records"). Cf. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(i)(1),
stating that a person requesting records of the judicial branch is not required to disclose
the reason for the request. Accord Tedesco v. State, 807 So. 2d 804, 806 (Fla. 4th DCA
2002) (no requirement that any person show a II need" in order to obtain public records
of the judicial branch).
Section 8 17.568, F .S., pr ovides criminal penal ties for t he una uthorized us e 0 f
personal identification information for fraudulent or harassment purposes. Criminal use
of a public record or public records information is proscribed in s. 817.569, F.S.
4. What agency employees are responsible for responding to public records
requests?
Section 119.011(5), F.S., defines the term "custodian of public records" to mean lithe
elected or appointed state, county, or municipal officer charged with the responsibility of
maintaining t he office hav ing publ ic records, or hi s or her des ignee." However, t he
courts have concluded that the statutory reference to the records custodian does not
alter the II duty of disclosure" imposed by s. 119.07(1), F .S., upon "[eJvery person who
has custody of a public record." PuIs v. City of Port Sf. Lucie, 678 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1996). [Emphasis supplied by the court].
Thus, the term "custodian" for pur poses 0 f t he Public Records Act refers to a II
agency per sonnel w ho have i t within t heir power tor elease or communicate pu blic
records. Mintus v. City of West Palm Beach, 7 11 So. 2d 1 359 (Fla. 4t h D CA 1998)
(citing Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683, 687 [Fla. 5th DCA 1991 ]). But, lithe
mere fact that an employee of a public agency temporarily possesses a document does
not necessarily mean that the person has custody as defined by section 119.07." Id. at
1361. I n order t 0 ha ve custody, one must haves upervision and control over t he
document or have legal responsibility for its care, keeping or guardianship. Id. And see
Alterra Healthcare Corporation v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936, 940n.4 (Fla. 2002),
noting that "only the custodian" of agency personnel records may assert any applicable
statutory exemption to disclosure, "not the employee. II
The custodian of public records, or a person having custody of public records, may
designate another 0 fficer or employee 0 f t he ag ency t 0 permit the inspection a nd
copying of public records, but must disclose the identity of the designee to the person
requesting to inspect or copy pu blic records. Section 119.07(1 )(b), F.S. The custodian
of public records and his or her designee must acknowledge requests to inspect or copy
records promptly and respond to such requests in good faith. Section 119.07(1 )(c), F .S.
A good faith response includes making reasonable efforts to determine from ot her
officers or employees within t he ag ency whether such a record exists and, if s 0, t he
location at which the record can be accessed. Id. Cf Remia v. City of Sf. Petersburg
Police Pension Board of Trustees, 1 4 F .L.W. Supp. 854a (Fla. 6th C ir. Ct. July 17,
2007), cert. denied, 996 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (since city clerk's responsibility
to pr ovide publ ic records w as ministerial, city was not ent itled t 0 pr otective or der
prohibiting at torney in litigation with t he city f rom directly contacting t he clerk with a
public records request without first contacting the city attorney).
5. Mayan agency refuse to comply with a request to inspect or copy the
agency's public records on the grounds that the records are not in the
physical possession of the custodian?
No. An ag ency is not aut horized tor efuse to allow inspection 0 f public records it
made or received in connection with the transaction of official business on the grounds
that the documents are in the actual possession of an agency or official other than the
records custodian. See Wallace v. Guzman, 687 S o. 2 d 13 51 (Fla. 3d D CA 19 97)
(public records cannot be hidden from the public by transferring physical custody of the
records to the agency's attorneys); Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA
1982), review denied sub nom., Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency v. Sanchez,
426 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1983) (official charged with maintenance of records may not transfer
actual physical custody of records to county attorney and thereby avoid compliance with
req uest f or inspection u nd er Ch. 119, F. S.); and A GO 92-78 (public hous ing aut hority
not authorized to withhold its records from disclosure on the g rounds that the records
have been subpoenaed by the state attorney and transferred to that office).
Thus, in Barfield v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, No.9 3-1701 (Fla. 2 d
Cir. C t. M ay 19, 1994), t he court held t hat an ag ency that received records f rom a
private ent ity i n t he course 0 f 0 fficial business and di d not make copies 0 f t he
documents could not "return" them tot he entity following receipt 0 f a pu blic records
request. The court ordered the ag ency to demand t he return of the records from the
private entity so they could be copied for the requestor.
Similarly, in Times Publishing Company v. City of Sf. Petersburg, 558 S o. 2d 4 87,
492-493 (Fla. 2d D CA 19 90), t he court found that bo th t he city and a pr ivate entity
violated the Public Records Act when, pursuant to a plan to circumvent Ch. 119, F .S.,
the city avoided taking possession of negotiation documents reviewed and discussed by
both parties and instead I eft them with t he pr ivate entity's at torney. The court
determined that although city officials may have intended merely to "avoid" the law, the
effect of their actions was to" evade the br oad policy of op en government. II And see
Wisner v. City of Tampa Police Department, 601 So. 2d 296, 298 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
(city m ay not allow a pr ivate ent ity tom aintain phy sical custody of publ ic records
[polygraph c hart us ed in internal investigation] lito circumvent t he public records
chapter"); a nd National Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So.
3d 1201 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 84 8 (Fla. 2010), (re cords 0 n
private ent ity's secure website that were v iewed an d us ed by a s tate university i n
carrying out its official duties were public records even though the university did not take
physical possession).
If municipal pe nsion records ar e stored i n a records storage facility out side city
limits, the city may not pass along to the public records requestor the costs to retrieve
the records. Inf. Op. to Sugarman, September 5, 1997. Any delay in production of the
records beyond what is reasonable under the circumstances may subject the custodian
to I iability for failure to pr oduce public records. Id. And see AGO 0 2-37 ( agency n ot
authorized tor equire that production an d copying of public records be ac complished
only through a pr ivate company t hat acts a sac learinghouse for the ag ency's publ ic
records information pursuant t 0 a contract bet ween t he ag ency and t he pr ivate
company).
While Ch. 119, F .S., does not require a county to transport microfilmed copies of
public records maintained i n a storage facility out side the county tot he county
courthouse when the originals are available at the courthouse, the microfilmed copies
must be available for copying at their location outside the county. AGO 88-26. See also
AGO 9 2-85, stating that individual school board m embers are not required tor etain
copies of public records which are regularly maintained in the course of business by the
clerk of the school board in the school board administrative offices.
Pursuant t 0 Ch. 11 9, F .S., public records m ay routinely be removed from the
building or 0 ffice in which such records are or dinarily kept onl y for 0 fficial pur poses.
AGO 9 3-16. The retention 0 f such records in the ho me 0 f a pu blic official, however,
would appear to circumvent the public access requirements of the Public Records Act
and compromise the rights of the public to inspect and copy such records. Id. See s.
119.021, F .S. And see AGO 04-43 ( mail addressed to city 0 fficials a t Cit Y Ha II a nd
received at City Hall should not be forwarded unopened to the private residences of the
officials, b ut r ather the or iginal or a copy 0 f t hemail that constitutes a public record
should be maintained at city offices).
6. Mayan agency refuse to allow access to public records on the grounds that
the records are also maintained by another agency?
No. The fact that a particular record is also maintained by another agency does not
relieve the custodian of the obligation to permit inspection and copying in the absence
of an applicable statutory exemption. AGO 86-69. If information contained in the public
record is available from other sources, a person seeking ac cess tot he record is not
required to make an unsuccessful attempt to obtain the information from those sources
as a condition precedent to gaining access to the public records. Warden v. Bennett,
340 So. 2d 977, 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).
7. Mayan agency refuse to allow inspection or copying of public records on the
grounds that the request for such records is "overbroad" or lacks
particularity?
No. In Lorei v. Smith, 464 S o. 2d 1 330, 1332 (Fla. 2d D CA 1985), review denied,
475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985), the court recognized that the "breadth of such right [to gain
access to public records] is virtually unfettered, save for the statutory exemptions. . . . II
Accordingly, in t he absence of a statutory ex emption, a custodian must produce the
records requested regardless 0 f t he number 0 f documents involved or pos sible
inconvenience. Note, however, s. 119.07(4)(d), F.S., authorizes a custodian to charge,
in addition to the cost of duplication, a reasonable service charge for the cost of the
extensive us e 0 f information technology resources or of personnel, if such ex tensive
use is required bec ause 0 f the nature or v olume of public records to be inspected or
copied. And see AGO 92-38 (agency may not restrict access to and copying of public
records based upon the amount requested or the span of time which is covered by the
public records; however, if extensive use of information technology resources or clerical
or supervisory per sonnel i sneed ed for retrieval of such records, t he ag ency m ay
impose a reasonable service charge pur suant to former s. 119.07[1 ][b] [now s .
119.07(4)(d), F .S.], based upon the actual costs incurred for the use of such resources
or personnel).
Thus, a person seeking to inspect "all" financial records of a municipality may not be
required to specify a particular book or record he or she wishes to inspect. State ex reI.
Davidson v. Couch, 1 56 So. 297, 300 (Fla. 1934). In Davidson, the Florida Supreme
Court explained that if this were the case, "one person may be required to specify the
book, while another and more favored one, because of his pretended ignorance of the
name of the record might be permitted examination of all of them." Id. Such a result
would be inconsistent with the mandate in the Public Records Act that publ ic records
are open to all who wish to inspect them. Id. Cf Salvadore v. City of Stuart, No. 91-812
CA (Fla. 19th Cir. Ct. December 17, 1991), stating that if a public records request is
insufficient to identify the records sought, the city has an a ffirmative duty to promptly
notify the requestor that more information is needed in order to produce the records; it is
the responsibility of the city and not the requestor to follow up on any requests for public
records. Compare Woodard v. State, 885 So. 2d 444, 446 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (records
custodian must furnish copies of records when the person requesting them identifies the
portions of t he record with sufficient specificity to permit the custodian to identify the
record and forwards the statutory fee).
8. Mayan agency require that a request to examine or copy public records be
made in writing?
Chapter 119, F .S., does not authorize an agency to require that requests for records
be in writing. See Dade Aviation Consultants v. Knight Ridder, Inc., 800 So. 2d 30 2,
305n.1 (Fla. 3 d DCA 2001) ("There is no requirement in the Public Records Act that
requests for records must be in writing"). As noted in AGO 80-57, a custodian must
honor a request for copies of records which is sufficient to identify the records desired,
whether the request is in writing, over the telephone, or in person, provided that the
required fees are paid.
If a public agency believes that it is necessary to provide written documentation of a
request f or publ ic records, t he agency m ay require that t he custodian complete an
appropriate form or document; however, the person requesting the records cannot be
required to provide such documentation as a precondition to the granting of the request
to inspect or copy pu blic records. See Sullivan v. City of New Port Richey, No. 86-
1129CA (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. May 22, 1987), per curiam affirmed, 529 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1988) , noting t hat a demandant's failure t 0 complete a city form required for
access to documents did not authorize the custodian to refuse to honor the request to
inspect or copy public records.
However, a request for records of t he judicial branch (which is not subject to C h.
119, F .S., see Times Publishing Company v. Ake, 660 So. 2d 255 [Fla. 1995]), must be
in writing. Ru Ie 2 .420(i)(1), Fla. R. J ud. Admin. In its commentary ac companying the
rule change that incorporated this requirement, the Court said that t he II writing
requirement is not intended to disadvantage any person who may have difficulty writing
a request; if any difficulty exists, the custodian should aid the requestor in reducing the
request to writing." In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records,
825 So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla. 2002).
9. Mayan agency require that the requestor furnish background information
to the custodian?
A person requesting access to or copies 0 f public records may no t be required to
disclose his or her name, address, telephone number or the like to the custodian, unless
the custodian is required by law to obtain this information prior to releasing the records.
AGOs 92-38 and 91-76. See also Bevan v. Wanicka, 505 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 2d D CA
1987) (production of public records may not be conditioned upon a requirement that the
person seeking inspection di sclose bac kground information abo ut himself or herself).
Cf s. 10 12.31(2)(f), F.S., pr oviding t hat the custodian 0 f public school employee
personnel files shall maintain a record i n t he file 0 f those persons reviewing an
employee personnel file each time it is reviewed.
1 O.ls an agency required to: answer questions about its public records; create a
new record in response to a request for information; or reformat its records in
a particular form as demanded by the requestor?
The statutory obligation of the custodian of public records is to provide access to, or
copies 0 f, pu blic records II at a ny reasonable time, un der reasonable conditions, an d
under supervision by the custodian of the public records" provided that the required fees
are paid. Section 119.07(1)(a) and (4), F.S. However, a custodian is not required to give
out information from the records of his or her office. AGO 80-57. The Public Records
Act does not require a town to produce an employee, such as the financial officer, to
answer questions regarding t he financial records 0 f t he t own. AGO 9 2-38. Cf In re
Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla.
2002) (the custodian of judicial records II is required to provide access to or copies of
records but is not required either to provide information from records or to create new
records in response to a request").
In ot her words, C h. 1 19, F .S., provides aright 0 f access to inspect a nd copy an
agency's ex isting publ ic records; i t does not mandate that a n agency create new
records in order to accommodate a request for information from the agency. Thus, the
clerk of court is not required to provide an inmate with a list of documents from a case
file which may be responsive to some forthcoming request. Wootton v. Cook, 590 So.
2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). However, in order to comply with the statutory directive
that an agency provide copies of pu blic records upon payment of the statutory fee, an
agency must respond to requests by m ail for information as to copying costs. Id. See
also Woodard v. State, 885 So. 2d 444, 445n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), remanding a case
for further proceedings where the custodian forwarded only information relating to the
statutory fee schedule rather than the total copying cost of the requested records; cf
Gilliam v. State, 9 96 So. 2 d 9 56 ( Fla. 2d DCA 200 8) ( clerk, as custodian of judicial
records, h ad a I egal duty tor espond t 0 Gilliam's request for information regarding
costs) .
Similarly, an ag ency is not or dinarily required tor eformat its records and pr ovide
them in a particular form as demanded by the requestor. AGO 08-29. As explained in
Seigle v. Barry, 422 So. 2d 63, 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), review denied, 431 So. 2d 988
(Fla. 1983):
If the health department maintains a c hronologicall ist of dog -bite incidents
with rabies implications [a] plaintiff, bitten by a suspect dog, may not require
the health department tor eorder t hat I ist a nd furnish a record 0 f incidents
segregated by geographical areas. Nothing in the statute, case law or public
policy imposes such a burden upon our public officials.
However, an ag ency must provide a copy of the record in the medium requested if
the ag ency maintains t he record i n t hat medium. Section 119.01 (2)(f), F .S. Thus, a
custodian of public records must, if asked for a copy of a computer software disk used
by an agency, provide a copy of the disk in its original format; a typed transcript would
not satisfy the requirements of s. 119.07(1), F .S. AGO 91-61. Cf Miami-Dade County v.
Professional Law Enforcement Association, 997 So. 2d 12 89 (Fla. 3d D CA 2009) (fact
that pertinent information may exist in more than one format is not a basis for exemption
or denial of the request).
11. When must an agency respond to a public records request?
The custodian of public records or his or her designee is required to acknowledge
requests to inspect or copy records promptly and to respond to such requests in good
faith. Section 119.07(1)(c), F.S. The Public Records Act, however, does not contain a
specific time limit ( such as 24 ho urs or 10 day s) for compliance with publ ic records
requests. The Florida Supreme Court has stated t hat the onl y del ay i n pr oducing
records per mitted under C h. 11 9, F .S., II is the limited reasonable time allowed t he
custodian to retrieve the record and delete those portions of the record the custodian
asserts are exempt." Tribune Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075, 1078 (Fla. 1984),
appeal dismissed sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985).
a. Automatic delay impermissible
A municipal policy which provides for an automatic delay in the production of public
records is impermissible. Tribune Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075, 1 078-1079
(Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., Deperte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315
(1985). See also Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545, 546 at n.2 (Fla. 1985), wherein the
Supreme Court noted that a county resolution imposing a 24-hour waiting period before
allowing inspection 0 f county per sonnel records which had been uph eld in an ear lier
appellate decision [Roberts v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 409 So. 2d 1089
(Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 418 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 1982)], was no longer enforceable
in light of subsequent judicial decisions.
Thus, an agency is not authorized to delay inspection of personnel records in order
to allow the employee to be present during the inspection of his or her records. Tribune
Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d at 1078. Compare s. 1012.31(3)(a)3., F.S., in which
the Legislature h as ex pressly pr ovided t hat no material derogatory to a publ ic school
employee m ay be inspected until 10 day s after t he employee h as be en notified a s
prescribed by statute.
Similarly, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice h as adv ised t hat aboard 0 f trustees 0 f a
police pension fund may not delay release of its records until such time as the request is
submitted to the board for a vote. AGO 96-55. And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31
So. 3 d 1 93 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 201 0), appeal pending, No. S C 1 0-798 (Fla. April 20, 201 0)
(city m ay not del ay public ac cess t 0 bo ard meeting minutes until after t he city
commission has approved the minutes).
b. Delay in response
An ag ency's unr easonable an d ex cessive del ays in pr oducing pu blic records can
constitute an unlawful refusal to provide access to public records. See Rechler v. Town
of Manalapan, N o. C L 94 -2724 A D (Fla. 15 th C ir. C t. November 21, 1994), affirmed,
674 So. 2d 789, 790 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), review denied, 684 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 1996),
finding that the town engaged in a II pattern of delays" by taking months to fully comply
with the petitioner's public records requests.
Similarly, in State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d 602, 604 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2001), the court held
that it was error for a lower court judge to vacate a misdemeanor conviction of a records
custodian (Webb) who had been found guilty of willfully violating s. 119.07(1 )(a), F .S.,
based on her "dilatory" response to public records requests filed by a citizen (Watson):
Evidence was presented that Webb took one and one-half months to respond
to Watson's initial pu blic-records request; that i twas near Iy four months
before Webb attempted to schedule a time for Watson to review documents
responsive to the requests; that Webb gave Watson one hour to review a ten-
inch stack 0 f documents an d t hen allowed onl y t wo addi tional one -hour
sessions five weeks later; t hat Webb terminated Watson's review after this
third session; and that Webb did not provide all of her public records until she
received a request from the grand j ury near Iy seven months a fter Watson's
request.
By contrast, in Lang v. Reedy Creek Improvement District, No. CJ-5546 (Fla. 9th Cir.
Ct. October 2, 1995), affirmed per curiam, 675 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), the
circuit court r ejected the petitioner's claim that t he ag ency should have pr oduced
requested records within 10 , 20 an d 6 O-day per iods. T he court determined that t he
agency's response t 0 num erous ( 19) public records requests for 135 categories 0 f
information and records filed by the opposing party in I itigation was reasonable in light
of t he cumulative impact of the requests an d t he fact t hat the requested records
contained exempt as well as nonexempt information and thus required a considerable
amount of review and redaction. And see Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d
Cir. Ct. June 9, 1998), in which the court said that in view of the "nature and volume of
the materials requested [ over 900 0 pages], t heir location, and the need for close
supervision by some knowledgeable person of the review of those records for possible
exemptions," t he amount 0 f time ex pended by t he county t 0 pr oduce t he records
(several weeks) to opposing counsel was not unreasonable.
c. Arbitrary time for inspection
While an ag ency m ay restrict t he hour s during which publ ic records m ay be
inspected tot hose ho urs when t he ag ency is open t 0 the public, a custodian is no t
authorized to establish an arbitrary time period during which records mayor may not be
inspected. AGO 81-12. Thus, an ag ency pol icy which permits inspection of its pu blic
records 0 nly from 1: 00 p. m. to 4:30 p. m., Monday through Friday, violates the Public
Records Act. Inf. Op. to Riotte, May21, 1990. There maybe instanceswhere, dueto
the nature or volume 0 f t he records requested, a delay bas ed up on t he physical
problems i n retrieving t he records and pr otecting them i s nec essary; ho wever, t he
adoption of a schedule in which public records may be viewed only during certain hours
is impermissible. Id.
d. Standing requests
The Florida Attorney General's 0 ffice has stated t hat upon receipt 0 f a public
records request, t he agency must comply by producing all no n-exempt do cuments in
the custody of t he ag ency that ar e responsive tot he request, upon pay ment 0 f t he
charges authorized in Chapter 119, F .S. However, this mandate applies only to those
documents in the custody of the agency at the time of the request; nothing in the Public
Records I aw appear s tor equire t hat an agency respond t 0 a so-called" standing"
request for production of public records that it may receive in the future. See Inf. Op. to
Worch. June 15, 1995.
12.ln the absence of express legislative authorization, may an agency refuse to
allow public records made or received in the normal course of business to
be inspected or copied if requested to do so by the maker or sender of the
document?
No. To allow the maker or sender of documents to dictate the circumstances under
which t he doc uments ar e t 0 b e de emed confidential would per mit pr ivate par ties as
opposed to the Legislature to determine which public records are subject to disclosure
and which are not. Such a result would contravene the purpose and terms of Ch. 119,
F.S. See Gadd v. News-Press Publishing Company, 412 S 0.2 d 894 ( Fla. 2d D CA
1982) (records of a county hospital's utilization review committee were not exempt from
Ch. 119, F.S., even though the information may have come from sources who expected
or were promised confidentiality); Browning v. Walton, 351 So. 2 d 380 ( Fla. 4t h DCA
1977) ( city cannot refuse t 0 allow inspection of records containing t he names an d
addresses 0 f city employees w ho filled out forms requesting that city maintain t he
confidentiality 0 f all material in their personnel files); City of Pinellas Park, Florida v.
Times Publishing Company, No. 00 -008234CI-19 (Fla. 6th C ir. Ct. January 3, 20 01)
("there is absolutely no do ubt that promises of confidentiality [given to employees who
were asked to respond to a survey] do not empower the Court to depart from the public
records I aw"). And see Hill v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 701 S o. 2d
1218 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 199 7), review denied, 717 S o. 2d 536 ( Fla. 19 98) ( materials
obtained by state ag ency f rom anonymous sources dur ing i ts investigation 0 fan
insurance company were public records subject to disclosure in the absence of statutory
exemption, notwithstanding the company's contention that the records were "stolen" or
"misappropriated" pr ivileged doc uments that were del ivered tot he state without t he
company's permission). Compare Doe v. State, 901 S o. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
(where citizen pr ovided information t 0 s tate at torney's 0 ffice which led t 0 a criminal
investigation was justified in inferring or had a reasonable expectation that he would be
treated as a confidential source in accordance with statutory exemption now found at s.
119.071[2][f], F.S., the citizen was entitled to have his identifying information redacted
from the closed file, even though there was no express assurance of confidentiality by
the state attorney's office).
Thus, it has been held that an agency "cannot bargain away its Public Records Act
duties with promises of confidentiality in settlement agreements. II The Tribune Company
v. Hardee Memorial Hospital, No . CA -91-370 ( Fla. 10th C ir. C t. August 1 9, 1991),
stating that a confidentiality pr ovision i n a settlement ag reement which resolved
litigation against a public hospital did not remove the document from the Public Records
Act. Cf s. 69.081(8), F.S., part of the "Sunshine in Litigation Act," providing, subject to
certain exceptions, that any portion of an ag reement which has the purpose or effect of
concealing information relating tot he settlement or resolution of any claim or ac tion
against a n ag ency is void, contrary top ublic pol icy, and m ay not be enforced, a nd
requiring that settlement records be maintained in compliance with Ch. 119, F .S. And
see Inf. Op. to Barry, June 24, 1998, citing to s. 69.081(8)(a), and stating that "a state
agency may not enter into a settlement ag reement or other contract which contains a
provision aut horizing t he concealment 0 f information relating t 0 a di sciplinary
proceeding or other adverse employment decision from the remainder of a personnel
file. II See also National Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So.
3d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010), holding that a
confidentiality ag reement en tered into by a pr ivate I aw firm on beh alf 0 f a state
university with t he N CAA t hat allowed ac cess tor ecords contained on t he NCAA's
secure custodial website that were used by the university in preparing a response to
possible NCAA sanctions, had no impact on whether such records were public records,
stating t hat II [a] pu blic record cannot bet ransformed into a pr ivate record merely
because an agent of the government has promised that it will be kept private. II
Accordingly, it is clear that the determination as to when publ ic records are to be
deemed confidential rests ex clusively with t he Leg islature. See Sepro Corporation v.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 839 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003),
review denied sub nom., Crist v. Department of Environmental Protection, 911 So. 2d
792 (Fla. 2005) ( private party cannot render publ ic records ex empt from di sclosure
merely by designating as confidential the material it furnishes to a state agency). See
also AGO 90-104 (desire of data processing company to maintain II privacy" of certain
materials filed with Department of State is of no consequence unless such materials fall
within a legislatively created exemption to Ch. 119, F .S.); AGO 71-394 (reports received
and marked "confidential" or "return to sender" must be open to public inspection unless
exempted from di sclosure by t he Legislature); A GO 97 -84 ( architectural a nd
engineering pi ans under seal pursuant to s. 481.221 or s. 471.025, F .S., that are held
by a public agency in connection with the transaction of official business are subject to
public inspection); and Inf. Op. to Echeverri, April 30, 2010 (taxpayer may not request
that records submitted to value adj ustment board be kept confidential). Cf Inf. Op. to
Burke, April 14, 20 10 ( state licensing bo ard must determine whether I etter, although
allegedly sent to the board by mistake, was received in connection with the transaction
of board business).
Therefore, unless the Legislature has expressly authorized the maker of documents
received by an agency to keep the material confidential, the wishes of the sender in this
regard cannot supersede t he requirements 0 f C h. 1 19, F .S. Compare, e.g., s.
377.2409(1), F .S. ( information 0 n geophysical ac tivities conducted on state-owned
mineral lands received by Department of Environmental Protection shall, on the request
of the person conducting the activities, be hel d confidential and exempt from C h. 119,
F.S., for 10 years).
13. Must an agency state the basis for its refusal to release an exempt record?
Yes. Section 119 .07(1 )(e), F .S., states that a custodian 0 f a public record w ho
contends that a record or part of a record is exempt from inspection must state the basis
for t he exemption, including the statutory citation to the exemption. Additionally, up on
request, the custodian must state in writing and with particularity the reasons for the
conclusion that t he record is ex empt or confidential. Section 11 9.07(1 )(f), F.S. See
Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (agency's response that it had
provided all records "with t he ex ception of certain information relating tot he v ictim"
deemed inadequate because t he response "failed to identify with specificity ei ther the
reasons w hy records were bel ieved t 0 be ex empt, or t he statutory bas is f or any
exemption"); an d Langlois v. City of Deerfield Beach, Florida, 3 70 F . S upp 2d 1 233
(S.D. Fla. 2005) (city fire chief's summary rejection of request for employee personnel
file v iolated the Public Records A ct because t he chief gave no statutory reason for
failing to produce the records). Cf City of Sf. Petersburg v. Romine ex reI. Dillinger, 719
So. 2d 19, 21 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), noting that the Public Records Act "may not be used
in such away to obt ain information that t he I egislature has dec lared must be ex empt
from d isclosure"; and AGO 06-04 (request for ag ency records may not be phr ased or
responded to in terms of a request for the specific documents asked for and received by
a law enforcement agency during the course of an active criminal investigation).
It has been held that a federal agency subject to the federal Freedom of Information
Act, 5 U.S.C. s. 552, must, in addition to providing a detailed justification of the basis for
claimed exemptions und er t he Act, specifically itemize and index t he doc uments
involved so as to show which are disclosable and which are exempt. See Vaughn v.
Rosen, 484 F .2d 820, 827-828 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 94 S.Ct. 1564 (1974).
However, a Florida court refused to apply the Vaughn requirements to the state Public
Records Act; and Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330, 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review
denied, 475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985). And see Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1997)
(state attorney's contention that requested records were work product and not subject to
public records disclosure was sufficient to identify asserted statutory exemptions).
14. Mayan agency refuse to allow inspection and copying of an entire public
record on the grounds that a portion of the record contains information
which is exempt from disclosure?
No. W here a pu blic record contains some information which i s ex empt from
disclosure, s. 119.07(1)(d), F.S., requires the custodian of the record to delete or excise
only that portion or portions 0 f the record for which an ex emption is as serted a nd to
provide the remainder of the record for examination. See Ocala Star Banner Corp. v.
McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (city may redact confidential identifying
information from pol ice report but must produce the rest for inspection); City of Riviera
Beach v. Barfield, 642 So. 2d 1135, 1137 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So.
2d 1 192 (Fla. 1995) ( police department authorized tow ithhold statutorily ex empt
criminal investigative information but must allow inspection of nonexempt portions of the
records); a nd AGO 95 -42 ( statute pr oviding f or confidentiality 0 f certain audit
information did not make the entire report confidential and exempt from disclosure; the
portions of the report which do not contain exempt information must be released).
The fact t hat an agency bel ieves that it would be impractical or bur densome t 0
redact confidential information from its records does not excuse noncompliance with the
mandates of the Public Records Act. AGO 99-52. Cf. AGO 02-73 (agency must redact
confidential a nd ex empt information an d release the remainder 0 f the record; ag ency
not au thorized t 0 release records containing confidential information, al beit
anonymously).
A custodian of records containing both exempt and nonexempt material may comply
with s. 119. 07(1)(d), F.S., by any reasonable method which maintains and does not
destroy the exempted portion while allowing public inspection of the nonexempt portion.
AGO 8 4-81. And see AGO 9 7-67 ( clerk is und er a duty t 0 pr event t he release of
confidential material that may be contained in the Official Records; the manner by which
this is to be accomplished rests within the sound discretion of the clerk). Accord AGO
05-37.
Section 119.011(12), F.S., defines the term "redact" to mean lito conceal from a copy
of an original public record, or to conceal from an electronic image that is available for
public viewing, that portion of the record containing exempt or confidential information."
See AGO 02-69 (statute providing for redaction of certain information in court records
available for pu blic inspection does not authorize clerk of court to permanently remove
or obliterate such information from the original court records).
15. Mayan agency refuse to allow inspection of public records because the
agency believes disclosure could violate privacy rights?
It is well established in Florida that "neither a custodian of records nor a person who
is the subject of a record can claim a constitutional right of privacy as a bar to requested
inspection of a public record which is in the hands of a government agency. II Williams v.
City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683,687 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289
(Fla. 1991).
In reaching t he conclusion that public records must be 0 pen to public inspection
unless t he Leg islature pr ovides ot herwise, t he courts haver ejected claims that t he
constitutional right of privacy bars disclosure. Article I, s. 23, Fla. Const., provides:
Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental
intrusion into t he person's pr ivate I ife except as ot herwise pr ovided her ein.
This section shall not be construed to limit the public's right of access to
public records and meetings as provided by law. (e.s.)
Accordingly, the Florida Constitution II does n ot pr ovide aright 0 f privacy in publ ic
records" and a s tate or federal right 0 f di sclosural pr ivacy does not ex ist. Michel v.
Douglas, 464 So. 2 d 545, 546 (Fla. 1 985). See also Forsberg v. Housing Authority of
City of Miami Beach, 455 S o. 2d 3 73 ( Fla. 198 4); and AGO 0 9-19 (to ex tent that
information 0 n an ag ency's F acebook pag e constitutes a pu blic record within t he
meaning of Ch. 119, F .S., Art. I, s. 23, Fla. Const., "is not implicated"). "[I]n Florida the
right to pr ivacy is ex pressly subservient tot he Public Records Act. II Board of County
Commissioners of Palm Beach County v. D.B., 7 84 So. 2d 585, 591 (Fla. 4t h DCA
2001). But see Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992)
(public's right of ac cess t 0 pr etrial criminal di scovery materials must b e bal anced
against a nonparty's constitutional right to privacy).
However, in Times Publishing Company v. A.J., 626 So. 2 d 1314 (Fla. 1993), the
Supreme Court blocked the release of a sheriff's initial incident report of alleged child
abuse that was referred tot he child welfare dep artment for investigation pur suant to
state child pr otection laws. Noting that t he department found no probable cause, t he
Court held that the confidentiality provisions in Ch. 415, F .S. 1990 [now found in Ch. 39,
F.S.], are intended to accommodate the privacy rights of those involved in these cases
"during the initial stages of an investigation before probable cause has been found." Id.
at 13 15. A dditionally, the Court hel d t hat a member 0 f t he class t he exception was
intended to pr otect--i.e., the minor children who were t he subject of the child ab use
incident r eport--had standing t 0 as sert a statutory ex ception. Cf Alterra Healthcare
Corporation v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936, 940n.4 (Fla. 2002), noting that "only
the custodian" of agency personnel records "can assert any applicable exemption; not
the em ployee. II Although the statutes did not require the sheriff to not ify third parties
about the public records request, the Court could not fault the sheriff for providing such
notification. Times Publishing Company v. A.J., supra at 1316. Cf. Tribune Company v.
Cannella, supra (automatic delay in production of personnel records to allow employees
time to assert constitutional privacy interests invalid). In a lengthy footnote, however, the
Court cautioned that i ts ruling addr essed onl y t he factual question 0 f a statutory
exception relating to child abus e, a nd did n ot nec essarily appl y i n any ot her context.
Times Publishing v. A.J., supra at 1315n.1. Cf AGO 94-47, regarding the application of
the Times Publishing Company standard t 0 complaints 0 f a buse filed with a human
rights advocacy committee.
16. What is the liability of a custodian for release of public records?
Nothing in Ch. 119 , F .S., indicates an intent tog ive pr ivate citizens aright t 0
recovery f or an ag ency negligently maintaining and pr oviding information from publ ic
records. City of Tarpon Springs v. Garrigan, 510 S o. 2d 1 198 ( Fla. 2d D CA 198 7);
Friedberg v. Town of Longboat Key, 504 So. 2d 52 ( Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Cf Layton v.
Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 676 So. 2d 1 038 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1996) (agency has no common law or statutory duty to citizen to maintain accurate
records). Accord Hillsborough County v. Morris, 730 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
However, a custodian is not protected against tort liability resulting from that person
intentionally communicating pu blic records or their contents to someone 0 utside t he
agency which is responsible for the records unl ess the person inspecting the records
has made a bona fide request to inspect the records or the communication is necessary
to the agency's transaction of its official business. Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So.
2d 683 (Fla. 5t h DCA 1991), review denied, 589 S o. 2 d 289 (Fla. 1991). On appeal,
after remand, the Fifth District held the claim against the city was barred on the basis of
sovereign immunity. Williams v. City of Minneola, 619 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).
Cf. AGO 9 7-09 ( law en forcement ag ency's release 0 f sexual offender records f or
purposes of public notification is consistent with its duties and responsibilities).
F. WHAT IS THE LEGAL EFFECT OF STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS FROM
DISCLOSURE?
1. How are exemptions created?
"Courts cannot judicially create any ex ceptions, or ex clusions t 0 Florida's Public
Records Act." Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County v. D.B., 784 So.
2d 585, 591 (Fla. 4t h DCA 2001). Accord Wait v. Florida Power and Light Company,
372 So. 2d 420, 425 (Fla. 1979) (Public Records Act II excludes any judicially created
privilege of c onfidentiality;" onl y t he Leg islature may ex empt records from pu blic
disclosure). See s. 119.011 (8), F .S., defining the term "exemption" to mean "a provision
of general law which provides that a specified record or meeting, or portion thereof, is
not subject to the access requirements of s. 119.07(1), s. 286.011, or s. 24, Art. I of the
State Constitution. II
Article I , s . 24( c), Fla. C onst., authorizes t he Legislature to enact general laws
creating ex emptions provided that such I aws II shall state with specificity t he public
necessity justifying t he exemption and shall b e n 0 broader than necessary t 0
accomplish t he stated pur pose of t he I aw. II See Memorial Hospital-West Volusia v.
News-Journal Corporation, 729 So. 2d 373,380 (Fla. 1999), in which the Court refused
to II imply" an ex emption from open records requirements, stating II we bel ieve t hat an
exemption from public records access is available only after the legislature has followed
the express pr ocedure pr ovided in article I, section 24( c) 0 f t he Florida Constitution. II
Accord Indian River County Hospital District v. Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., 766
So. 2d 233, 237 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) ("Only after the legislature provided by general law
for t he ex emption 0 f records, stating with specificity t he publ ic nec essity f or t he
exemption and pr oviding that t he I aw was no br oader than ne cessary, would an
exemption from public records ac cess be av ailable."). And see Campus
Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388, 395 (Fla. 5t h DCA 2002), review
denied, 848 S o. 2 d 1 153 ( Fla. 20 03) ( statutory ex emption for autopsy phot ographs
serves identifiable public purpose and is no broader than necessary to meet that public
purpose); Bryan v. State, 753 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2000) (statute exempting from public
disclosure certain pr ison records satisfies t he constitutional standard because the
Legislature set forth the requisite public necessity [personal safety of prison officials and
inmates] for the exemption). Compare Halifax Hospital Medical Center v. News-Journal
Corporation, 724 S o. 2d 5 67 ( Fla. 1 999) (statute providing an ex emption from t he
Sunshine Law f or po rtions 0 f hospital bo ard meetings i s unc onstitutional bec ause it
does not meet the constitutional standard of specificity as to stated public necessity and
it is broader than necessary to achieve its purpose).
Laws enacted pursuant to Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., shall relate to one s ubject and
must contain only exemptions or provisions governing enforcement. Cf State v. Knight,
661 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (while exemptions when enacted must contain a
public necessity statement, exceptions to an exemption are not required to contain such
a statement; thus, a trial judge er red i n overturning a statute pr oviding a limited
exception to the public records exemption for grand jury materials).
Article I, s. 24(c) also requires that laws providing exemptions from public records or
public meetings requirements must be passed by a two-thirds vote of each house. The
two-thirds vote requirement applies when an exemption is readopted in accordance with
the 0 pen Government Sunset Review Act, s . 11 9.15, F .S., as well as tot he initial
creation of an exemption. AGO 03-18.
In accordance with s. 24( d), all statutory exemptions in effect on July 1, 1993, are
grandfathered into the statutes and remain in effect until they are repealed. Rules of
court in effect on November 3, 1992, that I imit access to records remain in effect until
repealed. See Rule 2 .420, Public Access t 0 Judicial Branch Records, Fla. R . J ud.
Admin. (originally adopted by the Florida Supreme Court on October 29, 1992, as Rule
2.051, and subsequently renumbered in 2006 as Rule 2.420). The text of this rule is set
forth in Appendix E.
The Open Government Sunset Review Act, codified at s. 119.15, F.S., provides for
the review and repeal or reenactment of an exemption from s. 24, Art. I, Fla. Const., and
s. 119.07(1), or s. 286.011, F .S. The act does not apply to an exemption that is required
by federal I aw or appl ies solely tot he Leg islatu re or the State C ou rt System. Section
119.15(2)(a) and (b), F.S. Pursuant to the Act, in the fifth year after enactment of a new
exemption or expansion of an existing exemption, the exemption shall be repealed on
October 2 of the fifth year, unless the Legislature acts to reenact the exemption. Section
119.15(3), F.S.
2. Exemptions are strictly construed
The general purpose of Ch. 119, F .S., II is to open public records to allow Florida's
citizens to di scover t he ac tions 0 f their g overnment." Christy v. Palm Beach County
Sheriff's Office, 698 So. 2d 1365, 1366 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The Public Records Act is
to be I iberally construed in favor of open government, and exemptions from disclosure
are to b e nar rowly construed sot hey ar e I imited to their stated purpose. Krischer v.
D'Amato, 674 So. 2d 909, 911 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Seminole County v. Wood, 512 So.
2d 1000, 1002 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1988); Tribune
Company v. Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480,483 (Fla. 2d D CA 1986), review denied
sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987). See also Southern
Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company v. Beard, 597 So. 2d 873,876 (Fla. 1st DCA
1992) ( Public Service Commission's det ermination that statutory exemption for
proprietary confidential business information should be narrowly construed and did not
apply to company's internal self-analysis was II consistent with t he liberal construction
afforded the Public Records Act in favor of open government").
An agency claiming an exemption from disclosure bears the burden of proving the
right to an exemption. See Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765, 768 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000),
review denied, 786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2001); Barfield v. City of Fort Lauderdale Police
Department, 639 So. 2d 1012, 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 649 So. 2d 869 (Fla.
1994); and Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128, 1130 (Fla.
1st DCA 1985). See also Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775,
780n.1 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 198 5), review denied, 4 88 S o. 2d 67 ( Fla. 198 6); Tribune
Company v. Public Records, supra, stating t hat do ubt as tot he appl icability of a n
exemption should be resolved in favor of disclosure rather than secrecy. And see- Times
Publishing Company v. City of Sf. Petersburg, 558 So. 2 d 487, 492, noting that t he
judiciary cannot create a pr ivilege of confidentiality t 0 ac commodate t he desires 0 f
government and t hat II [a]n op en government i s crucial tot he citizens' abi lity t 0
adequately evaluate the decisions of elected and appointed officials"; rather the "right to
access pu blic doc uments is virtually unf ettered, save onl y t he statutory ex emptions
designed to achieve a bal ance be tween ani nformed public a nd t he a bility of t he
government t 0 maintain secrecy i n t he pu blic interest. II Accord AGO 8 0-78 ( "policy
considerations" do not, standing alone, justify nondisclosure of public records).
3. Do newly-created exemptions apply retroactively?
Access to public records is a substantive right. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc.
v. News-Journal Corporation, 784 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2001). Thus, a statute affecting that
right is pr esumptively prospective an d there must be a clear legislative intent for t he
statute to apply retroactively. Id. In Memorial, the Supreme Court ruled that a statute
providing an exemption from open government requirements for meetings and records
of private corporations leasing hospitals from public taxing authorities did not apply to
records created prior to the effective date of the statute. See also Baker County Press,
Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, 870 So. 2d 189,192-193 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
(generally, the critical date in determining whether a document is subject to disclosure is
the date the public records request is made; the law in effect on that date applies).
However, if t he Legislature i s II clear i nits intent, II a n ex emption may be applied
retroactively. Campus Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388, 396 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2002), review denied, 848 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 2003) ( statute ex empting aut opsy
photographs from di sclosure is remedial an d m ay be retroactively appl ied). See also
City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 49 3 S o. 2d 1027, 1028 ( Fla. 19 86); and Roberts v.
Butterworth, 668 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1996). Cf Cebrian By and Through Cebrian v. Klein,
614 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (amendment to child abuse statute limiting access
to unfounded reports was remedial in nature and therefore applied retroactively); and
AGO 94-70 (amendment to expungement statute appears to be remedial and, therefore,
should be retroactively applied to those records ordered expunged prior to the effective
date of the amendment).
4. Do statutes eliminating confidentiality apply retroactively?
In Baker v. Eckerd Corporation, 697 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), the court held
that a n am endment eliminating protection against disclosure of any unfounded reports
of child abuse applies prospectively from the effective date of the amendment. See also
AGO 95-19 (expanded di sclosure provisions for juvenile records apply only to records
created after the effective date of the amendment); and Coventry First, LLC v. Office of
Insurance Regulation, 30 So. 3d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 201 0) (although intended to apply
retroactively, statutory am endment imposing a time I imitation 0 n t he ex empt status of
certain records submitted t 0 an ag ency appl ied pr ospectively since retroactive
application improperly deprived company of its vested property rights in records already
submitted to the agency).
Records made before the date of a repeal of an exemption under s. 119.15, F.S., the
Open Government Sunset Review A ct, II may not be made public unl ess otherwise
provided by law." Section 119.15(7), F.S.
5. Are records which are confidential and exempt from disclosure treated
differently from those which are merely exempt from disclosure
requirements?
a. Confidential records
There is a difference between records the Legislature has determined to be exempt
from t he Public Records Act and those which t he Legislature h as det ermined t 0 b e
exempt from the Act and confidential. WFTV, Inc. v. School Board of Seminole County,
874 So. 2d 48, 53 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), review denied, 892 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2004). If
information ism ade confidential i n t he statutes, t he information i s not subject t 0
inspection by t he pu blic and may be released 0 nly tot hose persons an d entities
designated in the statute. Id. And see AGOs 04-09 and 86-97.
However, a statute restricting release 0 f confidential emergency c all information
does not pr event t he city's at torneys or ot her city 0 fficials w ho are responsible for
advising the city regarding the provision of emergency medical services or for defending
the city against a possible claim arising from such services, from reviewing the records
related t 0 such em ergency calls that c ontain pat ient ex amination or treatment
information. AGO 95-75.
An agency is authorized to take reasonable steps to ensure that confidential records
are not improperly released. Lee County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Company, 634 So. 2d 250, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (county policy requiring the patient's
notarized signature 0 n all release forms for emergency services medical records II not
unreasonable or onerous;" requirement was a valid means of protecting records made
confidential by s. 401.30[4], F .S.). Accord AGO 94-51 (agency "should be vigilant in its
protection of t he confidentiality pr ovided by statute for medical records of [its]
employees"). Cf Florida Department of Revenue v. WHI Limited Partnership, 754 So.
2d 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (administrative law judge [ALJ] not authorized to mandate
that ag ency di sclose confidential records because A LJ is not a judge 0 f a court of
competent jurisdiction f or pur poses 0 f statute permitting di sclosure 0 f confidential
records in response lito an order of a judge of a court of competent j urisdiction"); and
AGO 94-86 ( if custodian 0 f c onfidentiall ibrary circulation records bel ieves that such
records should not be disclosed in response to a subpoena because the subpoena is
not a "proper judicial order" as provided ins. 257.261, F .S., custodian may assert the
confidentiality provisions in amotion to quash the subpoena but should not ignore the
subpoena for production of such records).
b. Exempt records
If records ar e no t made confidential but ar e s imply ex empt from t he mandatory
disclosure requirements ins. 1 19.07(1), F .S., the ag ency i s n ot pr ohibited from
disclosing the documents in all circumstances. See Williams v. City of Minneola, 575
So. 2d 683, 687 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991), in which the
court observed that pursuant to s. 119.07(3)(d), F.S. [now s. 119.071 (2)(c), F.S.], "active
criminal investigative i nformation" was exempt from the requirement that public records
be made available f or publ ic inspection. However, as stated by t he court, II the
exemption does not prohibit the showing of such information. There are many situations
in which investigators haver easons f or di splaying information which they ha ve t he
option not to display." See also AGO 90-50, noting that the exemption from disclosure
for certain information ab out I aw en forcement personnel now s et forth ins .
119.071 (4)(d)1.a., F.S., does not prohibit a police department from posting the names,
I.D. numbers, and photographs of its police officers for public display; however, in light
of t he statutory pur pose 0 f t he ex emption (safety 0 flaw enf orcement 0 fficers), such
posting would appear to be inconsistent with legislative intent. Accord AGO 07-21 (while
statute makes photographs 0 flaw en forcement personnel exempt rather than
confidential, custodian, in deciding whether such information should be disclosed, must
determine whether there is a statutory or substantial policy need for disclosure and in
the absence of a statutory or other legal duty to be accomplished by disclosure, whether
release of such information is consistent with the exemption's purpose).
Once an agency has gone public with information which could have been previously
protected from disclosure under Public Records Act exemptions, no further purpose is
served by preventing full access to the desired information. Downs v. Austin, 522 So. 2d
931,935 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Cf. AGO 01-74 (taxpayer information that is confidential
in the hands of certain specified officers under s. 193.074, F. S., is subject to disclosure
under t he Public Records Act when it has been submitted by a taxpayer to a value
adjustment board as evidence in an assessment dispute).
However, in City of Riviera Beach v. Barfield, 642 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994),
review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1995), the court held that when a criminal justice
agency transfers ex empt criminal investigative information to another criminal justice
agency, the information retains its exempt status. And see Ragsdale v. State, 720 So.
2d 2 03, 206 (Fla. 19 98) (lithe focus i n determining whether a document has lost its
status as a pu blic record must be on t he policy behi nd t he exemption and not 0 n the
simple fact that the information has changed ag ency hands "); Alice P. v. Miami Daily
News, Inc., 440 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 467 So. 2d 697 (Fla.
1985) (confidential birth information contained in license application submitted to state
health ag ency not subject t 0 di sclosure); AGO 0 4-44 ( if the pr ison industry agency
sends exempt proprietary confidential bus iness information tot he Secretary 0 f t he
Department of Corrections in his capacity as a m ember of the board of di rectors of the
prison industry agency, that information does not lose its exempt status by virtue of the
fact that it was sent to the Secretary's office in the department); and AGO 94-77 (work
product exception authorized in former s. 119.07[3][1], F .S. [now s. 119.071 (1 )(d), F .S.],
will be retained if the work product is transferred from the county attorney to the city
attorney pursuant to a substitution of parties to the litigation).
6. Are exempt records discoverable?
An exemption from disclosure under the Public Records A ct does no t render the
document automatically privileged for purposes of discovery under the Florida Rules of
Civil Procedure. Department of Professional Regulation v. Spiva, 478 So. 2d 382 (Fla.
1 st DCA 1985). Cf State, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Kropff,
445 So. 2d 1068, 1069n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) ("Although the Rules of Civil Procedure
and the Public Records Act may overlap in certain areas, they are not coextensive in
scope. ").
For example, in B.B. v. Department of Children and Family Services, 731 So. 2d 30
(Fla. 4t h D CA 1999), t he court ruled t hat as a party t 0 a dependency pr oceeding
involving her daughters, a mother was entitled to discovery of the criminal investigative
records relating to the death of her infant. The court found that the statutory exemption
for active criminal investigative information did not "override the discovery authorized by
the Rules 0 f Juvenile P rocedure." Id. at 34. And see State, Department of Highway
Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Krejci Company Inc., 5 70 So. 2d 132 2 ( Fla. 2 d D CA
1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1991) (records which are exempt from public
inspection may be subject to discovery in a civil action upon a showing of exceptional
circumstances and if the trial court takes all precautions to ensure the confidentiality of
the records). Cf White v. City of Fort Lauderdale, No. 08-60771-CIV, 2009 WL 1298353
(S.D. Fla. May 8, 2009) (defendant in federal lawsuit could not object to interrogatories
on bas is that information w as pr otected a s criminal investigative information since
exemption relates onl y t 0 production 0 f records); Nolan v. Integrated Real Estate
Processing, LP, No.3 :08-cv-642-J-34HTS, 2009 WL 635799 ( M.D. Fla. March 11,
2009) (while Florida statute makes complaint and any information obtained pursuant to
investigation confidential, plaintiffs only ask whether an investigation occurred and, if so,
the date thereof, case nu mber, a nd 0 utcome which is no t pr otected by statute from
being disclosed in discovery). Compare Henderson v. Perez, 835 So. 2d 390, 392 (Fla.
2d DCA 2003) (trial court order compelling sheriff to produce exempt home addresses
and photographs of 1 0 active I aw enforcement officers in a civil lawsuit filed by Perez
predicated on his arrest, quashed because "Perez has not shown that the photographs
and home addresses of the law enforcement officers are essential to the prosecution of
his suit").
However, in some cases, legislative confidentiality requirements provide an express
privilege from discovery. See, e.g., Cruger v. Love, 599 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1992) (records
of medical review committees ar e statutorily pr ivileged from di scovery). See also
Department of Health v. Grinberg, 795 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2001).
G. WHAT ARE THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS RELATING TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY RECORDS?
1. Active criminal investigative and intelligence information exemption
a. Purpose and scope of exemption
Arrest and c rime reports are generally considered to be open to public inspection.
AGOs 9 1-74 a nd 8 0-96. And see AGO 0 8-23 ( officer trip sheets revealing identity 0 f
officer, location and hours of work and locations to which officers have responded for
emergency and no n-emergency pur poses ar e public records). However, s .
119.071(2)(c)1., F .S., ex empts ac tive criminal intelligence information an d ac tive
criminal investigative information from public inspection. To be exempt, the information
must be both II active" and constitute either II criminal i nvestigative" or "criminal
intelligence" information. See Woolling v. Lamar, 764 S o. 2d 765, 768 ( Fla. 5t h DCA
2000), review denied, 786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2001).
Thus, if a crime report contains active criminal investigative information, the criminal
investigative information may be ex cised from the report. AGO 9 1-74. See also Palm
Beach Daily News v. Terlizzese, No. CL-91-3954-AF (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. April 5, 1991),
holding that a newspaper was not entitled under Ch. 119, F .S., to inspect the complete
and uncensored incident report (prepared following a reported sexual battery but prior to
the arrest 0 f a suspect), including t he investigating officer's nar rative report 0 f t he
interview with the victim, since such information was exempt from inspection as active
criminal investigative information a nd as information identifying sexual battery victims.
See s. 119.071 (2)(c) and (h), F.S.
The ac tive criminal investigative and intelligence exemption is limited ins cope; its
purpose is to prevent premature disclosure of information when such disclosure could
impede an 0 ngoing investigation or allow a suspect to av oid a pprehension or escape
detection. See Tribune Company v. Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480, 483 (Fla. 2d DCA
1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune Company, 5 03 S o. 2d 3 27 ( Fla.
1987).
Moreover, t he active criminal investigative and intelligence information exemption
does not prohibit the di sclosure of the information by the criminal justice ag ency; the
information is exempt from and not subject to the mandatory inspection requirements in
s. 119.07(1), F .S., which would otherwise apply. As the court stated in Williams v. City
of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683, 687 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla.
1991), II [t]here are many situations in which investigators have reasons for displaying
information which they have t he opt ion n ot t 0 di splay. II And see AGO 9 0-50. Cf. s .
838.21, F.S., providing that it is unl awful for a publ ic servant, with intent to obs truct,
impede, or prevent a criminal investigation or a criminal prosecution, to disclose active
criminal investigative or intelligence information or t 0 di sclose or us e information
regarding either the efforts to secure or the issuance of a warrant, subpoena, or other
court process or court order relating to a criminal investigation or criminal prosecution
when such information is not available to the general public and is gained by reason of
the public servant's official position.
The law enforcement agency seeking the exemption has the burden of proving that it
is entitled to it. Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1997); and Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128 (Fla.
1 st DCA 1985).
b. What is active criminal investigative or intelligence information?
"Criminal intelligence information" means information concerning II an identifiable
person or group 0 f persons collected by a criminal justice ag ency i n an ef fort t 0
anticipate, prevent, or monitor possible criminal activity. II Section 119.011 (3)(a), F .S.
Criminal intelligence information is considered "active" as long II as it is r elated to
intelligence gathering conducted with a reasonable, good faith belief that it will lead to
detection of ongoing or reasonably anticipated criminal activities" or II is directly related
to pending prosecutions or appeals." Section 119.011 (3)(d), F.S.
"Criminal investigative i nformation" is de fined as information relating t 0 "an
identifiable per son or g roup of persons compiled by a criminal justice ag ency i n t he
course of conducting a criminal investigation of a specific act or omission, including, but
not limited t 0, information der ived from laboratory tests, reports of investigators or
informants, or a nytypeofs urveillance." Section 119.011(3)(b), F .S. See Rose v.
D'Alessandro, 380 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1980) (complaints and affidavits received by a state
attorney in the di scharge of hi s investigatory dut ies constitute criminal intelligence or
criminal investigative information).
Such information i s considered II active" as long II as i tis related t 0 an ong oing
investigation which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of securing
an ar rest or pr osecution in t he foreseeable f uture" or II is di rectly related tope nding
prosecutions or appeals." Section 119.011(3)(d), F.S.
"Criminal justice agency" is def ined to mean any law enf orcement ag ency, court,
prosecutor or any other agency charged by law with criminal law enforcement duties or
any agency having custody of criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information for the purpose of assisting such law enforcement agencies in the conduct
of active criminal investigation or prosecution or for the purpose of litigating civil actions
under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, during the time that such
agencies are in possession of criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information pur suant tot heir c riminall aw enforcement duties. The term al so includes
the Department of Corrections. Section 119.011 (4), F.S.
c. What information is not considered to be criminal investigative or
intelligence information and must be released unless some other
exemption applies?
Section 119.011 (3)(c), F .S., states that the following information is not criminal
investigative or criminal intelligence information:
1. The time, date, location and nature of a reported crime;
2. The name, sex, age, and address of a person arrested (but see s. G.1 0.,
infra, regarding confidentiality of juvenile records) or the name, sex, age
and address of the victim of a crime, except for a victim of a sexual
offense or of child abuse, as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(h), F.S.;
3. The time, date and location of the incident and of the arrest;
4. The crime charged;
5. Documents given or required to be given to the person arrested, except as
provided in s. 119.071 (2)(h), F.S. [providing an exemption from disclosure
for criminal intelligence or investigative information which reveals the
identity of a victim of a sexual offense or of child abuse], unless the court
finds that release of the information prior to trial would be defamatory to
the good name of a victim or witness or jeopardize the safety of such
victim or witness; and would impair the ability of the state attorney to
locate or prosecute a codefendant;
6. Informations and indictments except as provided in s. 905.26, F.S.
[prohibiting disclosure of finding of indictment against a person not in
custody, under recognizance or under arrest].
Accordingly, since the above information does not fall within the definition of criminal
intelligence or criminal investigative information, it is always subject to disclosure unless
some other specific exemption applies. For example, the "time, date, and location of the
incident and of the arrest" cannot be withheld from disclosure since such information is
expressly exempted from t he definitions 0 f criminal intelligence an d criminal
investigative information. See s. 119.011(3)(c)3., F.S.
d. Are records released to the defendant considered to be criminal
investigative or intelligence information?
Except in I imited circumstances, records which have been given or are required to
be given to the person arrested cannot be withheld from public inspection as criminal
investigative or intelligence information. See s. 119.011 (3)(c)5., F .S. In ot her words,
once the material has bee n made available tot he defendant as part 0 f the discovery
process in a criminal proceeding, t he material is ordinarily no longer considered to be
exempt criminal investigative or criminal intelligence information. See Tribune Company
v. Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480,485 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied sub nom.,
Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503 S o. 2 d 327 ( Fla. 19 87) ( all information given or
required t 0 beg iven t 0 defendants i s disclosable tot he public when released t 0
defendants or their counsel pursuant to the rules of discovery). Accord Times Publishing
Company v. State, 903 S o. 2 d 3 22, 32 5 (Fla. 2d D CA 2005) ("we beg in with t he
important general principle that once criminal investigative or intelligence information is
disclosed by the State to a criminal defendant that information becomes a nonexempt
public record subject to disclosure pursuant to section 119.07[1]"); Staton v. McMillan,
597 So. 2d 940, 941 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin,
605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992) (active criminal investigation exemption does not apply to
information for which disclosure was previously required under the rules of discovery).
Cf State v. Buenoano, 7 07 S o. 2d 714 ( Fla. 19 98) ( restricted ac cess documents
provided to state attorney by federal government pursuant to a loan agreement retained
their confidential status under a Florida law pr oviding an ex emption for out -of-state
criminal investigative information that is shared with Florida criminal justice agencies on
a confidential bas is, even though t he doc uments er roneously ha d bee n given tot he
defendant and placed in the court record).
For example, in Satz v. Blankenship, 407 So. 2d 3 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), review
denied, 413 S o. 2d 8 77 (Fla. 1982), the court ruled t hat a newspaper reporter was
entitled to access to tape recordings concerning a de fendant in a criminal prosecution
where the recordings had been disclosed to the defendant. The court concluded that a
reading 0 f the statute reflected the Legislature's bel ief t hat once the information was
released tot he defendant, there was no longer any nee d to ex clude t he information
from t he public. Thus, t he tape recordings were no longer II criminal investigative
information" that could b e withheld from public inspection. See also News-Press
Publishing Co. Inc. v. D'Alessandro, No. 96-2743-CA-RWP (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. April 24,
1996) ( once state al lowed de fense counsel t 0 listen t 0 por tions 0 f a surveillance
audiotape involving a city councilman accused of soliciting undue compensation, those
portions of the audiotape became excluded from the definition of "criminal investigative
information," and were subject to public inspection). Cf City of Miami v. Post-Newsweek
Stations Florida, Inc., 837 So. 2d 1002, 1003 (Fla. 3d D CA 2002), review dismissed,
863 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2003) (where defendant filed request for discovery, but withdrew
request be fore s tate attorney pr ovided such materials, requested materials were not
"given or required by law. . . to be given to the person arrested" and thus did not lose
their exempt status as active criminal investigative information).
Similarly, in Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775 ( Fla. 4t h
DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1986), the court upheld a trial judge's
order requiring the state attorney to release to the news media all information furnished
to the defense counsel in a criminal investigation. While the state attorney argued that
the documents could be withheld because the criminal investigation was s till II active"
and thus exempt from disclosure, the court rejected this contention by concluding that
once t he material w as given tot he defendant pur suant tot he rules 0 f criminal
procedure, t he material w as excluded from t he statutory definition 0 f criminal
investigative information. Therefore, it was no longer relevant whether the investigation
was ac tive or not and t he documents could n ot b e withheld as ac tive criminal
investigative information. Id. at 779n.1.
Chapter 119's requirement 0 f public disclosure 0 f records made available tot he
defendant does n ot violate t he at torney di sciplinary rule pr ohibiting ex trajudicial
comments about defendants as long as the state attorney does not put an interpretation
on the record that prejudices the defendant or exposes witnesses. Bludworth v. Palm
Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d at 780.
The only circumstances where criminal intelligence or investigative information can
retain that status even though it has been made available to the defendant are:
1) If t he information would reveal t he identity of a victim 0 f asexual
offense or child abuse pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(h), F.S.; or
2) If a court or der has been issued finding that release 0 f the information
prior to trial would:
a) be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or jeopardize the
safety of a victim or witness; and
b) impair t he ability 0 f a s tate at torney t 0 locate or pr osecute a
codefendant.
In all other cases, material which has been made available to the defendant cannot
be deemed criminal investigative or intelligence information an d must be open t 0
inspection unless some other exemption applies (e.g., s. 119.071[2][e], F.S., exempting
all information "revealing the substance of a confession" by a person arrested until there
is a final di sposition i n t he case); or t he court or ders closure 0 f t he material i n
accordance with its constitutional authority to take such measures as are necessary to
obtain orderly proceedings and a fair trial or to protect constitutional privacy rights of
third parties. See Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982);
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, 520 S o. 2d 3 2 ( Fla. 198 8); Post-
Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 61 2 So. 2 d 549 (Fla. 1992). And see Morris
Communications Company LLC v. State, 844 So. 2d 671, 673n.3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
(although documents turned over to the defendant during discovery are generally public
records subject t 0 di sclosure und er C h. 119, t he courts have aut hority tom anage
pretrial publicity to pr otect t he defendant's constitutional rights as des cribed in Miami
Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, supra). Cf Times Publishing Co. v. State, 903 So.
2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (while the criminal discovery rules authorize a nonp arty to
file a motion tor estrict di sclosure 0 f di scovery materials bas ed on pr ivacy
considerations, w here no such motion h as been filed, the judge is not authorized to
prevent public access on his or her own initiative).
e. When is criminal investigative and intelligence information considered
inactive and thus no longer exempt from disclosure?
(1) Active criminal investigative information
Criminal investigative information is considered active (and, therefore, exempt from
disclosure pur suant to s. 119.071 [2][c], F.S.) II as long as it is related to an ong oing
investigation which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of securing
an ar rest or pr osecution in t he foreseeable f uture." Section 119. 011(3)(d)2., F .S.
Information in cases barred from prosecution by a statute of limitation is not active. Id.
The definition of "active" requires "a showing in each particular case that an arrest or
prosecution is reasonably anticipated in the foreseeable future." Barfield v. City of Fort
Lauderdale Police Department, 639 So. 2d 1012,1016 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied,
649 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 1994). However, the Legislature did not intend that confidentiality
be limited t 0 investigations where t he out come a nd an ar rest or pr osecution w as a
certainty or even a probability. Id. at 1016-1017.
There is no fixed time I imit for naming suspects or making ar rests ot her than t he
applicable statute 0 f I imitations. See Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey,
478 So. 2d 11 28 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 1985). The fact that investigators might not yet have
decided upon a suspect does not necessarily imply that the investigation is inactive. Id.
at 1131.
Thus, an investigation w ill be deem ed t 0 be II active, II even though there i s no
immediate anticipation of an arrest, so long as the investigation is proceeding in good
faith, and the state attorney or grand jury will reach a determination in the foreseeable
future. Barfield v. City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department, supra. A ccordingly, a
police de partment's criminal investigation into a shooting incident involving its officers
continued to be "active" even though pursuant to department policy, all police shooting
cases were sent tot he s tate at torney's 0 ffice f or review by t he grand j ury and t he
department did not know if there would be an arrest in this particular case. Id.
Similarly, in News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. Sapp, 464 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 2d DCA
1985), the court held that in view of an ongoing investigation by the state attorney and
the convening of a grand jury in the very near future to consider a shooting incident by
deputy sheriffs dur ing an under cover dr ug transaction, doc uments consisting of t he
sheriff's completed internal investigation 0 f t he incident constituted "active criminal
investigative i nformation" and were, therefore, exempt from disclosure. See also Wells
v. Sarasota Herald Tribune Company, Inc., 546 So. 2d 1 105 ( Fla. 2d D CA 1 989)
(investigative files 0 f the sheriff and s tate at torney were not inactive where an ac tive
prosecution beg an shortly after the trial judge det ermined that the investigation was
inactive and ordered that the file be produced for public inspection).
Additionally, a circuit court held that a criminal investigative file involving an alleged
1988 sexual battery which had been inactive for three years, due in part to the death of
the victim from unrelated causes, could be "reactivated" and removed from public view
in 1992 w hen new developments pr ompted t he pol ice tor eopen the case. The court
found that it was irrelevant that t he 19 88 file could have be en inspected pr ior to the
current investigation; the important considerations were that the file apparently had not
been viewed by the public during its "inactive" status and the file was now part of an
active criminal investigation and therefore exempt from di sclosure as ac tive criminal
investigative information. News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. McDougall, N o. 9 2-
1193CA-WCM (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. February 26, 1992).
In an other case, however, t he ap pellate court uph eld a court or der uns ealing an
arrest warrant affidavit upon a showing of good cause by the subject of the affidavit. The
affidavit had been quashed and no formal charges were filed against the subject. The
court hel d that t he affidavit di d not constitute ac tive criminal in vestigative in formation
because there was no reasonable, good faith ant icipation that t he subject would be
arrested or pr osecuted i n t he ne ar future. In ad dition, most 0 f the information w as
already available to the subject through grand jury transcripts, the subject's perjury trial,
or by discovery. Metropolitan Dade County v. San Pedro, 632 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA
1994). And see Mobile Press Register, Inc. v. Witt, 24 Med. L. Rptr. 2336, No. 95-06324
CACE ( 13) (Fla. 17t h C ir. Ct. M ay 21, 1996) (ordering that files in a 1981 uns olved
murder be op ened to t he public because, des pite recent reactivation 0 f t he
investigation, the case had been dormant for many years and no arrest or prosecution
had been initiated or was imminent).
(2) Active criminal intelligence information
In or der t 0 constitute ex empt II active" criminal intelligence information, t he
information must "be of the type that will lead to the 'detection of ongoing or reasonably
anticipated criminal activities. '" Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So.
2d 1365,1367 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), quoting s. 119.011(3)(d)1., F.S. See Barfield v.
Orange County, Florida, No. C192-5913 (Fla. 9t h C ir. C t. August 4, 1 992) ( denying a
petition for writ of mandamus seeking access to gang intelligence files compiled by the
sheriff's office). See also AGO 94-48 (information contained in the statewide integrated
violent crime information system es tablished by t he Florida Department 0 fLaw
Enforcement constitutes active criminal intelligence information; even though some of
the information may have come from closed investigations, the information is collected
to "anticipate, pr event, an d monitor criminal ac tivity and t 0 as sist i n t he conduct 0 f
ongoing criminal investigations").
By contrast, in Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, supra, the court ruled
that records generated in connection with a criminal investigation conducted 13 years
earlier did not constitute "active" criminal intelligence information. The court noted that
the exemption "is not intended to prevent disclosure of criminal files forever on the mere
possibility that other potential criminal defendants may learn something from the files."
Id.
(3) Pending prosecutions or appeals
Criminal in telligence a nd investigative information is al so considered to be "active"
while such information is di rectly related t 0 pen ding pr osecutions or di rect appe als.
Section 119.011 (3)(d), F.S. See News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. Sapp, supra; and
Tal-Mason v. Satz, 614 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 624 So. 2d 269 (Fla.
1993) ( contents 0 f prosecutorial case file must remain secret until t he conclusion of
defendant's direct appeal).
Once t he conviction and sentence have bec ome final, criminal investigative
information can no longer be considered to be "active." State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d 324,
326 (Fla. 1990). Accord Tribune Company v. Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480, 483-484
(Fla. 2d D CA 1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503 So. 2d
327 (Fla. 1987) (actions for postconviction relief following affirmance of the conviction
on di rect appeal ar e not pending appe als f or pur poses 0 f s. 119.011 [3][d]2., F .S.);
Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So. 2d 1365, 1367 (Fla. 4 th DCA
1997) (the term "pending prosecutions or appeals" in s. 119.011[3][d], F.S., applies only
to ongoing prosecutions or appeals which have not yet become final).
It should be emphasized that the determination as to whether investigatory records
related to pending prosecutions or appeals are "active" is relevant only to those records
which constitute criminal intelligence or investigative information. In ot her words, if
records ar e ex cluded from t he definition 0 f criminal intelligence or investigative
information, as in t he case 0 f records given or required to be given tot he defendant
under s. 11 9.011(3)(c)5., F .S., it is immaterial whether t he investigation is active 0 r
inactive. See Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775, 779n.1 (Fla.
4th D CA 19 85), review denied, 48 8 S o. 2d 67 ( Fla. 1 986) ( "Something that is n ot
criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information cannot be ac tive
criminal intelligence information or ac tive criminal investigative i nformation."). Accord
Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940, 941 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 1992), review dismissed sub
nom., Staton v. Austin, 605 S o. 2d 1 266 ( Fla. 1992) (active criminal investigation
exemption does not apply to information for which disclosure was previously required
under discovery rules even though there is a pending direct appeal).
f. Does a criminal defendant's public records request trigger reciprocal
discovery?
Section 119.07(8), F .S., states that the public access rights set forth in s. 119.07,
F.S., "are not intended to expand or limit the provisions of Rule 3.220, Florida Rules of
Criminal Procedure, regarding the rightand extent of discovery by the state orby a
defendant in a criminal prosecution or in collateral postconviction proceedings." Thus, a
criminal de fendant's public records request f or no nexempt I aw enforcement records
relating to the defendant's pending prosecution constitutes an election to participate in
discovery and triggers a reciprocal discovery obligation. Henderson v. State, 745 So. 2d
319 (Fla. 1999).
g. Does the active criminal investigative information exemption apply if the
information has already been made public?
It has been held that t he criminal investigative ex emption does not apply i f t he
information h as al ready been made pu blic. Staton v. McMillan, 597 S o. 2 d 940, 941
(Fla. 1 s t DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin, 605 So. 2d 1 266
(Fla. 1992). See also Downs v. Austin, 522 So. 2d 931,935 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (once
state has gone public with information which could have been previously protected from
disclosure under Public Records A ct exemptions, no further pur pose i s served by
preventing full access to the desired information).
However, t he voluntary di sclosure of a non-public record does not au tomatically
waive the exempt status of other documents. Arbelaez v. State, 775 So. 2d 909, 918
(Fla. 2000). Accord Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-
688CI-07 (Fla. 6 th C ir. C t. February 27, 1997) (release 0 f t he autopsy report and the
medical examiner's public comments about the report did not mean that other records in
the possession of the medical examiner relating to an active criminal investigation into
the death were public; "[i]t is not unusual for law enforcement and criminal investigatory
agencies to selectively release information relating to an ong oing criminal investigation
in an effort to enlist public participation in solving a crime").
h. May active criminal investigative information be shared with another criminal
justice agency without losing its protected status?
Exempt active criminal investigative information may be shared with another criminal
justice agency and retain its protected status; in "determining whether or not to compel
disclosure of active criminal investigative or intelligence information, the primary focus
must be 0 n t he statutory classification of t he information sought rather than upon i n
whose hands the information rests." City of Riviera Beach v. Barfield, 642 So. 2d 1135,
1137 (Fla. 4t h DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1 192 (Fla. 1995). The City of
Riviera Beach court hel d t hat ex empt records 0 f t he West Palm Beach police
department's ac tive criminal investigation concerning a shooting incident involving a
police 0 fficer from Riviera Beach could b e furnished tot he Riviera B each pol ice
department for use in a simultaneous administrative internal affairs investigation of the
officer without losing t heir ex empt status. Accord Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2 d 203,
206 (Fla. 1998) (applicability of a particular exemption is determined by the document
being withheld, not by the identity of the agency possessing the record).
Additionally, a pol ice department may enter into a contract with a pr ivate company
that compiles r aw police da ta and then pr ovides informational reports t 0 I aw
enforcement. The release of the exempt information to the corporation for this purpose
would not cause such records to lose their exempt status. AGO 96-36.
However, while t he courts haver ecognized that ac tive criminal investigative
information m ay be forwarded f rom one criminal justice agency t 0 another without
jeopardizing its exempt status, "[t]here is no statutory exemption from disclosure of an
'ongoing federal prosecution.'" Woolling v. Lamar, 764 S o. 2d 765, 768 (Fla. 5th DCA
2000), review denied, 786 S o. 2d 118 6 (Fla. 2001). In Woolling, the court hel d t hat a
state attorney bore the burden of establishing that state attorney files in a nolle prossed
case which were furnished tot he federal government for pr osecution 0 f a de fendant
constituted active criminal investigative information; the fact that the federal government
was actively prosecuting the case was not sufficient, standing alone, to justify imposition
of the exemption.
i. Do other public records become exempt from disclosure simply because
they are transferred to a criminal justice agency?
The exemption for active criminal intelligence and investigative information does not
exempt other public records from disclosure simply because they are transferred to a
law enforcement agency. See, e.g., Tribune Company v. Cannella, 438 So. 2d 516, 523
(Fla. 2d DCA 1983), reversed on other grounds, 458 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), appeal
dismissed sub nom., Deperte v. Tribune Company, 105 S . Ct. 23 15 ( 1985) (assistant
state attorney could not withdraw public records from public scrutiny by asserting that
he "compiled" the records simply because he subpoenaed them; thus, law enforcement
personnel records compiled and maintained by the employing agency prior to a criminal
investigation did not constitute criminal intelligence or criminal investigative information).
And see New Times, Inc. v. Ross, N o. 92-5795 C IV 25 (Fla. 11 th C ir. C t. March 17,
1992) (papers i n a closed civil forfeiture file which subsequently bec ame par t 0 f a
criminal investigation were open to inspection as the materials could not be considered
criminal investigative information because t he file w as closed prior t 0 the
commencement of the criminal investigation).
Thus, public records maintained and compiled by the Office of the Capital Collateral
Representative cannot be transformed into active criminal investigative information by
merely transferring the records to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE).
AGO 88-25. Accord Inf. Op. to Slye, August 5, 1993, concluding that the contents of an
investigative report compiled by a state ag ency inspector general i n carrying out hi s
duty t 0 determine pr ogram compliance are n ot converted into criminal intelligence
information merely bec ause F DLE al so conducts ani nvestigation or bec ause such
report or a copy thereof has been transferred to that department. And see Sun-Sentinel,
Inc. v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 815 S o. 2d 793 ( Fla. 3d D CA
2002).
Similarly, in A GO 9 2-78, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice concluded that 0 therwise
disclosable public records of a ho using authority are not removed from public scrutiny
merely bec ause records hav e bee n subpoenaed by and transferred t 0 the state
attorney's office. And see Inf. 0 p. to Theobald, November 16, 2006, stating that while
an individual would be prohibited from obtaining records from the internal investigation
file pursuant to s. 112.533(2), F .S., while the investigation is active, public records such
as overtime slips created pr ior tot he investigation and maintained i n t he I aw
enforcement officer's personnel file would not become confidential simply bec ause
copies of such records are being used in the investigation.
However, t he ex emption for ac tive criminal investigative information m ay not b e
subverted by making a pu blic records request for all pu blic records gathered by a law
enforcement agency in the course of an ongoing investigation; to permit such requests
would negate the purpose of the exemption. AGO 01-75.
In addition, a request made by a law enforcement agency to inspect or copy a public
record that is in the custody 0 f ano ther ag ency and t he custodian's response tot he
request, and any information that would identify whether a law enforcement agency has
requested or received that pu blic record ar e ex empt from di sclosure requirements,
during t he period in which t he information constitutes active criminal investigative or
intelligence information. Section 119.071 (2)(c)2.a., F .S. The I aw enforcement ag ency
that made t he request must give not ice tot he custodial ag ency when t he criminal
intelligence information or criminal investigative information is no longer active, so that
the custodian's response to the request and information that would identify the public
record requested are available to the public. Section 119.071(2)(c)2.b., F.S.
Thus, while agency records ar e not ex empt merely bec ause they have been
submitted to F DLE, s. 11 9.071(2)(c)2.a., F .S., exempts FDLE's request to inspect or
copy records, as well as the agency's response, or any information that would identify
the public record that was requested by F DLE or pr ovided by t he agency dur ing the
period in which the information constitutes criminal intelligence or criminal investigative
information that is active. AGO 06-04. Although a request may be made for the agency's
records, such a request may not be phrased, or responded to, in terms of a request for
the specific documents asked for and received by FDLE during the course of any active
criminal investigation. Id. Cf Inf. Op. to Theobald, November 16, 2006, stating that while
the records i n a per sonnel depar tment were subject t 0 di sclosure, t he personnel
department was precluded from identifying which of its records had been gathered by a
law enforcement agency in the course of its active internal investigation.
j. Is an entire report exempt if it contains some active criminal investigative or
intelligence information?
The fact t hat a c rime or incident report m ay contain some ac tive criminal
investigative or intelligence information does not mean that the entire report is exempt
from disclosure. Section 119.07(1)(d), F .S., requires the custodian of the document to
delete only that portion of the record for which an exemption is asserted and to provide
the remainder of the record for examination. See, e.g., City of Riviera Beach v. Barfield,
642 S o. 2 d 1135, 1137 ( Fla. 4t h D CA 1994), review denied, 65 1 So. 2d 1192 ( Fla.
1995), in which t he court hel d t hat a city was aut horized tow ithhold ex empt ac tive
criminal investigative records bu t II must comply with t he di sclosure requirements of
sections 119.07(2) [now s. 119.07(1)(d)] and 119.011(3)(c) by making partial disclosure
of certain non-exempt information contained in the records including, inter alia, the date,
time and location of the incident."
k. When is criminal investigative or intelligence information received from other
states or the federal government exempt from disclosure?
Pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(b), F .S., criminal intelligence or investigative information
received by a Florida criminal justice agency from a non-Florida criminal justice agency
on a confidential or similarly restricted bas is is exempt from di sclosure. See State v.
Wright, 803 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2002)
(state not required to disclose criminal histories of civilian witnesses which it obtained
from the Federal Bureau of I nvestigation). The purpose of this statute is to "encourage
cooperation between non-state and state criminal justice agencies." State v. Buenoano,
707 S o. 2d 7 14, 7 17 (Fla. 1998). Thus, confidential documents furnished to a state
attorney by t he federal government remained exempt from public inspection even
though the documents inadvertently had been given to the defendant and placed in the
court record in violation of the conditions of the federal loan agreement. Id.
I. Is criminal investigative or intelligence information received prior to January
25, 1979, exempt from disclosure?
Criminal intelligence or investigative information 0 btained by a criminal justice
agency pr ior to January 25, 197 9, is ex empt from di sclosure. Section 1 19.071 (2)(a),
F.S. See Satz v. Gore Newspapers Company, 395 So. 2d 1274,1275 (Fla. 4th DCA
1981) ("AII criminal intelligence and criminal investigative information received by a
criminal justice ag ency pr ior t 0 January 2 5, 19 79, i s specifically exempt from t he
requirements of public disclosure.").
2. Autopsy records
a. Autopsy reports
Autopsy reports made by a di strict medical examiner pursuant to Ch. 406, F .S., are
public records and are open to the public for inspection in the absence of an exemption.
AGO 78-23. Cf. Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97 -688CI-
07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27, 1997) (physical specimens relating to an autopsy are
not public records, al though drafts and no tes taken during an autopsy as w ell as
laboratory reports and phot ographs ar e pu blic records). And see Bludworth v. Palm
Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775, 777 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied, 488
So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1986), noting that a former statutory exemption precluding release of
autopsy reports had been repealed.
Although autopsy reports are subject to Ch. 119, F.S., "[d]ocuments or records made
confidential by statute do not lose such status upon receipt by the medical examiner."
AGO 7 8-23. See Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, supra
(predeath medical records in the possession of the medical examiner are not subject to
public inspection). In addi tion, statutory exemptions from di sclosure, such as t he
exemption for active criminal investigative information, may also apply to portions of the
autopsy report itself. AGO 78-23. See Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683 (Fla.
5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991), noting the application of the active
criminal investigative information ex emption t 0 information contained i n au topsy
records.
b. Autopsy photographs and recordings
Section 406.135(2), F.S., provides that a photograph or video or audio recording of
an autopsy held by a medical examiner is confidential and may not be released except
as provided by court order or as otherwise authorized in the exemption. See AGOs 03-
25 a nd 0 1-47, di scussing the circumstances und er which aut opsy phot ographs and
recordings m ay be v iewed or copied. And see Inf. 0 p. t 0 Lynn, July 25, 2007
(exemption applies t 0 phot ographs and recordings taken or made by t he medical
examiner as a par t of t he autopsy process, including t hose taken before, during, and
after t he medical ex aminer per forms t he ac tual au topsy pr ocedure). Cf Campus
Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), review denied,
848 S o. 2 d 1153 ( Fla. 2 003) (upholding trial court finding t hat new spaper f ailed to
establish good cause for release of autopsy photographs of race car driver). Compare
Sarasota Herald- Tribune v. State, 924 So. 2d 8, 14 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), review denied,
918 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 2005), cert. dismissed, 126 S. Ct. 1139 (2006), in which the district
court reversed a trial court order that ha d bar red the media from v iewing aut opsy
photographs that were adm itted into ev idence i nope n court du ring a murder trial;
according to the appellate court, s. 406.135, F .S., "does not render these court exhibits
confidential. II (e.s.)
3. "Baker Act" reports
Part I, Ch. 394, F.S., is the II Baker Act," Florida's mental health act. The Baker Act
provides f or t he v oluntary or involuntary examination a nd treatment 0 f mentally ill
persons. Pursuant to s. 394. 463(2)(a)2., F .S., a I aw enf orcement officer must take a
person w ho appe ars tom eet t he statutory criteria f or involuntary examination into
custody and deliver that person, or have that person delivered, to the nearest receiving
facility for examination.
Section 3 94.463(2)(a)2., F .S., requires t he 0 fficer to" execute a written report
detailing t he circumstances under which t he per son was taken into custody, and t he
report shall be made a part of the patient's clinical record." A patient's clinical record is
confidential. Section 394.4615(1), F.S.
However, in AGO 93-51, the Attorney General's Office noted that a written incident
or event report pr epared a fter a specific crime h as been committed which contains
information given dur ing t he initial reporting of the crime, i s filed with t he I aw
enforcement agency as a record of t hat event, and is not made a part of the pat ient's
clinical record, is not confidential pursuant to Ch. 394, F .S. The opinion noted that the
incident report in question was not the confidential law enforcement report required by
s. 394. 463(2)(a)2., but was a separate written incident or event report prepared by a
deputy sheriff for filing with the sheriff's office as an independent record of the deputy's
actions.
4. Confessions
Section 119.071 (2)(e), F .S., exempts from disclosure any information revealing the
substance of a confession by a person ar rested until such time as the case is finally
determined by adj udication, dismissal, or other final disposition. See Times Publishing
Co. v. Patterson, 451 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (trial court order permitting state
attorney or def endant t 0 des ignate affidavits, depos itions or other papers which
contained "statements or substance 0 f s tatements" t 0 be sealed w as overbroad
because t he or der was not limited tot hose statements revealing t he substance 0 f a
"confession").
In AGO 84-33, the Attorney General's Office advised that only such portions of the
complaint a nd ar rest report i n a criminal case file which reveal the II substance of a
confession," i.e., the material parts of a statement made by a person charged with the
commission 0 f a crime i n which that pe rson ac knowledges gui It of t he es sential
elements of t he ac t or ac ts constituting t he ent ire criminal offense, ar e ex empt from
public disclosure. But see Times Publishing Company v. State, 827 So. 2d 1040, 1 042
(Fla. 2d D CA 2002), in which the appellate court held that a trial judge's order sealing
portions of records of police interviews with the defendant did not constitute a departure
from the essential requirements of law; however, portions of the interview transcript and
tape which did not "directly relate to [the defendant's] participation in the crimes" did not
contain the substance of a confession pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(e), F.S., and must be
released.
5. Confidential informants
Section 1 19.071 (2)(f), F .S., ex empts information disclosing the identity 0 f
confidential informants or sources. This ex emption applies regardless 0 f whether t he
informants or sources ar e still ac tive or may have, through 0 ther sources, been
identified as such. Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So. 2d 1365, 1368
(Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Salcines v. Tampa Television, 454 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984);
and Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 201 0). And see State v.
Natson, 661 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (private citizen who provided police with tip
information which I ed t 0 de fendant's ar rest m ay be afforded confidential informant
status). Cf Doe v. State, 901 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (where citizen provided
information t 0 s tate attorney's 0 ffice which I ed t 0 a criminal investigation an d w as
justified i n inferring or had a reasonable ex pectation that hew ould be treated as a
confidential source, t he citizen is ent itled to have hi s identifying information redacted
from the closed file, even though there was no express assurance of confidentiality by
the state attorney's office); State v. Bartholomew, No. 08-5656CF10A (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct.,
August 7, 2009) (even if Crimestoppers Council of Broward County were an agency for
purposes of Ch. 119, F .S., information relating to the identity of informants and persons
from whom they received information would be confidential under s. 119.071 [2][f], F.S.).
However, in Ocala Star Banner Corporation v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1994), the court held that a police department should not have refused to release
an entire police report on t he ground that t he report contained some information
identifying a confidential informant. According to the court, "[w]ithout much difficulty the
name of the informant, [and] the sex of the informant (which might assist in determining
the identity) . . . can be taken out of the report and the remainder turned over to [the
newspaper]. II Id. at 1197. Accord Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So.
2d at 1368.
Moreover, in City of Sf. Petersburg v. Romine ex reI. Dillinger, 719 So. 2d 1 9, 21
(Fla. 2d D CA 199 8), t he court ruled that information regarding pay ments t 0 a
confidential informant (who ha d been pr eviously identified as a confidential informant
during a criminal trial) is subject to di sclosure as long as the records are sufficiently
redacted t 0 conceal the specific cases on which t he informant worked. The court
acknowledged that the Public Records Act may not be used in such a way as to obtain
information that the Legislature has declared must be exempt from disclosure, but said
that "this is not a situation where someone has alleged that they know or suspect the
identity of a confidential informant and the production of records involving that informant
would confirm the person's information or suspicion. II Id.
6. Criminal history information
a. Criminal history information generally
Except where specific ex emptions apply, criminal hi story information i s a pu blic
record. AGO 77 -125; I nf. 0 p. t 0 Lymn, June 1, 1990. And see AGO 9 7-09 ( a law
enforcement agency may, without a request, release nonexempt information contained
in its public records relating to sexual offenders; the agency's authority to release such
information is not limited to those offenders who are designated as "sexual predators").
Section 943.046, F.S., states:
(1) Any state or local law enforcement agency may release to the public any
criminal history information and other information regarding a criminal
offender, including, but not limited to, public notification by the agency of
the information, unless the information is confidential and exempt [from
disclosure]. However, this section does not contravene any provision of s.
943.053 which relates to the method by which an agency or individual may
obtain a copy of an offender's criminal history record.
(2) A state or local law enforcement agency and its personnel are immune
from civil liability for the release of criminal history information or other
information regarding a criminal offender, as provided by this section.
Section 943.053(2), F .S., referenced in the above statute, provides restrictions on
the di ssemination of criminal history information obtained from federal criminal ju stice
information systems and other states by stating that such information shall n ot b e
disseminated i n a manner inconsistent with t he laws, regulations, or rules 0 f the
originating agency. Thus, criminal history record information shared with a public school
district by the Federal Bureau of Investigation retains its character as a federal record to
which onl y I imited access i s pr ovided by federal I aw and i s not subject top ublic
inspection. AGO 99-01.
Section 943.053(3), F .S., states that criminal hi story information compiled by the
Criminal Justice Information Program 0 f t he Florida Department of Law Enforcement
from intrastate sources shall be provided to law enforcement agencies free of charge
and to persons i n t he pr ivate sector upon payment 0 f fees as pr ovided i n t he
subsection.
b. Sealed and expunged records
Access to criminal history records sealed or expunged by court order in accordance
with s. 943.059 or s. 943.0585, F.S., is strictly limited. See, e.g., Alvarez v. Reno, 587
So. 2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (Goderich, J., specially concurring) (state attorney report
and any other information revealing the existence or contents of sealed records is not a
public record and cannot, under any circumstances, be disclosed to the public).
A I aw enf orcement agency t hat has been or dered t 0 ex punge criminal hi story
information or records should physically des troy or obi iterate information consisting of
identifiable descriptions and notations of arrest, detentions, indictments, informations, or
other formal criminal charges and t he di sposition 0 f those charges. A GO 02 -68.
However, criminal intelligence information and criminal investigative information don ot
fall within the purview ofs. 943.0585, F.S. Id. And see AGO 00-16 (only those records
maintained t 0 formalize t he pe titioner's ar rest, detention, indictment, information, or
other formal criminal charge and t he di sposition thereof would be subject t 0
expungement under s. 943.0585).
There are exceptions allowing disclosure of information relating to the existence of
an ex punged criminal hi story record to specified ent ities for their respective licensing
and employment purposes, and to criminal justice agencies for their respective criminal
justice purposes. Section 9 43.0585(4), F .S. Similar pr ovisions ex ist relative t 0
disclosure 0 f sealed criminal hi story records. Section 94 3.059(4), F .S. A records
custodian who has received information relating tot he ex istence 0 f an ex punged or
sealed criminal history record is prohibited from disclosing the existence of such record.
AGO 94-49.
7. Emergency "911" voice recordings
Section 365.171(12), F.S., provides that any record, recording, or information, or
portions thereof, obtained by a public agency for the purpose of providing services in an
emergency which reveals t he name, address, or telephone n umber or personal
information about, or information which may identify any person requesting emergency
service or reporting an em ergency by accessing an em ergency communications E911
system is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. The exemption applies only to
the name, a ddress, telephone number or per sonal information about or information
which m ay identify any per son requesting em ergency services or reporting an
emergency while such information is in the custody of the public agency or public safety
agency providing emergency services. Id. Accord AGO 90-43 (only that portion of 911
tape relating to name, address and telephone number of the caller exempt).
A tape recording of a "911 II call is a public record which is subject to disclosure after
the deletion of the exempt information. AGO 93-60. This does not, however, preclude
the application 0 f a nother ex emption to such records. Thus, i f the II 911 II calls ar e
received by a law en forcement ag ency and t he county em ergency management
department, information which i s de termined by t he I aw en forcement agency t 0
constitute ac tive criminal investigative information m ay al so be del eted from the tape
prior to pu blic release. AGO 95-48. See also I nf. 0 p. to F ernez, September 22, 1 997
(while pol ice depar tment i s not pr ohibited from ent ering into an ag reement with t he
public t 0 authorize ac cess t 0 i ts radio system, t he de partment must maintain
confidentiality of exempt personal information contained in "911 II radio transmissions).
8. Fingerprint records
Biometric identification information i s ex empt from s . 1 19.07(1), F .S. Section
119.071 (5)(g) 1., F .S. The term II biometric identification i nformation" means any record
of friction ridge detail, fingerprints, palm prints, and footprints. Id.
9. Firearms records
Section 790.335(2), F.S., states that no governmental agency "or any other person,
public or private, shall knowingly and willfully keep or cause to be kept any list, record,
or registry of pr ivately owned firearms or a ny list, record, or registry of t he owners 0 f
those firearms." Exceptions to the prohibition are included in s. 790.335(3), F .S., and
include, among other things, records of firearms used in committing a crime and records
relating to any person who has been convicted of a crime. See also s. 790.065(4), F.S.,
providing that specified information relating to a buyer or transferee of a firearm who is
not prohibited by law from receipt or transfer of a firearm is confidential and may not be
disclosed by the Department of Law Enforcement to any other person or agency. Cf.
AGO 0 4-52 ( prohibition ag ainst maintaining list 0 f firearms a nd firearms ow ners no t
applicable to paper pawn transaction tickets).
Personal identifying information of an individual who has ap plied for or received a
license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm pursuant to s. 790.06, F .S., held by the
Department of A griculture an d Consumer Services i s confidential and ex empt from
public di sclosure requirements. Section 790 .0601 (1), F .S. Such information shall b e
disclosed with t he express written consent 0 f t he a pplicant or I icensee or hi s or her
legally authorized representative, by court order upon a showing of good cause, or upon
request by a I aw en forcement agency i n connection with t he performance 0 f I awful
duties. Section 790.0601 (2), F.S.
10. Juvenile offender records
a. Confidentiality
Juvenile offender records traditionally have been considered confidential and treated
differently from other records in the criminal justice system. With I imited exceptions, s.
985.04(1), F .S., provides, in relevant part, that:
Except as pr ovided ins ubsections (2), (3), (6), and ( 7) and s . 943.053, all
information obtained under this chapter in the discharge of official duty by any
judge, any employee of the court, any authorized agent of the department [of
Juvenile Justice], t he Parole Commission, t he Department 0 f Corrections,
the juvenile justice circuit boards, any law enforcement agent, or any licensed
professional or licensed community agency representative participating in the
assessment or treatment of a juvenile is confidential and may be disclosed
only to the au thorized personnel 0 f t he court, the department an d i ts
designees, the Department 0 f Corrections, t he Parole Commission, la w
enforcement agents, school superintendents a nd their designees, a ny
licensed pr ofessional or licensed community ag ency representative
participating in the assessment or treatment of a juvenile, and others entitled
under this chapter to receive that information, or upon order of the court. (e.s.)
Similarly, s . 985. 04(7)(a), F .S., limits ac cess tor ecords i n t he custody of t he
Department of Juvenile Justice. With the exception of specified persons and agencies,
juvenile records in the custody of that agency "may be inspected only upon order of the
Secretary of Juvenile Justice or hi s or her aut horized ag ent by per sons w ho have
sufficient reason and upon such conditions for their use and disposition as the secretary
or his or her authorized agent deems proper." And see s. 985.045(2), F .S., providing,
with I imited ex ceptions, for confidentiality 0 f juvenile court records. Cf. s. 943 .053(3),
F.S., governing release of "[c]riminal history information, including information relating to
minors" compiled by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement).
Thus, as a general rule, access to records of juvenile offenders is limited. See, e.g.,
Inf. Op. to Galbraith, April 8, 1992 (city's risk manager and attorney representing city in
unrelated c ivill awsuit no t among t hose authorized t 0 have ac cess); and I nf. Op. to
Wierzbicki, April 7, 1992 ( domestic violence c enter no t among t hose authorized t 0
receive juvenile information). And see AGO 0 7-19, stating that i n a juvenile
misdemeanor case where t he provisions of s. 985.04(2), F .S., are not applicable, the
sheriff's office is not authorized to reveal the names and addresses of the parents of the
juvenile offender when asked for in a public records request.
However, t he subject 0 f juvenile 0 ffense records may aut horize access t 0 su ch
records to others (such as a potential employer) by means of a release. AGO 96-65.
And, juvenile confidentiality requirements d 0 not apply to court records 0 f a case in
which a juvenile i s pr osecuted as an adult, regardless 0 f t he sanctions ultimately
imposed in the case. AGO 97-28.
However, if a juvenile pr osecuted as an adult is transferred t 0 serve hi s or her
sentence in the custody of the Department of Juvenile Justice, the department's records
relating to that juvenile are not open to public inspection. New York Times Company v.
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, No. 03-46-CA (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. March 20, 2003).
See s. 98 5.04(7)(a), F.S., pr oviding confidentiality for records in t he custody 0 f t he
department regarding children.
Confidential photographs of juveniles taken in accordance with s. 985.11, F .S, "may
be shown by a I aw enforcement 0 fficer t 0 any v ictim or witness 0 f a c rime for t he
purpose 0 f identifying t he per son who committed such c rime." Section 98 5.11 (1 )(b),
F.S. This statute authorizes a I aw enforcement officer to use photographs of juvenile
offenders i n a photographic I ineup for t he pur pose 0 f identifying t he per petrator 0 f a
crime, regardless of whether those juvenile offenders are suspects in the c rime un der
investigation. AGO 96-80. Cf Barfield v. Orange County, Florida, No. C192-5913 (Fla.
9th C ir. C t. August 4, 1992) (denying pet itioner's request to inspect gang intelligence
files compiled by the sheriff's office).
b. Exceptions to confidentiality
(1) Child traffic violators
All records of child traffic violations shall be kept in the full name of the violator and
shall be 0 pen t 0 inspection a nd publication i n t he same manner as ad ult traffic
violations. Section 985.11 (3), F .S.
(2) Felony arrests and adult system transfers
Until 0 ctober 1, 1994, law enf orcement ag encies generally could release only the
name and address of juveniles 16 and older who had been charged with or convicted of
certain crimes. In 1994, the juvenile confidentiality laws were modified to eliminate the
age restriction and provide enhanced disclosure. Section 985.04(2), F.S., now provides:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the name, photograph,
address, and crime or arrest report of a child:
(a) Taken into custody if the child has been taken into custody by a law
enforcement officer for a violation of law which, if committed by an adult,
would be a felony;
(b) Found by a court to have committed three or more violations of law which,
if committed by an adult, would be misdemeanors;
(c) Transferred to the adult system under s. 985.557, indicted under s.
985.56, or waived under s. 985.556;
(d) Taken into custody by a law enforcement officer for a violation of law
subject to the provisions of s. 985.557(2)(b) or (d); or
(e) Transferred to the adult system but sentenced to the juvenile system
pursuant to s. 985.565 shall not be considered confidential and exempt
from. . . s. 119.07(1) solely because of the child's age.
Thus, a court ruled t hat a surveillance videotape which showed an al tercation
between children on a school bus was a student record and initially was exempt from
disclosure pursuant to former student confidentiality laws. In the Interest of D.P., etc.,
No. 97 -4001 (Fla. 18t h C ir. C t. November 6, 1997). However, some 0 f t he students
were subsequently ar rested on felony charges and t he tape w as shown t 0 defense
counsel. Because of this, the judge ordered that the tape be pu blicly released with the
faces of the non-charged students and the victims excised from view. Id. While current
law exempts "education records" (as defined in F ERPA and implementing regulations),
the court in National Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So. 3d
1201 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010), concluded that
FERPA do es not prohibit t he release of records sol ong as t he student's identifying
information is redacted. See s. J.4., infra, of this manual, discussing changes to student
confidentiality laws.
The expanded di sclosure provisions apply onl y t 0 juvenile records created after
October 1, 19 94, t he effective date 0 f t he am endments to the juvenile confidentiality
laws. AGO 9 5-19. Confidential information on juveniles ar rested prior toO ctober 1 ,
1994, is available by court order upon a showing of good cause. Id. Cf In the Interest of
Gay, No. 94-8481 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. Juv. Div. December 30, 1994), allowing a newspaper
to v iew II the en tire juvenile court files," with t he ex ception 0 f ps ychological reports,
relating to juveniles facing felony charges.
(3) Mandatory notification to schools
Section 985.04(4)(b), F.S., provides that when the state attorney charges a juvenile
with a felony or a del inquent act that would be a felony if committed by an adul t, the
state attorney must notify the superintendent of the juvenile's school that the juvenile
has been charged with such felony or delinquent act. A similar directive applies to a law
enforcement ag ency t hat takes a juvenile into custody for an offense t hat would have
been a felony if committed by an adult, or a crime of violence. Section 985.04(4)(a), F.S.
In addition, s. 1006.08(2), F.S., requires the court, within 48 hours of the finding, to
notify t he ap propriate school superintendent 0 f t he na me a nd address 0 f a student
found t 0 have committed a del inquent ac t, or w ho has ha d an adj udication of a
delinquent act withheld which, if committed by an adult, would be a felony, or the name
and address 0 f a ny student found guilty of a felony. And see s. 9 85.04(4), F .S.,
requiring t he school superintendent, when informed by a s tate at torney 0 f a child
formally charged with a felony or a delinquent act which, if committed by an adult, would
be a felony, to relay such information to certain school personnel within 48 hour s, and
requiring the Department of Juvenile Justice to disclose to the school superintendent
the presence 0 f a juvenile sexual 0 ffender i n t he c are and custody or un der t he
jurisdiction and supervision of the department.
(4) Victim access
Section 985.036(1), F.S., allows t he victim, t he v ictim's parent or guardian, their
lawful representatives, and, in a homicide case, t he nex t 0 f kin, to have ac cess to
information a nd pr oceedings i n a juvenile case, pr ovided that such rights do not
interfere with the constitutional rights of the juvenile offender. Those entitled to access
"may not reveal to any outside party any confidential information obtained under this
subsection regarding a case involving a juvenile of fense, ex cept as i s reasonably
necessary to pursue I egal remedies. II Id. And see ss. 985.04(3) and 960.001 (8), F .S.,
authorizing similar disclosures to victims.
(5) Sexual offenders
Section 985.481 (4), F .S., authorizes the Department of Juvenile Justice or any law
enforcement agency t 0 no tify t he community and t he public 0 f t he pr esence i n the
community of a per son who has be en adj udicated delinquent as pr ovided ins ection
943.0435(1)(a)1.d., F .S. However, with respect to asexual 0 ffender who has be en
found to be a sexual predator under chapter 775, the Department of Law Enforcement
or any other law enforcement agency must inform the community and the pu blic of the
sexual predator's presence in the community as provided in chapter 775. Id. And see s.
985.04(6)(b), F .S., pr oviding sexual offender and pr edator registration information as
required in ss. 775.21, 943.0435,944.606,944.607,985.481, and 985.4815, F.S., is a
public record pursuant to s. 119.07(1), F.S., and as otherwise provided by law.
11. Law enforcement personnel records
In t he absence 0 f an express I egislative ex emption, I aw en forcement per sonnel
records are open to inspection just like those of other public employees. See Tribune
Company v. Cannella, 438 S o. 2 d 5 16, 5 24 ( Fla. 2d D CA 1 983), quashed on other
grounds, 458 So. 2d 1 075 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., Deperte v. Tribune
Company, 105 S .Ct. 2315 ( 1985) (law enf orcement per sonnel records compiled an d
maintained by t he employing ag ency II can never constitute criminal investigative or
intelligence information within t he meaning 0 f t he Public Records A ct even if
subpoenaed by anot her I aw enf orcement a gency at some poi nt after t heir or iginal
compilation by t he employing ag ency"). However, there ar e some exemptions which
apply specifically to law enforcement personnel records.
a. Complaints filed against law enforcement officers
(1) Scope of exemption and duration of confidentiality
Section 112.533(2)(a), F .S., provides that complaints filed against law enforcement
officers and correctional officers, and all information obtained pursuant to the agency's
investigation of the complaint, are confidential until the investigation is no longer active
or until the agency head or his or her designee provides written notice to the officer who
is the subject of the complaint that the agency has concluded the investigation with a
finding t 0 either proceed or no t t 0 pr oceed with di sciplinary ac tion or t he filing 0 f
charges. See also s. 112.531(1), F .S., which defines II law enforcement officer" as any
person, other than a chief of police, who is employed full time by any municipality or the
state or any pol itical subdivision t hereof and whose pr imary responsibility i s t he
prevention an d detection of c rime or t he en forcement of the pe nal, traffic, or hi ghway
laws of this state; and includes any person who is appointed by the sheriff as a deputy
sheriff pursuant to s. 30.07, F.S.
Complaints filed with the employing agency by any person, whether within or outside
the agency, are subject to the exemption. AGO 93-61. However, the complaint must be
in writing i n or der for t he confidentiality pr ovisions t 0 a pply. City of Delray Beach v.
Barfield, 579 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
While s. 112.533, F .S., appl ies to complaints and records obtained pursuant to the
agency's investigation of the complaint, it does not transform otherwise publ ic records
(such as crime or incident reports) into confidential records simply because the actions
which are described in the crime report later form the basis of a complaint filed pursuant
to s. 112.533, F .S. AGO 96-27. Thus, a circuit judge ordered a police department to
provide the media with a copy of an unredacted incident report that identified a police
officer involved in the s hooting of an armed suspect. Morris Publishing Group, LLC v.
Thomason, No. 16-2005-CA-7052-XXXX-MA (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. October 14, 2004). And
see AGO 0 8-33 ( list of I aw enf orcement 0 fficers w ho hav e been pi aced 0 n
administrative duty by their employer is not confidential under s. 112.533[2][a], F .S., but
is subject to inspection a nd copying even if information on the list will identify 0 fficers
who are the subject of internal investigation).
If the officer resigns pr ior tot he agency's completion of i ts investigation, t he
exemption from disclosure provided by s. 112.533(2), F.S., no longer applies, even if
the agency i s still ac tively investigating the complaint. AGO 9 1-73. However, i f the
complaint has generated information which qualifies as ac tive criminal investigative
information, i.e., information compiled by a criminal justice agency while conducting an
ongoing criminal investigation of a specific act, such information would be exempt while
the investigation is continuing with a good faith anticipation 0 f securing an ar rest or
prosecution in the foreseeable future. Id. See s. 112. 533(2)(b), F .S., providing that the
disclosure pr ovisions do not apply t 0 an y publ ic record [ such as ac tive criminal
investigative information exempted ins. 1 19.071 (2)(c), F .S.] which i s exempt from
disclosure pursuant to Ch. 119, F.S.
The exemption is of I imited duration. Section 112.533(2), F .S., establishes that the
complaint and all information gathered in the investigation 0 f that complaint generally
become public records at t he conclusion 0 f t he investigation or at such time as t he
investigation bec omes inactive. AGO 9 5-59. Thus, a court ruled that t he exemption
ended once the sheriff's office provided the accused deputy with a letter stating that the
investigation had be en completed, t he allegations had been sustained, an d that t he
deputy would be notified of the disciplinary action to be taken. Neumann v. Palm Beach
County Police Benevolent Association, 763 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
However, the mere fact that written notice of intervening actions is provided to the
officer under investigation does not signal the e nd of the investigation nor does such
notice make this information public prior to the conclusion of the investigation. AGO 95-
59. Similarly, the exemption remains in effect if an agency schedules a pre-disciplinary
determination meeting with an officer to hear and evaluate the officer's side of the case
because II [d]iscipline is not an ac cepted fact at t his poi nt. II Palm Beach County Police
Benevolent Association v. Neumann, 796 So. 2d 1278, 1280 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).
A complaint is presumed to be inactive, and hence subject to disclosure, if no finding
is made within 45 days after the complaint is filed. Section 112.533(2)(b), F.S. See City
of Delray Beach v. Barfield, 579 So. 2d at 318 (trial court's finding that complaint was
inactive, des pite contrary testimony of I awenf orcement 0 fficers conducting t he
investigation, comes to appellate court "clothed with its own presumption of correctness-
-especially, as here, where there is other record evidence which sustains it").
(2) Law enforcement officer's access
A pol itical subdivision that initiates or receives a complaint ag ainst a I aw
enforcement 0 fficer or correctional 0 fficer must within 5 bus iness day s forward t he
complaint to the employing agency of the officer who is the subject of the complaint for
review or investigation. Section 112 .533(1 )(b), F .S. T he confidential nat ure 0 f t he
complaint does not preclude the officer who is the subject of the complaint, along with
legal counselor other representative, from reviewing the complaint and all statements,
regardless of form, made by the complainant and witnesses, and all existing evidence,
including, bu t n ot limited to, incident reports, an alyses, G PS locator information, a nd
audio or video recordings relating to the investigation immediately before beginning the
investigative interview. Section 112.533(2)(a), F .S. I f a witness is incarcerated i n a
correctional facility and m ay be und er t he supervision of , or have contact with, t he
officer under investigation, onl y t he names and statements of the complainant a nd
non incarcerated witnesses may be reviewed by the officer. Id.
The officer under investigation and subject to interrogation by members of his or her
agency for any reason that could lead to disciplinary action, suspension, demotion, or
dismissal must be informed of the na ture of the investigation before any interrogation
begins and must be informed of the names of all complainants. Section 112.532(1)(d),
F.S. The complaint and all witness statements, including all other existing subject officer
statements, and all other existing evidence, including, but not limited to, incident reports,
GPS locator information, and audio or video recordings relating to the incident under
investigation, must be provided to the officer who is the subject of the complaint before
the beginning of any investigative interview of that officer. Id.
Thus, the officer who is the subject of the complaint may have access to confidential
information pr ior tot he time that such information becomes available for public
inspection. A GO 96 -27. However, s. 112. 533(2)(b) F .S., qualifies the 0 fficer's right 0 f
access provided by s. 112. 533(2)(a), F .S., by stating that the di sclosure provisions do
not apply to a ny record that is exempt from di sclosure under C h. 119, F .S., such as
active criminal investigative information.
The limited ac cess tot he complaint and witness statements pr ovided by s .
112.533(2)(a), F .S., does not restrict t he officer's (or the publ ic's) ac cess toot herwise
public records, such as incident reports because II [t]here is no indication ins ection
112.533 . . . that the Legislature intended to make public records that are open to public
inspection and copying unavailable to a I aw enforcement officer who is the subject of a
complaint under investigation by a law enforcement agency." AGO 96-27.
Moreover, not withstanding t he pr ovisions 0 f s . 11 2.533(2), F .S., if an 0 fficer is
subject to disciplinary ac tion consisting 0 f suspension with loss of pay, de motion, or
dismissal, t he officer, or the 0 fficer's representative, shall, up on request, be provided
with a complete copy of the investigative file, including the final Investigative report and
all evidence, and be given the opportunity to address the findings in the report with the
employing agency before imposing disciplinary action. Section 112.532(4)(b), F .S. liThe
contents of the complaint and investigation shall remain confidential until such time as
the employing law enforcement agency makes a final determination whether or not to
issue a notice of disciplinary action consisting of suspension with loss of pay, demotion,
or dismissal." Id.
(3) Limitations on disclosure
Section 112.533(2)(b), F .S., states that the inspection provisions in that subsection
do not apply to any public record which is exempt from public disclosure under Ch. 119,
F.S. F or ex ample, ac tive criminal investigative or intelligence information which i s
exempt pursuant t 0 s. 119 .071 (2)(c), F .S., remains exempt notwithstanding t he
disclosure pr ovisions set forth ins. 112.533(2)(a), F .S. Palm Beach County Police
Benevolent Association v. Neumann, 796 S o. 2d 12 78 (Fla. 4t h DCA 2001). And see
AGO 91-73. Thus, in such cases, the information would be subject to disclosure when
the criminal investigative information ex emption ends, rather than as pr ovided ins.
112.533(2), F .S. Cf City of Riviera Beach v. Barfield, 642 So. 2 d 1135 (Fla. 4 th DCA
1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1995) (exempt active criminal investigative
information m ay be shared with ano ther criminal justice ag ency f or us e i n a
simultaneous internal affairs investigation and retain its protected status).
Similarly, information that would reveal the identity of the victim of child abuse or the
victim of a sexual offense is not subject to disclosure since the information is exempt
pursuant to s. 119.071 (2)(h), F .S. Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v.
Neumann, supra.
However, the state attorney's records of a closed criminal investigation are not made
confidential by s. 112.533, F.S., even though an internal investigation conducted by the
police department remains pending concerning the same complaint. AGO 00-66. Cf
AGO 96-05, noting that a pol ice report of an agency's criminal investigation of a police
officer is a public record in the hands of the police department after the investigation is
over regardless of whether a copy of t he report is forwarded to the Criminal Justice
Standards and Training Commission or to the Commission on Ethics.
(4) Unauthorized disclosure penalties
Section 112.533(4), F.S., makes it a first degree misdemeanor for any person who is
a participant in an internal investigation tow illfully di sclose any information obt ained
pursuant to the agency's investigation before such information becomes a public record.
However, t he subsection II does not I imit a law enf orcement or correctional 0 fficer's
ability to gain access to information under paragraph (2)(a)." Section 112.533(4), F.S. In
addition, a sheriff, police chief or other head of a law enforcement agency, or his or her
designee, may ac knowledge t he ex istence 0 f a complaint, a nd t he fact t hat an
investigation is underway. Id.
The Attorney General's Office has issued several advisory opinions interpreting this
statute. See, e.g., AGOs 03-60 (while public disclosure of information obtained pursuant
to ani nternal investigation pr ior to i ts becoming a public record i s pr ohibited, s .
112.533[4], F .S., "would not preclude i ntradepartmental communications among those
participating in the investigation"); and 96-18 (statute does not preclude a chief of police
from discussing information obtained from an active internal investigation with his or her
supervisory staff within the police department in carrying out the internal investigation).
Cf AGO 97-62 (confidentiality requirements prevent the participation of a citizens' board
in resolving a complaint made ag ainst a I aw enf orcement 0 fficer unt il t he 0 fficer's
employing ag ency has made its initial findings). But see Cooper v. Dillon, 403 F . 3 d
1208,1218-1219 (11th Cir. 2005), in which the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that
s. 112.533(4), F.S., was unconstitutional "[b]ecause the curtailment of First Amendment
freedoms by Fla. Stat. ch. 112.533(4) is not supported by a compelling state interest,
the statute fails t 0 satisfy strict scrutiny and unc onstitutionally abr idges the rights to
speak, publish, and petition government."
b. Home addresses, telephone numbers, etc.
Section 11 9.071 (4)(d)1.a., F.S., makes exempt ( but not confidential) certain
information relating to past and present law enforcement officers and their families held
by the officer's employer by excluding from public inspection:
The ho me addresses, telephone nu mbers, social security num bers, a nd
photographs 0 f ac tive or former I awenf orcement personnel, including
correctional an d correctional pr obation 0 fficers. . . ; t he hom e addr esses,
telephone numbers, social security nu mbers, ph otographs, a nd places of
employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the names
and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of
such personnel. . . .
The same exemption exists for current or former state attorneys, statewide prosecutors,
as w ell as current a nd former as sistant state attorneys, and assistant statewide
prosecutors. Section 119.071 (4)(d)1.d., F.S. And see s. 119.071 (4)(d)1.i., F.S. (applying
a similar exemption t 0 certain employees of t he Department of Juvenile Justice).
Identification and location information (i.e., home address, telephone n umber an d
photograph 0 f a current or former United States attorney or as sistant United States
attorney and the attorney's spouse or child, as well as the place of employment of the
spouse or child or the name and location of the school or day care facility attended by
the child) is exempt provided the attorney submits to the agency having custody of such
information a written request to exempt such information and a written statement that he
or s he has made reasonable efforts to protect such information from bei ng available to
the public. Section 119.071 (5)(i), F .S.
An ag ency t hat 1st he custodian of per sonal information specified ins .
119.071 (4)(d)1., F.S., but is not the past or present employer of the officer or employee,
may maintain the exempt status of that information only if the officer or employee or the
employing ag ency of t he designated employee submits a written request for
maintenance of the exemption to the custodial ag ency. Section 119.071 (4)(d)2., F .S.
See AGO 04-18 (applying exemption when requested to petitions and campaign papers
filed with supervisor of elections), and AGO 97-67 (Official Records maintained by clerk
of court). A property appr aiser is precluded from making technology available tot he
public that would en able a us er to v iew a m ap 0 n t he Internet showing t he phy sical
location of a law enforcement officer's home, even though the map does not contain the
actual ho me addr ess of t he 0 fficer, if t he property appr aiser has received a written
confidentiality request from the officer. AGO 04-20. And see Inf. Op. to Cook, December
22,2008, noting that nothing In s. 119.071(4)(d) indicates that such a written request
may be made after a request for the public record has been made; generally, the date in
determining whether a document is subject to disclosure is the date the public records
request is made, making the law in effect on that date applicable.
It should also be noted that the exemption afforded by s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S., applies
only to records held by a publ ic agency or a private entity acting on beh alf of a public
agency; i t does not apply to or pr eclude a pr ivate company from releasing such
information unl ess that company falls within t he definition 0 f "Agency" because it is
acting on behalf of a public agency. Inf. Op. to Gomez. November 3, 2008.
The purpose 0 f the s. 119.071 (4)(d) ex emption i s to pr otect t he safety 0 flaw
enforcement officers and their families by removing certain information relating to such
individuals from t he mandatory di sclosure requirements of C h. 11 9, F .S. AGO 90-50.
Accordingly, a posting of the names, I.D. numbers and photographs of police officers in
the hallway of the police department for public display would appear to be counter to the
purpose of the exemption. Id. And see AGO 07-21 stating that a police department, in
determining whether t 0 release ph otographs 0 flaw en forcement personnel, must
determine whether there is a statutory or substantial policy need for disclosure. In the
absence of a statutory or other legal duty to be accomplished by disclosure, the agency
should consider whether the release of such information is consistent with the purpose
oft he ex emption a fforded by s. 119. 071(4)(d)1. Cf s. 843.17, F .S., making ita
misdemeanor t 0 maliciously publ ish or di sseminate, with intent to obs truct t he du e
execution 0 f t he I aw or with t he intent t 0 intimidate, hi nder, or interrupt any I aw
enforcement officer in the legal performance of his or her duties, the residence address
or telephone nu mber 0 f any law enf orcement 0 fficer while des ignating t he 0 fficer a s
such, without authorization of the agency which employs the officer. But see Brayshaw
v. City of Tallahassee, Fla., 709 F. Supp. 2d 1244 (N.D. Fla. 2010), holding that s.
843.17, F.S., was unconstitutional on its face.
The Attorney General's Office has advised that s. 119.071(4)(d)1., F .S., does not
exempt from di sclosure book ing pho tographs 0 flaw enf orcement and correctional
officers who have been arrested and who are not undercover personnel, whose identity
would ot herwise be protected by s. 11 9.071 (4)(c), F .S. AGO 94-90. However, if th e
officer has filed a written request f or confidentiality as pr ovided in former s .
119.07(3)(i)2., F.S. [see now s. 119.071(4)(d)2., F.S.], the booking photograph may not
be released. Fraternal Order of Police, Consolidated Lodge 5-30, Inc. v. The
Consolidated City of Jacksonville, No.2 000-4718-CA (Fla. 4t h C ir. C t. December 21,
2001). And see Sarasota Herald- Tribune Co. v. Sarasota County Sheriff's Office, No.
96-1026-CA-01 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. March 13,1996) (denying newspaper's request for
booking photograph 0 f sheriff's de puty w ho ha d filed a written request for
confidentiality). Thus, in AGO 07-21, the Attorney General's Office stated that in cases
where s. 119.071 (4)(d)8. [see now s. 119.071 (4)(d)2.], F.S., applies and the officer has
filed a written request to maintain the information as exempt, it may be advisable in light
of t he cases cited above too btain t he 0 fficer's per mission before t he release 0 f t he
photograph.
While s. 119 .071 (4)(d)1., F .S., ex empts t he home ad dresses, telephone nu mbers,
social security num bers and photographs from the mandatory disclosure requirements
of the Public Records Act, it does not prohibit the city from maintaining the names and
addresses of its law enforcement officers. AGO 90-50. See also Inf. Op. to Reese, April
25, 1989 (information from the city personnel files which reveals the home addresses of
former law enforcement personnel may be di sclosed to the State Attorney's office for
the purpose of serving criminal witness subpoenas by mail pursuant to s. 48.031, F .S.).
And see Inf. 0 p. t 0 Laquidara, July 17, 2 003, advising that t he cellular telephone
numbers of telephones provided by the agency to law enforcement officers and used in
performing I awen forcement duties ar e not exempt from di sclosure under this
exemption.
Section 1 19.071 (4)( d) 1. a., F. S., does no t c ontain a de fin ition 0 f "Iaw en forcement
personnel. II Thus, the scope of the exemption is not clear. The Attorney General's Office
has noted this problem and has recommended that the Legislature clarify the statute.
AGO 07-21 and Inf. 0 p. to Morgan, September 28, 1992. In the interim, it has be en
suggested that agencies, faced with implementing the provisions ofs. 119.071(4)(d),
F.S., consider utilizing the definition of II law enforcement officer" contained in s. 784.07,
F.S. Id. This statute, which imposes increased penalties for assault and battery on law
enforcement officers, has a purpose similar to that of s. 119.071 (4)(d), in that it seeks to
protect the safety of such individuals. "Law enforcement officer" is defined for purposes
of s. 784.07(1)(d), F.S., to include:
[A] I aw enf orcement officer, a correctional 0 fficer, a correctional pr obation
officer, a part-time law enforcement officer, a part-time correctional officer, an
auxiliary I aw en forcement 0 fficer, and a n aux iliary correctional 0 fficer, as
those terms are respectively defined ins. 943.10, and any county probation
officer; an employee or ag ent 0 f t he Department 0 f Corrections w ho
supervises or pr ovides services t 0 inmates; an officer 0 f t he Parole
Commission; . . . and law enf orcement personnel 0 f t he F ish a nd Wildlife
Conservation Commission, t he Department of Environmental Protection, or
the Department of Law Enforcement.
c. Polygraph records
The Attorney General's Office is not aware of any statutory provision barring access
to ot herwise publ ic records, simply bec ause the records ar e in the form 0 f polygraph
charts. See, e.g., Wisner v. City of Tampa Police Department, 601 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1992) (polygraph materials resulting from polygraph examination that citizen took
in connection with a closed internal affairs investigation were public records); an d
Downs v. Austin, 52 2 S o. 2d 931 ( Fla. 1 s t D CA 1988) (because state ha d al ready
publicly disclosed the results of polygraph tests administered to defendant's accomplice,
the tests were no t ex empt criminal investigative or intelligence information and were
subject to disclosure to the defendant).
However, a circuit court has noted that t he ex emption from di sclosure found ins.
119.071 (1 )(a), F .S., for em ployment examination questions and answers could exempt
some information contained in pre-employment polygraph records. See Gillum v. Times
Publishing Company, No. 91 -2689-CA ( Fla. 6t h C ir. C t. July 10, 199 1) ( newspaper
entitled to access to employment polygraph records lito the extent such records consist
of polygraph machine graph s trips and ex aminers' test results, including t he bottom
portion of the machine graph denoted 'Findings and Comments' or similar designation;"
however, ag ency could redact "any ex aminee's ac tual answers t 0 questions or
summaries thereof' pursuant to the exemption for em ployment examination questions
and answer sheets that is now found at s. 119.071 [1 ][a], F .S.).
d. Undercover personnel
Section 11 9.071 (4)(c), F .S., provides t hat any information revealing under cover
personnel 0 f a ny criminal justice ag ency is ex empt from publ ic di sclosure. But see
Ocala Star Banner Corporation v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196, 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
(police department should not have refused to release an entire police report containing
some information that could lead t 0 a n undercover person's identity, when, without
much difficulty, the name or initials and identification numbers of the undercover officer
and that 0 fficer's supervisor could be taken ou t 0 f t he report and the remainder
released). Accord Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So. 2d 1365 (Fla.
4th DCA 1997).
12. Motor vehicle records
a. Crash reports
Motor vehicle crash reports are confidential for a period of 60 days after the report is
filed. Section 316 .066(3)(a), F .S. However, such reports m ay be made immediately
available to the parties involved in the crash, their legal representatives, their insurance
companies and ag ents, pr osecutorial a uthorities, law enf orcement ag encies, county
traffic operations, victims services programs, and certain print and broadcast media as
described in the exemption. Section 316.066(3)(b), F.S. The owner of a vehicle involved
in a crash is among those authorized to receive a copy of the crash report immediately.
AGO 01-59.
In a ddition, the statute pr ovides t hat a ny local, s tate, or federal ag ency that i s
authorized t 0 have ac cess t 0 crash reports by any pr ovision 0 flaw s hall be granted
such access in the furtherance of the agency's statutory duties. Section 316.066(3)(c),
F.S. Cf. AGOs 06-11 (fire department that is requesting crash reports in order to seek
reimbursement from the at-fault driver, does not fall within the scope of this provision
authorizing immediate access to the reports), and 09-22 (county not entitled to receive
information contained in crash reports prepared pursuant to s. 316.066, F .S., based on
its motor vehicle accident cost recovery fee ordinance).
liAs a condition precedent to accessing a crash report within 60 days after the date
the report is filed, a person must present a valid driver's license or other photographic
identification, proof of status or identification that demonstrates his or her qualifications
to ac cess that information, a nd file a written sworn statement with t he s tate or local
agency i n pos session 0 f t he information stating that information from a crash report
made confidential a nd ex empt by this section w ill not be us ed f or any commercial
solicitation of accident victims, or knowingly disclosed to any third party for the purpose
of such solicitation, during t he per iod 0 f time that the information remains confidential
and exempt." Section 316. 066(3)(d), F .S. Reports may be released without the sworn
statement to third-party vendors under contract with one or more insurers, but only if the
conditions s et forth in t he statute ar e stated i n the contract. Id. Third-degree felony
penalties ar e es tablished for knowing unau thorized di sclosure or us e of confidential
information in violation of this statute. See s. 316.066(4)(b), (c), and (d), F.S., for more
information.
b. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles records
Section 119 .0712(2)(b), F.S., provides that personal information, including highly
restricted personal information as defined in 18 U .S.C. s. 2725, contained in a motor
vehicle record is confidential pursuant to t he federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act of
1994, 18 U .S.C. ss. 2721 et seq. Such information may be released only as authorized
by that ac t; however, information received pursuant tot hat ac t may not be used for
mass commercial solicitation of clients for litigation against motor vehicle dealers. Id. Cf
Rine v. Imagitas, Inc., 590 F .3d 121 5 ( 11th C ir. 2009) (marketing company that
pursuant t 0 contract with t he state m ailed vehicle registration not ices i n envelopes
containing advertisements a nd solicitations from company's client-advertisers to non-
consenting Florida drivers did not violate Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994).
Emergency contact information contained in a motor vehicle record is confidential
and exempt, and, without the express consent of the person to whom such emergency
contact information applies, m ay onl y be released t 0 I aw enf orcement ag encies for
purposes 0 f contacting t hose listed i n the event 0 f an emergency. Section
119.0712(2)(c)1. and 2., F.S.
The term II motor vehicle r ecord" is defined to mean any record that pertains to a
motor vehicle op erator's per mit, motor vehicle title, motor vehicle registration, or
identification card issued by t he Department 0 f Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
(DHSMV). Section 119.0712(2)(a), F.S. The Attorney General's Office has stated that
while DHSMV motor vehicle records are confidential in the hands of a law enforcement
agency, to the extent information is taken from DHSMV records and used in preparing
other records of t he I aw en forcement a gency or i ts ag ent, t he confidentiality
requirements of s . 1 19.0712(2)(a), F .S., do n ot reach t hose records created by
subsequent users. Thus, a driver's license number that is included in a law enforcement
officer's report is not confidential or exempt from disclosure and copying. AGO 1 0-10.
And see Inf. Op. to Rubin, May 12, 2010, advising that the statute does not act as a bar
against t he town pr oducing copies 0 f no tices 0 f infraction for speed z one violations
issued pursuant to the town's street safety program.
The DHSMV, prior to disclosure of personal information pursuant to s. 119.0712(2),
F.S., or the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. ss. 2721 et seq.,
may require t he requestor t 0 meet certain conditions for t he purposes 0 f obt aining
reasonable as surance concerning t he identity of t he requestor and, tot he ex tent
required, assurance that the use will be onl y as authorized or that the consent of the
person w ho i s t he subject 0 f t he per sonal information has be en obt ained. Section
119.0712(2)(d), F.S. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the making and
filing 0 f a written ap plication ins uch form and containing such information an d
certification requirements as t he department requires. Id. And see s. 31 6.066(3)(a),
F.S., providing limitations on access to crash reports for a period of 60 days after the
report i s filed; a nd s . 32 2.142(4), F .S., restricting ac cess tor eproductions of color
photographic or digital imaged driver's licenses.
13. Pawnbroker records
All records r elating to paw nbroker transactions delivered t 0 appr opriate I aw
enforcement 0 fficials pursuant s . 539 .001, F .S., t he Florida Pawnbroking Act, ar e
confidential a nd ex empt from di sclosure and m ay be us ed onl y f or of ficiall aw
enforcement pur poses. Section 539.003, F .S. However, law enf orcement 0 fficials a re
not prohibited from disclosing the name and address of the pawnbroker, the name and
address 0 f t he conveying customer, or a description 0 f t he paw ned pr operty tot he
alleged owner of pawned property. Id. And see AGO 01-51.
14. Prison and inmate records
In t he abs ence of statutory ex emption, pr ison a nd inmate records ar e subject to
disclosure under the Public Records Act. Cf. Williams v. State, 741 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1999) (order imposing 0 ffender's habitual 0 ffender sentence and documents
showing his qualifying convictions, subject to disclosure under Ch. 119). A discussion of
some 0 f t he exemptions from di sclosure follows; f or a complete I isting of ex emption
summaries, please refer to Appendix D.
Subject to limited exceptions, s. 945.10, F.S., states that the following records and
information held by t he Department 0 f Corrections ar e confidential and ex empt from
public inspection: mental he alth, medical or substance ab use records 0 f inmates;
preplea, pr etrial intervention, presentence or p ostsentence investigative records;
information regarding a person in the federal witness protection program; confidential or
exempt Parole Commission records; information which if released would jeopardize
someone's safety; information concerning a victim's statement and identity; information
which identifies an executioner; an d records t hat are otherwise confidential or exempt
by law. See Bryan v. State, 753 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2000), in which the Florida Supreme
Court upheld the constitutionality of s. 945.10. See also Roberts v. Singletary, No. 96-
603 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. July 28, 1997) (portions of the Department of Corrections Execution
Procedures Manual containing II highly sensitive security i nformation" not subject t 0
disclosure). Cf s. 9 51.27, F.S. (limited disclosure 0 f infectious disease test results,
including HIV testing pursuant to s. 775.0877, F.S., of inmates in county and municipal
detention facilities).
The Public Records Act ap plies t 0 a private corporation which has contracted to
operate an d maintain t he county j ail. Times Publishing Company v. Corrections
Corporation of America, No. 91 -429 C A 0 1 (Fla. 5t h C ir. C t. December 4, 1991), per
curiam affirmed, 611 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). See also Prison Health Services,
Inc. v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 718 S o. 2d 2 04 ( Fla. 2d D CA 19 98),
review denied, 727 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) (records of private company un der contract
with sheriff to provide health care to jail inmates are subject to Ch. 119 just as if they
were maintained by a public agency).
15. Resource inventories and emergency response plans
Section 119.071 (2)(d), F .S., ex empts II [a]ny comprehensive inventory of s tate an d
localla w enforcement resources compiled pursuant t 0 part I , chapter 2 3, a nd any
comprehensive policies or plans compiled by a criminal justice agency pertaining to the
mobilization, deployment, or tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies,
as def ined in s . 2 52.34(3). .. . II See Timoney v. City of Miami Civilian Investigative
Panel, 917 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 3d D CA 2005), in which the court held that a city police
department's 0 perational P Ian prepared in response to intelligence reports warning of
possible violence surrounding an ec onomic summit remained exempt from di sclosure
after the summit ended. The court found that the city planned to use portions of the Plan
for future events a nd t he II language 0 f [ the ex emption] leads u s t 0 bel ieve that t he
legislature intended t 0 keep such security information exempt after ani mmediate
emergency pas ses." Id. at 88 7. And see s. 11 9.071 (3)(a)1., F.S., which includes
"emergency evacuation plans" and "sheltering arrangements" within the definition of a
"security system plan" that is confidential and exempt from public disclosure.
16. Security system information and blueprints
a. Security system information
Information relating to the security systems for property owned by or leased to the
state or a ny 0 fits political subdivisions is confidential and exempt from di sclosure.
Section 281.301, F .S. Exempt information includes al I records, information,
photographs, au dio and visual pr esentations, schematic di agrams, surveys,
recommendations, or consultations or portions thereof relating directly to or revealing
such security systems or information. Id. The exemption extends to information relating
to or revealing t he security systems for pr operty ow ned or I eased by t he s tate or its
political subdivisions, and al so to security information concerning pr ivately ow ned or
leased property which is in the possession of an agency. AGOs 01-75 and 93-86. See
also s. 331.22, F.S. (airport security plans) and s. 311.13, F.S. (seaport security plans).
Section 1 19.071 (3)(a), F .S., pr ovides a similar exemption f rom disclosure f or a
security system plan of a private or public entity that is held by an agency. However, the
information may be disclosed to the property owner or leaseholder as well as to another
state or federal ag ency to prevent, detect, 0 r respond to a n attempted or actual act of
terrorism or for prosecution of such attempts or acts. Id.
The term II security system pi an" includes: records relating di rectly tot he phy sical
security of the facility or revealing security systems; threat assessments conducted by
an ag ency or pr ivate ent ity; threat response pi ans; emergency evacuation pi ans;
sheltering ar rangements; or security manuals. Id. Cf s. 3 81.95, F .S., providing an
exemption for information identifying t he na me, location, pharmaceutical cache,
contents, capacity, eq uipment, physical features, or capabilities of individual medical
facilities, storage facilities, or laboratories es tablished, maintained, or regulated by the
Department 0 f Health as par t of t he s tate's pi an 0 f defense ag ainst terrorism; and s .
395.1056, F .S., pr oviding an ex emption for t hose portions of a comprehensive
emergency management plan that address the response of a pu blic or private hospital
to an act of terrorism.
Sections 281.301 and 119.071 (3)(a), F.S., prohibit public disclosure of the name and
address of applicants f or security system permits, 0 f persons cited for violations 0 f
alarm ordinances, and of individuals who are the subject of law enforcement dispatch
reports for verified or false al arms "because di sclosure would imperil t he safety 0 f
persons and property. II Critical Intervention Services, Inc. v. City of Clearwater, 908 So.
2d 1195, 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Accord AGO 04-28.
b. Blueprints
Section 11 9.071 (3)(b)1., F .S., ex empts building plans, bl ueprints, schematic
drawings, and diagrams of government buildings. Exempt information may be disclosed
to ano ther governmental ent ity, t 0 a licensed pr ofessional per forming work on t he
building, or upon as howing of good cause to a court. Section 119.071(3)(b)3., F .S.
Exempt documents may also be released in orderto comply with competitive bidding
requirements. AGO 02-74. However, the entities or persons receiving such information
must maintain its exempt status. Id. And see s. 119.071(3)(c)1., F .S. (exemption for
building pi ans, blueprints, schematic dr awings and di agrams 0 f various at tractions,
retail, resort, office, and industrial complexes and developments when the records are
held by an agency). The exemption afforded by this statute, however, does not apply to
comprehensive pi ans or site pi ans, or am endments thereto, which ar e submitted for
approval or which have been approved under local land development regulations, local
zoning regulations, or development of regional impact review. Section 119.071 (3)(c)4.,
F.S.
17. Surveillance techniques, procedures or personnel
Information revealing surveillance techniques, pr ocedures or personnel is ex empt
from public inspection pursuant t 0 s .1 19.071(2)(d), F .S. See Rameses, Inc. v.
Demings, 29 S o. 3d 418 ( Fla. 5t h D CA 2010) (disclosure t 0 criminal de fendant 0 f
unredacted undercover police surveillance recordings does not destroy exemption in s.
119.071[2][d], F .S.; therefore, sheriff is only required to provide redacted recording in
response to a public records request); and State v. Bee Line Entertainment Partners
Ltd., No. CIO 0 0-5358, 28M ed.L.Rptr. 2592 ( Fla. 9t h C ir. C t. October 25 , 2 000)
(videotapes created with hi dden camera by I aw enf orcement investigation showing
result 0 f investigative activity b ut that do not reveal confidential surveillance methods
must be released once investigation is no longer active).
18. Victim information
Although s. 119.071(2)(c), F .S., exempts active criminal investigative information
from disclosure, the "name, sex, age, and ad dress of . . . the victim of a c rime, except
as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h)," are specifically excluded from the definition of criminal
investigative or intelligence information. See s. 119.011 (3)( c)2., F .S. Accordingly, victim
information is considered to be public record in the absence of statutory exemption. A
discussion of the exemptions which apply to crime victims generally, and t hose which
apply to the victims of certain crimes, follows. For a di scussion of the exemptions that
apply to records of juvenile offenders, please refer to s. G.1 0, supra.
a. Amount of stolen property
Pursuant to s. 11 9.071 (2)(i), F .S., criminal intelligence or investigative information
that reveals the personal assets of a crime victim, which were not involved in the crime,
is exempt from disclosure. However, the Attorney General's Office has stated that this
exemption does not apply to information relating to the amount of property stolen during
thecommissionofa crime. AGO 82-30. Note, however,thats. 119.071(2)U)1., F.S.,
provides that victims of certain crimes may file a written request to exempt information
revealing their "personal assets. II
b. Commercial solicitation of victims
Section 11 9.105, F .S., pr ovides that police reports ar e pu blic records ex cept as
otherwise made ex empt or confidential and that every person is allowed to ex amine
nonexempt or nonc onfidential pol ice reports. However, a per son w ho comes into
possession 0 f ex empt or confidential information i n pol ice reports m ay not us e that
information for commercial solicitation of the victims or relatives of the victims and may
not knowingly di sclose such information t 0 a third party f or t he pur pose 0 f such
solicitation during the period of time that information remains exempt or confidential. Id.
The statute "does not prohibit the publication of such information to the general public
by any new s media legally ent itled t 0 possess that information or t he use of such
information for a ny ot her data collection 0 r anal ysis pur poses by those entitled t 0
possess that information." Id. A willful and knowing violation of this statute is at hird-
degree felony. Section 1 19.10(2)(b), F .S. And see s. 31 6.650(11), F .S. ( driver
information contained i n a uniform traffic citation s hall not be used for commercial
solicitation purposes); s. 327.301, F .S. (accident reports made by persons involved in
vessel ac cidents may not b e us ed for commercial solicitation pur poses). Cf Los
Angeles Police Department v. United Reporting Publishing Corporation, 120 S.Ct. 483
(1999) ( California statute that imposes conditions on public ac cess t 0 addr esses 0 f
arrestees is no t facially unc onstitutional; t he I aw doe s not a bridge anyone's right t 0
engage in speech but simply regulates access to information in the hands of the police
department).
By contrast, s. 316.066(3)(a), F.S., restricts access to crash reports required by that
section for a per iod of 60 day s after the report is filed. However, such reports may be
made immediately available to the parties involved in the crash and other entities as set
forth in the exemption. Id. For more information about access to crash reports, please
refer to the discussion on that topic in s. G.12(a), supra, in this manual.
c. Documents regarding victims which are received by an agency
Section 11 9.071 (2)U)1., F .S., ex empts from di sclosure a ny doc ument that reveals
the identity, home or employment telephone num ber or address, or personal assets of
the victim of a crime and identifies that person as the victim of a crime, if that document
is received by an ag ency that regularly receives information from or concerning t he
victims of crime. However, this provision is limited to documents received by agencies
which regularly receive information from or concerning victims 0 f crime; it does no t
apply to records generated or made by these agencies. AGO 90-80. Accordingly, this
exemption do es not apply to pol ice reports. Id. Additionally, t he ex emption do es no t
apply to documents revealing the identity of a victim of crime which are contained in a
court file not closed by court order. AGO 90-87.
Section 119.071 (2)U) 1., F .S., also provides that "[a]ny state or federal agency that is
authorized to have access to such documents by any provision of law shall be granted
such access in t he furtherance of such agency's statutory dut ies, notwithstanding this
section." See Inf. Op. toM cCabe, November 27, 1995 (state attorney aut horized to
release materials received during an investigation of a domestic violence incident to a
police department for use in the department's internal affairs investigation).
d. Home or employment address, telephone number, assets
Victims of specified crimes listed in s. 119.071(2)U)1., F.S., are authorized to file a
written request for confidentiality of their addresses, telephone numbers and personal
assets as follows:
Any information not 0 therwise hel d confidential or ex empt [from disclosure]
which reveals t he home or em ployment telephone number, hom e or
employment address, or personal assets of a person who has been the victim
of sexual battery, aggravated child abuse, aggravated stalking, harassment,
aggravated battery, or domestic violence is ex empt [from disclosure] upon
written request by the victim which must include 0 fficial verification t hat an
applicable crime has occurred.
Such information shall c ease to b e ex empt 5 years after t he receipt 0 f t he
written request. (e.s.)
This exemption is not limited t 0 documents received by an ag ency, but ex empts
specified information in records--whether generated or received by--an agency. Thus, a
victim of the enumerated crimes may file a written request and have his or her home or
employment telephone nu mber, home or em ployment ad dress, or per sonal assets,
exempted from the police report of the crime, provided that the request includes official
verification t hat an ap plicable c rime has oc curred as pr ovided in the statute. Criminal
Law Alert, Office of the Attorney General, June 29, 1995. The exemption is limited to the
victim's address, telephone number, or personal assets; it does not apply to the victim's
identity. City of Gainesville v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Company, N o. 96-3425-CA
(Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. October 28, 1996).
The incident report or of fense report for on e 0 f t he listed crimes m ay constitute
"official verification that an applicable crime has occurred." Criminal Law Alert, Office of
the Attorney General, June 29, 1995. In addition, the requirement that the victim make a
written request f or confidentiality appl ies onl y t 0 information not ot herwise hel d
confidential by law; thus, t he ex emption supplements, b ut do es not replace, 0 ther
confidentiality pr ovisions ap plicable t 0 c rime victims. Id. The ex emption applies t 0
records created pr ior to, as well as a fter, the agency's receipt of t he victim's written
request for confidentiality. AGO 96-82.
There is no ex ception to t he provisions of s. 119.071 (2)U) 1., F .S., for copies of the
police report that are sent to domestic violence centers; thus, the victim's address and
telephone n umber must be deleted from the copy of the police report that is sent to a
domestic violence center pursuant to s. 741.29, F.S., if the victim has made a written
request for confidentiality pursuant to s. 119.071 (2)U)1., F.S. AGO 02-50.
e. Information revealing the identity of victims of sex offenses and of child abuse
(1) Law enforcement and prosecution records
Section 119.071 (2)(h)1., F .S., provides a comprehensive exemption from disclosure
for information which would reveal the identity of victims of sexual offenses prohibited in
Chs. 794,796,800,827 or 847, F.S., or of child abuse as proscribed in Ch. 827, F.S.
The exemption includes the II photograph, name, address, or other fact or i nformation"
which would reveal the identity of the victim of these crimes. The exemption applies to
"any criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information or ot her
criminal record, including those portions of court records and court proceedings," which
may reveal the victim's identity. Id.
In addition, the photograph, videotape, or image of any part of the body of a victim of
a sexual offense prohibited under Chs. 794,796, 800,827 or 847, F.S., is confidential
and exempt, regardless of whether the photograph, videotape, or image identifies the
victim . Section 11 9.071 (2) (h) 1 . c., F. S .
Section 1 19.071 (2)U)2., F .S., provides that identifying information in a videotaped
statement 0 f a minor w ho i s alleged t 0 b e or w ho i s a victim of asexual 0 ffense
prohibited in the cited laws which reveals the minor's identity, including, but not limited
to, t he minor's face; t he minor's home, school, church, or employment telephone
number; the minor's home, school, church, or employment address; the name 0 f the
minor's school, church, or pi ace of em ployment; or the personal as sets of t he minor;
and which identifies t he minor as a victim, hel d by a I aw enforcement ag ency, i s
confidential. Access s hall be pr ovided, however, to aut horized governmental ag encies
when necessary to the furtherance of the agency's duties. Id.
Thus, information revealing the identity of victims of child abus e or sexual bat tery
must be deleted from the copy of the report of domestic violence which is sent by a law
enforcement agency to the nearest do mestic v iolence center pursuant to s. 741.29(2),
F.S. AGO 9 2-14. And see Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v.
Neumann, 796 So. 2 d 127 8 (Fla. 4t h 0 CA 2001) , a pplying ex emption to information
identifying a child abus e v ictim which was contained i n files pr epared as par t 0 fan
internal investigation conducted in accordance with s. 112.533, F.S.
However, the identity of a child abuse victim who died from suspected abuse is not
confidential. AGO 90-103.
A public employee or officer having access to the photograph, name, or address of a
person alleged to be a victim of an offense described in Ch. 794 (sexual battery); Ch.
800 (lewdness, indecent exposure); s. 827.03 (child abuse); s. 827.04 (contributing to
delinquency or dependency of a child); or s. 827.071 (sexual performance by a child)
may not willfully and knowingly disclose it to a person not assisting in the investigation
or pr osecution 0 f t he alleged 0 ffense or to any per son ot her than t he de fendant, t he
defendant's at torney, a per son specified in a court or der ent ered by the court hav ing
jurisdiction over t he alleged 0 ffense, too rganizations aut horized tor eceive such
information made exempt by s. 119.071 (2)(h), F .S., or to a rape crisis center or sexual
assault counselor, as defined in s. 90.5035(1)(b), F.S., who will be offering services to
the victim. Section 794.024(1), F .S. A violation 0 f this section constitutes a second
degree misdemeanor. Section 794.024(2), F .S. Cf State v. Globe Communications
Corporation, 648 So. 2d 110,111 (Fla. 1994) (statute mandating criminal sanctions for
printing, publ ishing or br oadcasting " in a ny instrument 0 f mass communication"
information identifying a victim of a sexual offense, ruled unconstitutional).
An entity or individual w ho communicates t 0 others, pr ior too pen judicial
proceedings, the name, address, or other specific identifying information concerning the
victim of any sexual offense under Ch. 794 or Ch. 800 shall be liable to the victim for all
damages reasonably necessary to compensate the victim for any injuries suffered as a
result of such communication. Section 794.026(1), F .S. The victim, however, may not
maintain a cause of action unless he or she is able to show that such communication
was intentional and was done with reckless disregard for the highly offensive nature of
the publication. Section 794.026(2), F .S. Cf. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 95 S .Ct.
1029 (1975); a nd Cape Publications, Inc. v. Hitchner, 54 9 S o. 2d 13 74 (Fla. 19 89),
appeal dismissed, 110 S.Ct. 296 (1989).
The Crime Victims' Services Office in the Attorney General's Office is authorized to
receive confidential records from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies. Section
960.05(2)(k), F .S. And see AGO 92-51 (city victim services division, as a governmental
agency which i spar t of t he city's criminal justice system, m ay receive identifying
information ab out victims 0 f s ex 0 ffenses, for t he purpose 0 f ad vising the victim 0 f
available services pur suant to s. 96 0.001, F .S., requiring di stribution 0 f victim support
information).
(2) Court records
The Leg islature intended t 0 make t he identity of a victim 0 f asexual of fense
confidential in court records. AGO 03-56. See s. 119.0714(1)(h), F.S.
Section 92 .56, F .S., pr ovides that criminal intelligence information or criminal
investigative information made confidential pur suant t 0 s . 119 .071 (2)(h) must be
maintained in court records and in court proceedings, including witnesses' testimony. If
a pet ition for ac cess tot hese records is filed with t he trial c ou rt with j u risd iction over
alleged 0 ffense, t he status of the information must be maintained by t he court if t he
state or t he victim demonstrate certain factors as s et forth i n the statute. Section
92.56(1), F.S. A person who willfully and knowingly violates section 92.56, F.S., or any
court or der issued under this section i s subject t 0 contempt proceedings. Section
92.56(6), F .S.
(3) Department of Children and Family Services abuse records
As discussed in s. K. of this manual, there are statutory exemptions set forth in Ch.
415, F .S., which relate tor ecords of abuse 0 f v ulnerable adults. Similar provisions
relating to child abuse records are found in Ch. 39, F .S. The Attorney General's Office
has concluded that t he confidentiality pr ovisions in these I aws, i.e., s s. 4 15.107 and
39.202, F .S., apply to records of the Department of Children and Family Services and
do not encompass a I aw enforcement agency's arrest report of persons charged with
criminal child abuse, after the agency has deleted all information which would reveal the
identity of the victim. See AGO 93-54. Accord Inf. Op. to O'Brien, January 18, 1994. Cf
Times Publishing Company v. A.J., 626 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 1993), holding that a sheriff's
incident report 0 f alleged child abus e t hat was forwarded tot he state child welfare
department for investigation pursuant to C h. 415, F .S. 1990 [see now Part II, C h. 39,
F.S., entitled "Reporting Child Abuse"], should not be released. The Court noted that the
department h ad found no probable cause an d that child pr otection statutes
accommodate pr ivacy rights of those involved in these cases II by pr oviding that t he
supposed victims, their families, and t he accused should not be subjected t 0 pu blic
scrutiny at least during the initial stages of an investigation, before probable cause has
been found." Id. at 1315.
Section 39.202(1), an d (2)(b), F .S., authorizes criminal justice agencies to have
access to confidential abuse, abandonment, or neglect records held by the Department
of Children an d Family Services and pr ovides that t he ex emption from di sclosure for
department abuse records al so ap plies to department records an d information in the
possession of the agencies granted access. See Inf. Op. to Russell, October 24, 2001.
f. Relocated victim or witness information
Information held by a I aw enforcement agency, prosecutorial agency, or the Victim
and Witness Protection Review Committee which discloses the identity or location of a
victim or witness who has been identified or certified for protective or relocation services
is confidential and exempt from disclosure. The identity and location of immediate family
members of such v ictims or witnesses ar e also pr otected, as a re relocation sites,
techniques or pr ocedures ut ilized or developed as a result 0 f t he v ictim an d witness
protective services. Section 914.27, F.S.
H. WHAT ARE THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS RELATING TO BIRTH AND
DEATH RECORDS?
A number of exemptions exist for adoption, birth, and death records. For a complete
listing, please refer to Appendix D.
1. Birth and adoption records
Except for bi rth records over 1 00 years old which ar e not un der seal pursuant to
court order, all bi rth records are considered to be confidential documents a nd exempt
from public inspection; such records may be disclosed only as provided by law. Section
382.025(1), F.S.; AGO 74-70. Cf s. 383.51, F.S. (the identity of a parent who leaves a
newborn infant at a hos pital, emergency medical services station, or fire station i n
accordance with s. 383.50, F.S., is confidential).
Adoption records are confidential and may not be disclosed except as provided in s.
63.162, F .S. An u nadopted individual, however, has the right to obtain his or her bi rth
records which include the names of the individual's parents from the hospital in which
he or she was born. Atwell v. Sacred Heart Hospital of Pensacola, 520 So. 2d 30 (Fla.
1988).
In the absence of court order issued for good cause shown, the name and identity of
a birth parent, an adoptive parent, or an adoptee may not be disclosed unless the birth
parent authorizes in writing the release of his or her name; the adoptee, if 18 or older,
authorizes in writing the release of his or her name; or, if the adoptee is less than 18,
written consent is obtained from an adoptive parent to disclose the adoptee's name; or
the adoptive parent authorizes i n writing the release 0 f hi s or her name. Section
63.162(4), F.S. And see s. 63.165(1), F.S. (state adoption registry); and s. 63.0541, F.S.
(putative father registry).
2. Death certificates
Information relating to cause of death in all death and fetal death records, and the
parentage, marital status, and medical information of fetal death records are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., except for health research purposes as approved
by t he 0 epartment of Health. Section 3 82.008(6), F .S. Cf Yeste v. Miami Herald
Publishing Co., 451 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), review denied, 461 So. 2d 115
(Fla. 1984) (med ical certification 0 f t he cause 0 f death i n t he death certificate i s
confidential). And see s. 382.025(2)(a), F .S., pr oviding for the issuance 0 f a certified
copy of a de ath or fetal de ath certificate, ex cluding t he por tion t hat is confidential
pursuant to s. 382.008, F.S., and specifying those persons and governmental agencies
authorized to receive a copy of a death certificate that includes the confidential portions.
All portions of a death certificate cease to be exempt 50 years after the death. Section
382.025(2)(b), F.S.
By contrast, autopsy reports prepared by a district medical examiner pursuant to Ch.
406, F .S., have been held to be subject to public inspection. See Church of Scientology
Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27, 1997);
and AGO 78-23. For more information about autopsy reports, please refer to s. G.2, of
this manual.
I. WHAT ARE THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS RELATING TO HOSPITAL AND
MEDICAL RECORDS?
There are m any exemptions for hospital and m ed ical records. F or a m ore complete
listing, please refer to the exemption summaries contained in Appendix D.
1. Communicable or infectious disease reports
A nu mber of exemptions exist for communicable or infectious disease reports. E.g.,
s. 381.0031(4), F .S. (information submitted in public health reports to Department of
Health is confidential and is to be made public only when necessary to public health); s.
384.29, F.S. (sexually transmissible diseases); s. 466.041(3), F.S. (reports of hepatitis B
carrier status filed by a dentist). See Oca/a Star-Banner v. State, 697 So. 2d 1317 (Fla.
5th DCA 1997) (upholding court order sealing portions of a battery prosecution case file
pertaining to transmission of sexually transmissible diseases to victims due to s. 384.29,
F.S., confidentiality requirements). However, notwithstanding any other provision of law
to t he contrary, t he 0 epartment of Health, t he 0 epartment 0 f Children an d Family
Services, and t he Agency f or Persons with 0 isabilities m ay share confidential
information on any individual who is or has been the subject of a program within the
jurisdiction of eac h ag ency. Sections 38 1.0022 and 40 2.115, F.S. The shared
information remains confidential or exempt as provided by law. Id. See AGO 98-52.
Results 0 f screenings f or sexually transmissible di seases conducted by t he
Department 0 f Health in ac cordance with s . 384.287, F .S., m ay be released onl y to
those persons specified i n t he exemption. Section 384.287(5), F .S. A per son who
receives t he results of a test pursuant tot his section, which results di sclose hu man
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and are otherwise confidential pursuant to law,
shall maintain t he confidentiality 0 f t he information received an d t he identity 0 f t he
person tested as required by s. 381.004, F.S.; violation 0 f this subsection is a first
degree misdemeanor. Section 384.287(6), F.S.
Notification to an emergency medical technician, paramedic or other person that a
patient they treated or transported has an infectious disease must be done in a manner
to pr otect t he confidentiality of patient information a nd s hall no t include the patient's
name. Section 395.1025, F.S.
There are strict confidentiality requirements for test results for H IV infection; such
information may be released only as expressly prescribed by statute. See s. 381.004,
F.S. Any person who violates t he confidentiality provisions of s. 381.004, F .S., and s.
951.27, F .S., is guilty of a first degree misdemeanor. Section 381.004(6)(b), F .S. And
see s. 38 1.004(6)(c), F .S., es tablishing felony penal ties for disclosure i n certain
circumstances. Thus, information received by t he clerk 0 f court indicating t hat a n
individual has complied with an order to be tested for HIV and the attendant test results
"would appear to be confidential and should be maintained in that status." AGO 00-54.
Cf Florida Department of Corrections v. Abril, 969 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 2007) (an entity that
negligently violates a patient's right 0 f confidentiality in di sclosing the results 0 f H IV
testing may be held responsible in a negligence action).
HIV tests performed on persons charged with certain offenses may not be disclosed
to any per son other than the defendant, a nd upo n request, t he v ictim or t he victim's
legal guardian, or if the victim is a minor, the victim's parent or legal guardian, and to
public health agencies pursuant to s. 775.0877, F.S., except as expressly authorized by
law or court or der. If the alleged offender is a juvenile, t he t est results shall al so be
disclosed tot he parent or guardian. Section 96 0.003, F .S. See also s. 9 51.27, F .S.
(limited disclosure of infectious disease test results, including HIV testing pursuant to s.
775.0877, F .S., of inmates in county and municipal detention facilities, as provided in
statute) .
2. Emergency medical services
With limited exceptions, s. 401.30(4), F .S., provides, in relevant part, that "[r]ecords
of em ergency c ails which c ontain pat ient examination or treatment information ar e
confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) and may not be di sclosed
without the consent of the person to whom they pertain." Such records may be released
only i n certain circumstances and onl y tot he persons a nd entities specified i n t he
statute. AGO 86-97. Thus, a city commissioner is not authorized to review records of an
emergency call by the city's fire-rescue department when those records contain patient
examination and treatment information, except with the consent of the patient. AGO 04-
09. See Lee County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 634 So. 2d
250 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), upholding the county's right to require the patient's notarized
signature on al I release forms, t 0 ens ure that these confidential records ar e not
improperly released. And see AGO 09-30 (entire record of emergency call containing
patient ex amination a nd treatment information which ism aintained as required by s .
401.30[1], F.S., is confidential and exempt; reports containing statistical data, required
by t he 0 epartment 0 f Health, ar e pu blic records and must be made available f or
inspection and copying following redaction of any patient-identifying information).
However, s . 401. 30(4), is not v iolated by t he city at torney, or a n at torney und er
contract t 0 the city, and other city 0 fficials hav ing ac cess tot he city fire-rescue
department's records of emergency calls that c ontain patient information when such
access is granted to such individuals in carrying out their official duties to advise and
defend, or assess the liability of, the city in a possible or anticipated claim against the
city ar ising out 0 f t he pr ovision 0 f such c are. AGO 9 5-75. And see AGO 0 8-20 ( s.
401.30[4], F .S., permits emergency medical services transportation licensee to release
records 0 f emergency calls including patient's na me, address, an d pertinent medical
information to I ocall aw enf orcement agency t hat do es n ot pr ovide regulatory or
supervisory responsibility over licensee).
Reports to the Department of Health from service providers that cover statistical data
are publ ic ex cept that t he na mes 0 f patients and ot her pat ient-identifying information
contained ins uch reports are confidential a nd exempt from s. 119.07(1), F .S. Section
401.30(3), F.S.
3. Hospital records
a. Public hospitals
Like ot her governmental ag ency records, publ ic hos pital records ar e subject t 0
disclosure in the absence of a statutory exemption. AGO 72-59. For example, the court
in Tribune Company v. Hardee Memorial Hospital, No. CA 9 1-370 (Fla. 1 Ot h C ir. C t.
August 19, 1 991), hel d t hat a settlement agreement ent ered in a lawsuit ag ainst the
public hospital alleging that the hospital had swapped babies was a public record. The
court hel d that t he agreement w as subject t 0 di sclosure des pite a confidentiality
provision contained within the agreement and claims by the hospital that it constituted
work product.
In recent years, however, an increasing n umber of exemptions have bee n created
for hospital records. A discussion of exemptions follows:
(1) Employee evaluations and personal identification information
Section 39 5.3025(9), F .S., authorizes hos pitals to prescribe the content of limited
access employee records which are not available for disclosure for 5 years after such
designation. Such records ar e limited t 0 evaluations 0 f em ployee per formance,
including records forming the basis for evaluation and subsequent actions. See Times
Publishing Company v. Tampa General Hospital, No. 93-03362 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. May
27, 1993) (s. 395.3025[9] ex emption does not ap ply t 0 I ist of terminated hospital
employees; hos pital or dered to allow new spaper to inspect I ist and per sonnel files of
those persons named in list after "Iimited access" documents have been removed).
Home ad dresses, telephone nu mbers, a nd photographs of certain hospital
employees, as well as specified personal information about the spouses and children of
such employees, are also confidential. See ss. 395.3025(10) and (11), F.S.
All per sonal identifying information contained i n records pr ovided by phy sicians
licensed under Ch. 458 or 459 in response to physician workforce surveys required as a
condition for license renewal and held by the Department of Health is confidential and
exempt, except as otherwise provided. Section s. 458.3193, F.S. (also published as s.
459.0083, F.S.)
(2) Proprietary business records
The following publ ic hos pital records a nd information ar e confidential and exempt
from di sclosure: contracts for managed care ar rangements under which t he pu blic
hospital pr ovides he alth care services and any doc uments directly relating tot he
negotiation, performance, and implementation of such contracts; certain strategic plans;
trade secrets as defined ins. 688 .002; and documents, 0 ffers, and contracts ( not
including managed care contracts) that ar e t he product 0 f negotiations with
nongovernmental entities for the payment of services when such negotiations concern
services that ar e or may reasonably be expected t 0 be provided by t he hospital's
competitors, provided that if the hospital's governing board is required to vote on the
documents. This exemption expires 30 days prior to the date of the meeting when the
vote is scheduled to take place. Section 395.3035(2), F .S. Cf AGO 92-56, concluding
that the exemptions must be strictly construed.
(3) Quality assurance records
Quality assurance or improvement records are generally confidential and not subject
to di sclosure. See, e.g., s. 394.907(7), F .S. ( community m ental health c enters a nd
facilities); s . 397. 419(5) (substance abuse service pr oviders); s. 401. 425(5), F .S.
(emergency medical services); s. 641.55(5)(c), F.S. (health maintenance organizations).
See also s. 395.0193(7), F.S. (records of peer review panels, committees, governing
bodies, or ag ent thereof, of hospitals or ambulatory surgical centers which relate t 0
disciplinary proceedings against staff not subject to s. 119.07[1], F.S.); s. 395.0197(7),
F.S. (adverse incident report submitted to the Agency for Health Care Administration
shall not be available tot he public); s. 395.4025(12), F .S. ( patient c are quality
assurance reports made pursuant to enumerated statutes shall be held confidential by
the Department of Health or its agent); and s. 400.119(1) and (2)(b), F .S. (specified
incident reports an d records of meetings of a risk management and quality as surance
committee of a long-term care facility are confidential). But see Art. X, s. 25, Fla. Const.,
and s . 38 1.028, F .S., aut horizing pat ients to have ac cess to an y records made 0 r
received in the course of business by a hea Ith care facility or provider relating to any
adverse medical incident. And see Florida Hospital Waterman, Inc. v. Buster, supra
(amendment creating A rt. I , s . 25 , Fla. C onst., w as intended t 0 ap ply t 0 ex isting
records).
b. Private hospitals/private organizations operating public hospitals
A private organization leasing the facilities of a public hospital is acting on behalf of a
public agency and thus constitutes an agency subject to open records requirements in
the absence of statutory exemption. See Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-
Journal Corporation, 729 S o. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999). See also s. C .2., 0 f th is manual,
discussing the applicability of the Public Records Act to private organizations providing
services to public agencies.
Section 395.3036, F .S., however, provides that records of a private corporation that
leases a public hospital or ot her publ ic health care facility are confidential a nd exempt
from disclosure when the public lessor complies with the public finance accountability
provisions of s. 155.40(5), F .S., with respect to the transfer of any public funds to the
private lessee and when the private lessee meets at least three of five criteria set forth
in the exemption. See Indian River County Hospital District v. Indian River Memorial
Hospital, Inc., 766 S o. 2 d 2 33 (Fla. 4th DCA 200 0) ( nonprofit corporation I easing
hospital from hospital district is exempt from the open government laws). And see Baker
County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, Inc., 870 S o. 2 d 189 (Fla. 1 s t
DCA 2004) , up holding t he constitutionality of t he ex emption. Cf Memorial Hospita/-
West Volusia, Inc. v. News- Journal Corporation, 927 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
(private corporation that purchased hospital from public hospital authority not subject to
Public Records A ct) an d s . 1 55.40(8), F.S., describing a nd construing t he term
"complete sale" as applied to a purchase of a public hospital by a private entity.
4. Patient records
Patient records ar e generally pr otected from di sclosure. For ex ample, patient
records in hospitals or am bulatory surgical centers licensed und er C h. 395, F .S., are
confidential and may not be disclosed without the consent of the patient, or the patient's
legal representative, except as provided in the statute. Section 395.3025(4), (5), (7) and
(8), F .S. And see s. 400.022(1 )(m), F .S. (nursing home residents' medical and personal
records); s. 400.611 (3), F .S. (hospice); and s. 383.32(3), F .S. (birth centers). See State
v. Johnson, 8 14 S o. 2d 39 0 ( Fla. 200 2) ( state attorney's subpoena p ower under s.
27.04, F .S., cannot 0 verride not ice requirements 0 f s . 3 95.3025(4)(d), F .S., which
provides for disclosure of confidential patient records upon issuance of subpoena and
upon proper notice to the patient or the patient's legal representative). Cf. s. 408.051 (3),
F.S., permitting a health care provider to release or access an identifiable health record
of a pat ient without the patient's consent for use in the treatment of the patient for an
emergency medical condition, as defined ins. 395.002(8), F .S., when t he he alth care
provider i s unabl e t 0 obt ain t he patient's consent or t he consent 0 f t he patient
representative du e tot he patient's condition or t he nature 0 f t he situation requiring
immediate medical attention.
Patient medical records made by health care practitioners may not be furnished to
any person other than the patient, his or her legal representative or other health care
practitioners and providers involved in the patient's c are an d treatment without written
authorization ex cept as pr ovided by ss. 440.13(4)(c) and 4 56.057, F .S. Section
456.057(7)(a), F.S.
The recipient 0 f patient records, i f 0 ther than the pa tient or t he patient's
representative, m ay us e such information 0 nly for t he pur pose provided and m ay not
disclose any information to any other person or entity, unless expressly permitted by the
written consent 0 f the pa tient. See ss. 3 95.3025(7)(hospital patient records) and
456.057(12), F .S. ( health care pr actitioner patient records). Thus, predeath medical
records in the possession of the medical examiner are not subject to public inspection.
Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97 -688CI-07 (Fla. 6th C ir.
Ct. February 27,1997).
Patient clinical records are also protected. See, e.g., s. 393.13(4)(i)1., F.S. (central
client records of persons with developmental di sabilities); s. 394.4615(1), F .S. (clinical
records of persons subject to liThe Baker Act"); s. 397.501(7), F.S. (individuals receiving
services from substance abuse service providers); s. 916.107(8), F .S. (forensic clients).
Such records maintain their confidentiality even when disclosed to another agency such
as t he clerk of t he circuit court. AGO 9 1-10. And see Sarasota Herald- Tribune v.
Department of Children and Families, N o. 2 001-CA-002445 (Fla. 2d C ir. Ct. April 8 ,
2002) (confidentiality 0 f clinical record ism aintained even though 0 epartment of
Children a nd Families m ay have filed por tions of t he records i n court pr oceedings
throughout t he s tate; department has no authority tow aive confidentiality 0 f clinical
records).
Except as provided in the exemption, all personal identifying information, contained
in records relating t 0 an individual's per sonal he alth or el igibility f or heal th-related
services hel d by t he 0 epartment of Health i s confidential an d exempt. Section
119.0712(1), F .S. And see s. 11 9.0713(2), F .S. ( personal identifying information
contained in records relating to a person's health held by local governmental entities for
purposes 0 f det ermining el igibility f or par atransit services under the Americans with
Disabilities Act); and s. 408.7056(14), F.S. (subscriber-identifying information contained
in records held by the subscriber assistance panel, Department of Financial Services, or
state heal th care ag ency). Cf AGO 0 1-69 ( documents submitted tot he statewide
provider and managed care organization claim dispute resolution program pursuant to
s. 408.7057, F.S., found to be subject to disclosure after redaction of patient-identifying
information)
Certain identification and location information of a patient or patient's agent, a health
care practitioner, a dispenser, an employee of the practitioner who is acting on behalf of
and at the direction of the practitioner; a pharmacist, or a pharmacy, that is contained in
Department of Health records under the electronic prescription drug monitoring program
for monitoring the prescribing and di spensing of controlled substances are confidential
and exempt from disclosure. Section 893.0551 (2), F.S.
5. Anatomical gifts donor records
The Agency for Health Care Administration and the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles must jointly contract for the operation of an anatomical gifts donor
registry. Section 765.5155(2), F .S. Information held in the donor registry which identifies
a donor is confidential and exempt but may be disclosed to certain specified individuals
including pr ocurement or ganizations certified by t he A gency for Health Care
Administration and persons engaged in bona fide research. Section 765.51551 (1), F.S.
J. WHAT ARE THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS RELATING TO EDUCATION
RECORDS?
There ar e statutory exemptions which remove some education records from
disclosure. A discussion of exemptions relating to education records follows; for a more
complete listing of exemption summaries, please refer to Appendix D.
1. Direct-support organizations
Several statutes ex empt information identifying donor s t 0 di rect-support
organizations as sociated with ed ucation ag encies. The identity 0 f donors to a direct-
support organization of the Department of Education or of a district school board, and all
information identifying such donors and prospective donors, are confidential and exempt
from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), F .S.; that anonymity is required to be maintained in
the auditor's report. See s. 1001.24(4), F .S. (Department 0 f Education di rect-support
organization); s. 1001.453(4), F.S. (district school board direct-support organization). Cf
267.1736(9)(a), F .S. (direct-support organization a uthorized to assist the University of
Florida regarding historic preservation and education for the City of St. Augustine).
The identity of donors t 0 a university or community college di rect-support
organization who wish to remain anonymous is protected by statute which also requires
that such a nonymity be maintained in t he audi tor's report. Sections 10 04.28(5) a nd
1004.70(6), F .S. And see s. 1 004.71(6), F.S. (statewide community college di rect-
support organization); s. 1009.983(4), F.S. (Florida Prepaid College Board).
In addition, other records of such organizations are made confidential by statute. All
records 0 f university di rect-support or ganizations, ot her than t he auditor's report,
management letter, and any supplemental data requested by the Board of Governors,
the Auditor General, board of trustees, and the Office of Program Policy Analysis and
Government Accountability (OPPAGA) are confidential an d exempt from s. 119.07(1),
F.S. Section 1004.28(5), F .S. And see s. 1001.24(4), F .S. (records of a di rect-support
organization of the Department of Education). However, all records of a di strict school
board di rect-support or ganization, ot her than donor-identifying information, ar e
expressly made subject to Ch. 119, F.S. See s. 1001.453(4), F.S.
Records of community college di rect-support organizations, other than the auditor's
report, any information necessary for the auditor's report, any information related to the
expenditure offunds, and any supplemental data requested by the board of trustees,
the Auditor General, and OPPAGA, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S.
Section 1004.70(6), F.S. See Palm Beach Community College Foundation, Inc. v.
WFTV, 6 11 S o. 2d 588 ( Fla. 4t h 0 CA 1 993) (direct-support organization's ex pense
records are public records subject to deletion of donor-identifying information). Cf AGO
05-27 ( Sunshine L awappl ies t 0 community college di rect-support or ganization as
defined in s. 1004.70, F.S.).
Information received by t he di rect-support or ganization of t he Florida Prepaid
College Program t hat is ot herwise confidential or ex empt shall retain such status an d
any sensitive, per sonal information regarding contract beneficiaries, including their
identities, is exempt from disclosure. Section 1009.983(4), F.S.
2. Education personnel records
In the absence of statutory exemption, personnel records of educators are subject to
public inspection. For example, the judiciary is not authorized to create an exemption for
the home addresses and home telephone numbers of public school system personnel.
United Teachers of Dade v. School Board of Dade County, No. 92-17803 (01) (Fla. 11th
Cir. Ct. Nov. 30, 1992). However, there are anum ber of statutory exemptions which
apply t 0 school per sonnel records. See Florida Department of Education v. NYT
Management Services, Inc., 895 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2005) (federal law does not
authorize new spaper t 0 ob tain social security num bers ins tate teacher certification
database).
a. Public school personnel
Complaints ag ainst a teacher or a dministrator and all information obt ained by t he
Department of Education pursuant to its investigation of the complaint are exempt from
s. 119.07(1), F.S., until the conclusion of the preliminary investigation, the investigation
ceases to b e ac tive, or as 0 therwise pr ovided by s . 10 12.798(6), F .S. Section
1012.796(4), F .S. The complaint a nd material as sembled during t he investigation,
however, m ay be inspected an d copied by t he individual un der investigation or hi s
designee after the investigation is concluded but prior to the determination of probable
cause. Id. Information obtained by the recovery network program within the Department
of Education from a treatment provider which relates t 0 a per son's impairment an d
participation in the program is confidential and ex empt from s. 119.07(1), F .S. Section
1012.798(9), F.S.
Public school system em ployee per sonnel files, I ike those 0 f 0 ther government
employees, are generally open to public inspection, subject to certain exceptions as set
forth ins. 1 012.31 (3), complaint are confidential until the pr eliminary investigation is
either concluded or ceases to be active. Section 1012.31 (3)(a)1., F.S. See AGO 91-75
(while exemption applies when a complaint against a di strict em ployee has been filed
and ani nvestigation ag ainst t hat employee ens ues, it does n ot provide a bas is f or
withholding documents compiled in a general investigation of school departments). And
see AGO 08-24 (names, home addresses, telephone numbers, photographs and places
of employment of spouses of active or former law enforcement personnel exempt under
s. 119 .071 (4)(d)1., F .S., a nd maintained ins chool district records, ar e ex empt from
disclosure an d are not required to be pr ovided to certified bar gaining representative
unders. 447.203[8], F.S.). Cf Johnson v. Deluz, 875 So. 2d 1 ( Fla. 4th DCA2004)
(student identifying information must be redacted from public report of investigation of
school principal).
Employee evaluations pr epared pursuant t 0 cited statutes ar e confidential an d
exempt from disclosure until the end of the school year immediately following the school
year during which the evaluation was made, provided that no evaluations made prior to
July 1,1983, shall be made public. Section 1012.31(3)(a)2., F.S. However, information
obtained from evaluation forms circulated by the local teacher's union to its members
that is provided unsolicited to the superintendent is not exempt under this statute. AGO
94-94. Written comments an d performance memoranda prepared by individual school
board members regarding an appointed superintendent are not exempt from disclosure.
AGO 97-23.
Employee pay roll de duction records a nd medical records ar e confidential and
exempt. Section 1 012.31 (3)(a)4. a nd 5. , F .S. See AGO 0 9-11 (tax information 0 f a
public school system employee is a pay roll ded uction record a nd is confidential a nd
exempt from disclosure pursuant to s. 1 012.31). However, the personnel file is open at
all times t 0 school boar d members, t he superintendent, or t he pr incipal, or their
respective designees in the exercise of their duties, and to law enforcement personnel
in the conduct of a lawful criminal investigation. Section 1012.31 (3)(b) and (c), F.S.
No material derogatory to a public school employee shall be open to inspection until
10 day s after t he employee has been notified as pr escribed by statute. Section
1012.31 (3)(a)3., F .S. While s. 1 012.31 (1 )(b), F .S., prohibits placing anonymous letters
and material i n a n employee's personnel file, t he statute does not pr event a school
board from investigating t he allegations contained in an ano nymous I etter nor does it
permit t he school boa rd t 0 des troy t he an onymous material abs ent compliance with
statutory restrictions on destruction of public records. AGO 87-48.
Criminal history record information shared with a public school district pursuant to s.
231.02, F .S., [now s. 1012.32, F .S.] by the Federal Bureau of Investigation retains its
character as a federal record to which only limited access is provided by federal law and
is not subject to public inspection. AGO 99-01. However, information developed by the
school district from further inquiry into references in the federal criminal history record
information is a pu blic record which should be included in a school district employee's
personnel file. Id.
b. University and community college personnel
Limited-access records maintained by a state university on i ts em ployees ar e
confidential a nd ex empt from s .1 19.07(1), F .S., an d m ay be released 0 nly upon
authorization i n writing f rom the employee or up on court 0 rder. Without such
authorization, access to the records is limited to university personnel as specified in the
statute. Section 1012.91, F.S.
Until July 1, 1995, state universities were authorized to prescribe the content and
custody 0 f lim ited-access records maintained on their employees, pr ovided that such
records were limited to information reflecting evaluations of employee performance. See
Cantanese v. Ceros-Livingston, 599 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), review denied,
613 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1992) (copies of minutes and other documentation indicating votes
on t enure or pr omotion appl ications 0 f university em ployees ar e ex empt); and
Tallahassee Democrat, Inc. v. Florida Board of Regents, 314 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 1 st DCA
1975) (investigative report about university athletic staff held confidential).
In 1995, the law was amended to specify that "Iimited-access records" are limited to:
information reflecting academic evaluations of employee performance that are open to
inspection 0 nly by t he em ployee a nd university officials responsible for supervision of
the employee; records relating t 0 ani nvestigation 0 f employee misconduct which
records ar e confidential unt il t he conclusion 0 f the investigation or t he investigation
ceases to be active as defined in the law; and records maintained for the purpose of any
disciplinary proceeding ag ainst t he em ployee or records maintained for any grievance
proceeding br ought by an employee for en forcement 0 f a collective bar gaining
agreement or contract un til a final decision i s made. For sexual harassment
investigations, por tions 0 f t he records that identify or reasonably could lead t 0 the
identification of t he complainant or a witness al so constitute limited-access records.
Records which comprise t he common core items contained i n t he State University
System Student Assessment of Instruction instrument may not be prescribed as limited-
access records. Section 10 12.91 (4), F .S. These pr ovisions ap ply tor ecords created
after July 1, 1995. Section 1012.91 (5), F.S.
Regarding community college per sonnel, s. 101 2.81, F .S., states that rules of the
State Board 0 f Education shall pr escribe t he content an d custody of limited-access
records maintained by a community college on its employees. Such records "shall be
limited to information reflecting evaluations of employee performance and shall be open
to inspection only by the employee and by officials of the college who are responsible
for supervision 0 f t he em ployee. II The lim ited-access records ar e confidential a nd
exempt and may be released only as authorized in the statute.
3. Examination materials
Testing materials ar e generally ex empt from t he disclosure provisions 0 f s .
119.07(1), F .S. See, e.g., s . 10 08.345(7)(h), F .S. ( tests a nd r elated doc uments
developed tom easure and di agnose student ac hievement 0 f college-level
communication a nd mathematics skills); s . 1012 .56(8)(e), F .S. ( state-developed
educator certification ex amination, developmental materials a nd w orkpapers); s .
1012.56(8)(g), F.S. (examination instruments, including related developmental materials
and w orkpapers, pr epared or ad ministered pur suant t 0 s . 10 12.56, F .S., relating t 0
educator certification); and s. 1008.23, F .S. (examination and assessment instruments,
including developmental materials and workpapers directly related to such instruments,
which are prepared or adm inistered pursuant to cited statutes). Cf Florida Department
of Education v. Cooper, 858 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (Florida Comprehensive
Achievement Test [FCA T] test instruments, consisting of the test booklet and questions,
as di stinguished from t he test score, ar e confidential a nd do not constitute II student
records" which must be provided to student, parent, or guardian upon request). And see
AGO 0 9-35 concluding that student as sessment tests developed by teachers t 0
measure student pr eparedness for college boar d advanced pi acement exams ar e
confidential and exempt from the inspection and copying requirements of Ch. 119, F .S.
Cf s. 1008.24(3)(b), F .S. (identity of a school or postsecondary ed ucational institution,
personally identifiable information 0 f personnel 0 f a school di strict or pos tsecondary
educational institution, or allegations of misconduct obtained or reported in connection
with an investigation of a testing impropriety conducted by the Department of Education
are confidential an d ex empt from di sclosure unt il t he investigation i s concluded or
becomes inactive).
4. Student records
Access to student records is limited by statute. In 2009, the Legislature revised the
state statutes relating to student records to incorporate the federal Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U .S.C. s. 1232g. "Education records" are defined
by FERPA to mean "those records, files, documents, and other materials" (except as
otherwise provided in 20 U .S.C. s. 1 232g[a][4][B]), which contain "information directly
related to a student" and "are maintained by an educational agency or institution or by a
person acting for such agency or institution." (e.s.) 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g(a)(4)(A). And see
34 C.F.R. Part 99 for regulations implementing FERPA.
For educ ation records 0 f students in el ementary and secondary schools, section
1002.22(2), F .S., guarantees students a nd their par ents t he right to have ed ucation
records created, maintained or us ed by pu blic educ ational institutions an d ag encies
protected in accordance with the FERPA, the implementing regulations issued pursuant
to this ac t, and s . 1 002.22, F .S. See s. 100 2.22(1), F .S., defining II Agency" an d
"Institution. II Section 1 002.22, F .S., al so ap plies tor ecords 0 f an y def unct non public
educational institution t hat has deposited its student records with t he di strict school
superintendent in the county where the institution was located. Section 1002.22(5), F.S.
Section 100 2.221, F.S., provides that ed ucation records ar e confidential a nd
prohibits an agency, as defined in s. 1002.22(1)(a), F .S., or a p ublicschool, center,
institution, or other entity that is part of Florida's education system under s. 1000.04(1),
(3), or (4), from releasing a student's education records (as defined in F ERPA a nd
implementing regulations) without the student's or parent's written consent, except as
permitted by FERPA, or to the Auditor General or the Office of Program Policy Analysis
and Government A ccountability, when nec essary f or such ag encies toper form their
official duties and responsibilities. But see s. 1002.221(2)(b), F.S., permitting an agency
to release student education records without the written consent of the student or parent
to parties to an interagency ag reement among the Department of Juvenile Justice, the
school, law enforcement authorities, and other signatory agencies.
Public postsecondary educ ationall nstitutions ar e required to comply with F ERPA
with respect tot he ed ucation records 0 f students. Section 1002.225(2), F .S. Section
1006.52(1), F .S., authorizes a pu blic postsecondary educational institution to prescribe
the content an d custody of records t he institution maintains on i ts students an d
applicants f or ad mission. A student's education records a nd applicant records ar e
confidential and ex empt. Id. A public pos tsecondary educ ational institution may not
release a student's ed ucation records without the written consent of the student except
as per mitted by F ERPA or tot he Auditor General or t he 0 ffice of Program Policy
Analysis and Government Accountability, which ar e nec essary f or such agencies t 0
perform their official duties and responsibilities.
In National Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201
(Fla. 1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010), considered FERPA and
2009 am endments tot he Florida Statutes. Recognizing t hat un der F ERPA a record
"qualifies as an educational record only if it 'directly' relates to a student" and relying on
several federal and out -of-state cases, the court agreed with t he lower court's
conclusion t hat a transcript 0 faN CM hearing and a N CM committee response
pertained to allegations 0 f misconduct by the uni versity at hletic department a nd only
tangentially related to students. Recognizing that federal and several out-of-state courts
have concluded FERPA does not prohibit the release of records so long as the student
identifying information is redacted, the NCAA court also held that the transcript and the
response would n ot be pr otected since the requested records h ad been redacted to
remove student identifying information and thus did not disclose education records. Cf
Inf. 0 p. to S tabins, June 12, 1997 (teacher grade bo oks are not student "records" or
"reports" for purposes of statutory provision establishing that a student or parent had a
right t 0 be shown any II record or report relating t 0 such s tudent"; see now s.
1002.22(2)(a), F .S., stating that students and their parents have the right to inspect and
review the student's education records).
Section 119.071(5)(c), F.S., exempts information that would identify or locate a child,
or the parent or guardian of a child, participating in a government-sponsored recreation
program from s. 119.07, F.S., and Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const.
In AGO 01-64 the Attorney General, in interpreting the former statutes, stated that a
felony complaint/arrest affidavit created and maintained by school police officers for a
juvenile or adul t who is a student in the pu blic schools is a I aw enforcement record
subject t 0 disclosure, pr ovided that ex empt information such as active criminal
investigative information i s del eted pr ior tor elease. See now 20 U. S.C.
1232g(a)(4)(B)(ii) excluding II records maintained by a I aw enf orcement uni t of t he
educational agency or institution that were created by that law enforcement unit for the
purpose of law enforcement" from the definition of "education records. II
5. Charter schools
Section 1002.33(16)(b), F.S., provides that charter schools are subject to the Public
Records A ct an d t he Sunshine Law. The open government laws appl y regardless of
whether t he charter school operates as a public or private ent ity. AGO 9 8-48. The
records a nd meetings 0 f a no t-for-profit corporation granted charter school status ar e
subject to the requirements 0 f C h. 11 9, F .S., a nd s. 2 86.011, F .S., even though the
charter school has not yet op ened its doors to students. A GO 0 1-23. And see AGO
2010-14 (records of team created by charter school tor eview personnel dec isions
subject to Ch. 119, F.S.).
6. School readiness programs
Early learning coalitions (formerly known as school readiness coalitions) created
pursuant to s. 411.01 (5), F .S., are subject to t he open government I aws. AGO 0 1-86.
Individual records of children enrolled in school readiness programs provided under s.
411.01, held by an ea rly learning coalition or the Agency for Workforce I nnovation are
confidential. Section 411. 011, F .S. And see s. 1 002.72, F .S. (records 0 f children
enrolled in the Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Program).
K. WHAT ARE THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS RELATING TO ABUSE
RECORDS?
There ar e confidentiality statutes which ap ply tor ecords 0 f abuse 0 f children or
vulnerable adul ts which ar e received by t he 0 epartment 0 f Children and Family
Services. A di scussion 0 f exemptions relating t 0 abuse records follows; f or a more
complete listing of exemption summaries, please refer to Appendix D.
1. Records of abuse of children and vulnerable adults
a. Confidentiality of abuse records
Generally, reports of abused children or vulnerable adults which are received by the
Department of Children an d Family Services (DCF) are confidential an d exempt from
disclosure, except as expressly provided by statute. See ss. 39.202(1) and 415.107(1),
F.S. (abuse reports confidential).
Thus, a union representative may not attend that portion of an investigatory interview
between t he 0 CF inspector general an d an employee requiring t he di scussion 0 f
information taken from a child abuse investigation that is confidential under s. 39.202,
F.S. AGO 99-42. And see s. 383.412(1)(a), F.S., providing that information that reveals
the identity of the surviving siblings, family members, or others living in the home of a
deceased child who is the subject of review by, and which information is held by, the
State Child A buse Death Review Committee, or a local committee or pan el i s
confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements.
All records and reports of the child protection team of the Department of Health are
confidential and exempt, and shall not be disclosed, except, upon request, to the state
attorney, I aw en forcement, 0 CF, and necessary pr ofessionals in furtherance of t he
treatment or additional evaluative needs of the child, by court order, or to health plan
payors, limited to that information used for insurance reimbursement purposes. Section
39.202(6), F .S. Cf Records of the Children's Advocacy Center of Southwest Florida
Relating to Michele Fontanez, N o. 0 6-DR-001850 ( Fla. 20 th C ir. Ct. June 16, 2006)
(newspaper g ranted access to records of child protection team relating to child in care
of DCF who died from injuries sustained from a sexual battery allegedly committed by
her stepfather because "[a]ccess to the records will allow the public to fully evaluate the
circumstances of [the child's] death").
The following information held by a guardian a d I item ( GAL) is confidential an d
exempt and may not be disclosed except as provided in the exemption: medical, mental
health, substance abuse, child care, education, law enforcement, court, social services,
and financial records; and any other information maintained by a GAL which is identified
as confidential information under Ch. 39, F.S. Section 39.0132(4)(a)2., F.S. And see s.
744.7081, F .S., pr oviding for confidentiality of records held by t he Statewide Public
Guardianship 0 ffice relating tot he medical, financial, or m ental heal th 0 f vulnerable
adults, persons with a developmental di sability, or per sons with a mental illness; s.
744.1076, F .S. (except as provided in the exemption, reports of a court monitor which
relate tot he medical condition, financial a ffairs, or m ental he alth 0 f a ward are
confidential); and s. 744.708(2), F .S. (no disclosure of the personal or medical records
of a ward of a public guardian shall be made, except as authorized by law).
b. Release of abuse records
Section 39.2021(1), F .S., authorizes any person or organization, including DCF, to
petition the court tom ake pu blic 0 CF records relating to its investigation into alleged
abuse, neglect, ex ploitation or ab andonment 0 f a child. The court s hall de termine if
good cause exists for public access to the records and is required to balance the best
interest 0 f the child and the interests 0 f the child's siblings, together with the pr ivacy
rights of other persons identified in the reports against the public interest. Id.
This "balancing process" thus "requires the trial court to weigh the harm to the child
against the benefit to the pu blic that would potentially result from the disclosure of the
records at issue." In re Records of the Department of Children and Family Services, 873
So. 2d 506, 51 3 ( Fla. 2d 0 CA 2004). To perform this f unction, the trial court must
conduct an in camera review because "[i]t is impossible to judge the potential impact of
the disclosure of information contained in records without knowing what that information
is." Id. at 514. But see Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Gainesville
Sun Publishing Company, 582 So. 2 d 725 (Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 1991), holding that the trial
court w as not required t 0 h old a hearing before finding good cause tor elease t he
department's records relating t 0 a child abuse investigation, where shortly af ter t he
department's investigation, the individual who ha d been investigated killed t he victim,
the victim's family, and himself.
In cases involving serious bodily injury to a child, 0 CF may pe tition the court for
immediate pu blic release 0 f records pertaining tot he pr otective investigation. Section
39.2021(2), F .S. The court has 24 hours to determine if good cause exists for public
release of the records. If no action is taken by the court in that time, DCF may, subject
to specified exceptions, release summary information including a confirmation that an
investigation has been conducted concerning t he victim, t he dat es and a br ief
description of pr ocedural ac tivities under taken i n t he investigation, a nd information
concerning judicial proceedings. Id.
Similar pr ocedures ar e es tablished i n C h. 415, F .S., for ac cess toO CF records
relating to investigations of alleged abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult.
See s. 415.1071, F.S.
The petitioner seeking pu blic ac cess tot he records must formally serve 0 CF with
the petition. Florida Department of Children and Families v. Sun-Sentinel, 865 So. 2d
1278 (Fla. 2004). A livery narrow" exception to the home venue privilege applies when a
petition is filed seeking to make DCF records public. See Sun-Sentinel, supra at 1289,
adopting the exception in cases "where a party petitions the court for an order to gain
access to public records, an d where t he records s ought are by law confidential and
cannot be made public without a determination by the court, pursuant tot he petition,
that good cause exists for public access."
Section 39 .202(2)(0), F.S., pr ovides t hat access to child ab use records s hall be
granted to any person in the event of the child's death due to abuse, abandonment, or
neglect. However, any information identifying t he per son reporting abus e,
abandonment, or neg lect, or any information that i s ot herwise made confidential or
exempt by law shall not be released. Id. Section 415.107(3)(1), F.S., provides for similar
release of records in the event of the death of a vulnerable adult. And see s. 39.202(4),
F.S., authorizing DCF and the investigating law enforcement agency to release certain
identifying information tot he public i n or der to help locate or protect a missing child
under investigation or supervision of the department or its contracted service providers.
c. Licensure and quality assurance records
Records relating to licensure of foster homes, or assessing how the Department of
Children and Family Services is carrying out its duties, including references to incidents
of a buse, a bandonment, or neglect, contained ins uch records, d 0 no t fall within t he
parameters 0 f s . 3 9.202, F .S. AGO 0 1-54. Such reports are in t he nature 0 f quality
assurance reports that do not substitute for the protective investigation of child abuse,
abandonment, or ne glect; tot he ex tent that such incident reports reference an
occurrence of a buse, abandonment, or neg lect, identifying information t hat reveals the
identity 0 f the victim contained i n the reference should be redacted. Id. Cf s.
409.175(16), F .S., pr oviding an exemption f or certain personal information ab out
licensed foster parents, foster parent appl icants, a nd their families. And see Boyles v.
Mid-Florida Television Corp., 431 So. 2d 627,637 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), approved, 467
So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1985) (summary report compiled during a I icensing investigation of a
residential facility for developmentally disabled persons, subject to disclosure pursuant
to statute [now found at s. 393.067(9), F .S.] pr oviding f or public access to inspection
reports of such facilities).
2. Domestic violence
Information abo ut clients received by t he 0 epartment 0 f Children an d Family
Services or by authorized persons employed by or volunteering services to a dom estic
violence center, through files, reports, inspection or ot herwise, i s confidential and
exempt from disclosure except as provided by statute. Section 39.908, F .S. Information
about the location of domestic violence centers and facilities is also confidential. Id.
A pet itioner seeking an injunction for pr otection against domestic violence m ay
furnish the petitioner's address to the court in a separate confidential filing for safety
reasons. Section 7 41.30(3)(b), F .S. See also s. 119.071 (2)U) 1., F .S. (domestic violence
victim m ay file written request, ac companied by official verification t hat a crime ha s
occurred, t 0 have hi s or her home or employment address, home or em ployment
telephone n umber, or per sonal assets ex empt from di sclosure); and s. 787.03(6)(c),
F.S. ( current a ddress an d telephone number 0 f t he person taking t he minor or
incompetent person when fleeing from domestic violence and t he current address and
telephone number of the minor or incompetent person which are contained in the report
made to a sheriff or s tate a ttorney under s. 787. 03[6][b], F .S., are confidential a nd
exempt from disclosure).
Personal identifying information contained i n records documenting an ac t 0 f
domestic v iolence that is submitted to a n ag ency by an ag ency employee seeking to
take I eave un der t he requirements of s .7 41.313, F .S., is confidential an d exempt.
Section 741.313(7), F.S. A written request for leave submitted by an agency employee
and any ag ency time sheet reflecting such request are confidential and ex empt until 1
year after the leave has been taken. Id.
The addresses, telephone numbers, and social security numbers of participants in
the Address Confidentiality Program for Victims 0 f Domestic Violence ( program) ar e
exempt from disclosure, except as provided in the exemption. Section 741.465(1), F .S.
A similar exemption is provided for the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of
program par ticipants contained i n voter registration and voting records. Section
741.465(2), F .S. Cf s. 97. 0585, F .S., pr oviding that t he names, addr esses, a nd
telephone nu mbers 0 f s talking or ag gravated s talking victims are exempt from
disclosure i n t he same manner as ar e par ticipants i n t he A ddress Confidentiality
Program f or V ictims of Domestic V iolence which ar e hel d by t he Attorney General,
provided that the victim files a sworn statement of stalking with the Attorney General's
Office and otherwise complies with the procedures in ss. 741.401-741.409, F.S.
Any information in a record created by a domestic violence fatality review team that
reveals the identity of a domestic violence victim or the identity of the victim's children is
confidential and exempt from disclosure. Section 741.3165, F.S.
For information regarding the status of abuse records compiled by law enforcement
agencies in the course of a criminal investigation, please refer to the discussion ins.
G.18.e., supra, relating to victim information contained in crime reports.
L. TO WHAT EXTENT DOES FEDERAL LAW PREEMPT STATE LAW REGARDING
PUBLIC INSPECTION OF RECORDS?
1. Under what circumstances will a federal statute operate to make agency
records confidential?
The general rule is that records which would otherwise be public under state law are
unavailable for public inspection only when there is an absolute conflict between federal
and state law relating to confidentiality of records. If a federal statute requires particular
records to be closed and the state is clearly subject to the provisions of such statute,
then pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, Art. VI, U.S.
Const., the state must keep the records confidential. State ex reI. Cummer v. Pace, 159
So. 679 (Fla. 1935); AGOs 90-102,85-03,81-101,80-31,74-372, and 73-278. See also
Wallace v. Guzman, 687 S o. 2 d 1 351, 1353 ( Fla. 3d 0 CA 1997) (exemptions from
disclosure set forth in federal Freedom of Information Act apply to federal agencies but
not to state agencies). Compare Florida Department of Education v. NYT Management
Services, Inc., 895 S o. 2d 11 51 ( Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 2005) (federal I aw pr ohibits publ ic
disclosure of social security numbers in state teacher certification database).
Thus, tenant records of a public housing authority are not exempt, by reason of the
Federal Privacy Act, from disclosure otherwise required by the Florida Public Records
Act. Housing Authority of the City of Daytona Beach v. Gomillion, 639 So. 2 d 11 7 (Fla.
5th DCA 1994). Rejecting the housing authority's argument that it was an agency of the
federal government and thus subject tot he Federal Privacy Act, the court concluded
that while the authority received federal funds and was subject to some oversight, the
federal government was not involved in the day-to-day operations of t he au thority and
the records produced and submitted to the federal government were simply "monitoring
devices." See now s.119.071(5)(f), F.S., providing confidentiality for medical history
records a nd certain insurance information provided by app licants for or participants in
government housing assistance pr ograms. Cf Florida Department of Children and
Family Services v. Florida Statewide Advocacy Council, 884 So. 2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 2d
DCA 200 4) ( rejecting s tate agency's contention t hat federal regulations ado pted
pursuant tot he Health Insurance Portability and A ccountability Act 0 f 19 96 [ HIPM]
prohibited a trial judge from issuing an "access warrant" requiring the agency to provide
client records tot he adv ocacy council; t he appellate court found that t he federal
regulations expressly authorized such di sclosures if made to an other ag ency pursuant
to court order).
Similarly, since federal law did not clearly require that documents received by a state
agency i n t he course of settlement negotiations tor esolve a f ederall awsuit be kept
confidential, such documents were found to be open to inspection under Ch. 119, F.S.
Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
No. 91 -2108 (Fla. 2d Cir. C t. September 20, 1 991), per curiam affirmed, 606 So. 2 d
1267 (Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 1992). Accord Lakeland Ledger Publishing Corporation v. School
Board of Polk County, No. GC-G-91-3803 (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. November 21, 1991) (map
prepared by U.S. Justice 0 epartment concerning des egregation 0 f Lakeland schools
and given to school district employees was a public record and open to inspection). Cf.
State v. Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 1998) (materials furnished to state attorney by
federal government were not subject top ublic inspection even though er roneously
furnished to defendant in criminal case because Florida law provides an exemption from
disclosure f or criminal investigative information received f rom a non -Florida criminal
justice ag ency on a confidential or restricted bas is); Morris v. Whitehead, 588 So. 2 d
1023, 10 24 ( Fla. 2d 0 CA 1991) (upholding nondi sclosure of confidential records
received by hous ing aut hority from t he federal government pur suant to agreement
authorized by state housing law); and City of Miami v. Metropolitan Dade County, 745 F.
Supp. 683 ( S.D. Fla. 1990) (while t he ac tions 0 f t he State 0 f Florida i n releasing
documents ar e subject tot he mandates of Ch. 119, F .S., the actions 0 f t he federal
government i n a criminal pr osecution un dertaken by t he 0 ffice 0 f t he United States
Attorney are not).
2. To what extent is copyrighted material in possession of an agency subject
to public inspection and copying?
a. Copyrights held by agencies
In the absence of statutory authorization, a public official is not empowered to obtain
a copyright for material produced by his or her office in connection with the transaction
of official business. Micro de cisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004),
review denied, 902 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005) (property
appraiser not authorized to assert copyright protection for the Geographic Information
System maps created by his office). Accord AGOs 03-42,88-23, and 86 -94. Cf. AGO
00-13 ( in t he absence 0 f ex press statutory aut hority, state ag ency not authorized to
secure a trademark).
Section 1 19.084(2), F .S., however, specifically aut horizes ag encies t 0 hol d a
copyright for data processing software created by the agency. The agency may sell the
copyrighted software to pu blic or pr ivate ent ities or may es tablish a I icense fee for its
use. See also s. 24.105(10), F .S., authorizing t he 0 epartment of t he Lottery to hol d
patents, copyrights, trademarks and service marks; and see ss. 286.021 and 286.031,
F.S., prescribing duties of the Department of State with respect to authorized copyrights
obtained by state agencies.
b. Copyrighted material obtained by agencies
The federal copyright I aw vests i n t he ow ner 0 f a copyright, subject t 0 certain
limitations, t he ex clusive right t 0 door t 0 a uthorize, am ong ot her things, t he
reproduction of the copyrighted work and the distribution of the copyrighted work to the
public by sale or other transfer of ownership. See AGO 97-84, citing to pertinent federal
law and interpretive cases. However, the Attorney General's Office has concluded that
the fact that material received by a state agency may be copyrighted does not preclude
the material from constituting a publ ic record. For example, AGO 90-102 advised that
copyrighted data processing software which was not specifically designed or created for
the county but was being used by the county in its official capacity for official county
business fell within the definition of "public record. II
Moreover, in State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe
Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377, 1382-1383 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1994), the court rejected a state
agency's argument that a transcript of a hearing that had been copyrighted by the court
reporter and filed with the agency should not be copied without the copyright holder's
permission. T he court stated that t he ag ency was under a statutory obi igation t 0
preserve all testimony in the proceeding and make a transcript available in accordance
with the fees set forth in Ch. 119, F .S. And see AGO 75-304 (agency may not enter into
agreement with court reporter to refer all requests for copies of agency proceedings to
court reporter who or iginally transcribed pr oceedings; ag ency must provide copies 0 f
transcripts in accordance with charges set forth in Public Records Act). Cf AGO 95-37
(fee pr escribed ins. 119.07, F .S., ap plies to t he duplication of copyrighted materials
contained i n a county I aw I ibrary when such reproduction i s permissible un der t he
federal copyright law).
The federal copyright law, when read together with Ch. 119, F .S., authorizes and
requires t he custodian 0 f records 0 f t he 0 epartment 0 f State tom ake maintenance
manuals supplied tot hat ag ency pur suant t 0 I aw, available f or ex amination and
inspection purposes. AGO 03-26. "With regard to reproducing, copying, and distributing
copies of these maintenance manuals which are protected under the federal copyright
law, s tate law must yield tot he federal I aw on the subject. II Id. The custodian should
advise individuals seeking t 0 copy such records 0 f t he I imitations 0 f t he federal
copyright law and the consequences of violating its provisions; such notice may take the
form of a posted notice that the making of a copy may be subject to the copyright law.
AGOs 0 3-26 an d 97 -84. However, it i s adv isable f or t he custodian tor efrain from
copying such records himself or herself. AGO 03-26. But see State v. Allen, 14 F .L.W.
Supp. 172a (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. November 2, 2006) (defendant entitled to inspect and copy
copyrighted oper ating manual for the radar uni t a nd speedometer us ed by the police
under Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const.; if police department declined to make copies, defendant
or his representative must be allowed reasonable access to the documents and a copy
machine to make copies).
Moreover, as noted by the court inState, Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy, supra, once a transcript of an administrative hearing
conducted by or on behalf of an agency has been filed with the agency, the transcript
becomes a public record, without regard to who or dered the transcription or bor e its
expense. The agency which is und er a statutory obi igation to preserve all testimony
(see now s. 120.57[1][g], F .S.) can charge neither the parties nor the public more than
the charges authorized by C h. 119, F .S., regardless of the fact that the court reporter
may have copyrighted the transcript.
M. WHAT FEES MAY LAWFULLY BE IMPOSED FOR INSPECTING AND COPYING
PUBLIC RECORDS?
1. When may an agency charge a fee for the mere inspection of public records?
Providing access to publ ic records is a statutory dut y imposed by t he Leg islature
upon all record custodians an d should not be considered a pr ofit-making or revenue-
generating operation. AGO 85-03. Thus, public information must be open for inspection
without charge unless otherwise expressly provided by law. See State ex reI. Davis v.
McMillan, 38 So. 666 (Fla. 1905). Nor may an agency impose a fee upon persons who
wish to listen to tape recordings of city commission meetings. AGO 75-50 (agency may
not precondition the inspection of a public document 0 n the payment of a fee; the fact
that t he record sought to be inspected is a tape recording as op posed to a written
document is of no import insofar as the imposition of a fee for inspection is concerned).
And see AGOs 84-03 and 76 -34 (only those fees or charges which are authorized by
statute may be imposed upon an individual seeking access to public records).
Section 119.07(4)(d), F .S., however, authorizes the imposition of a special service
charge when t he nature or volume 0 f public records t 0 b e inspected i s such as to
require extensive use of information technology resources, or extensive clerical 0 r
supervisory assistance, or both. The charge must be reasonable and based on the labor
or computer costs actually incurred by t he agency. See Board of County
Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 9 76 S o. 2d 3 1 (Fla. 2d 0 CA 2 008)
(special service charge ap plies tor equests f or bot h inspection a nd copies 0 f pu blic
records when extensive clerical assistance is required). Thus, an agency may adopt a
policy imposing a reasonable special service charge based on the actual labor cost for
clerical personnel who are required, due to the nature or volume of a public records
request, to safeguard such records from loss or destruction during their inspection. AGO
00-11. I n doing so, however, the county's policy should reflect no more than the actual
cost of the personnel's time and be sensitive to accommodating the request in such a
way as to ensure unfettered access while safeguarding the records. Id.
2. Is an agency required to provide copies of public records if asked, or may the
agency allow inspection only?
lilt is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal records are open for
personal inspection and copying by any p erson." (e.s.) Section 119 .01 (1), F .S. In
addition, s. 119.07(1)(a), F.S., provides that "[e]very person who has custody of a public
record shall permit the record to be inspected and copied by any person desiring to do
so. . . . II Finally, s . 119. 07(4), F .S., requires t he custodian t 0 "furnish a copy or a
certified copy of the record upon payment of the fee prescribed by law.. .." And see
Fuller v. State ex reI. O'Donnell, 17 S o. 2d 60 7 ( Fla. 19 44) ( liThe best-reasoned
authority in this country holds that the right to inspect pu blic records carries with it the
right to make copies."); Winter v. Playa del Sol, Inc., 353 So. 2d 598, 599 (Fla. 4th DCA
1977) (right to inspect public records would in many cases be valueless without the right
to make copies); Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire Department, 352 So. 2d
1230, 1232n.2 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (Public Records Act requires custodian to furnish
copies). Cf Wootton v. Cook, 590 S o. 2d 1039, 1 040 ( Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 1991) (if t he
requestor identifies a record with sufficient specificity to permit the agency to identify it
and forwards the appropriate fee, the agency must furnish by mail a copy of the record).
In order to comply with the statutory directive that an agency provide copies of public
records upon payment 0 f t he statutory fee, an ag ency must respond tor equests for
information as to copying costs. Wootton v. Cook, supra. See also Woodard v. State,
885 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), remanding a case for further proceedings where
the custodian forwarded only information relating to the statutory fee schedule rather
than the total cost to copy the requested records. Cf Mathis v. State, 722 So. 2d 235
(Fla. 2d 0 CA 1998) (petitioner seeking writ of mandamus to compel court reporter to
inform hi m of the cost to obtain a transcript of trial court proceedings was entitled to a
show cause order as he showed a prima facie basis for relief under Rule 2.420[e] [see
now Rule 2.420(h)], Fla. R. Jud. Admin.).
3. Does Ch. 119, F .S., exempt certain individuals (such as indigent persons or
inmates) from paying statutory fees to obtain copies of public records?
Chapter 119, F .S., does not c ontain a provision that pr ohibits ag encies from
charging indigent per sons or inmates t he applicable statutory fee to obt ain copies of
public records. See Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1, 3 (Fla. 1993) (indigent inmate not
entitled tor eceive copies 0 f public records free 0 f charge nor to have or iginal state
attorney files mailed to him in prison; prisoners are "in the same position as anyone else
seeking public records who cannot pay" the required costs); Potts v. State, 869 So. 2d
1223 (Fla. 2d 0 CA 2004) (no merit to inmate's contention that C h. 119, F .S., ent itles
him to free copies of all records generated in his case); Alexis v. State, 732 So. 2d 46
(Fla. 3d 0 CA 1999) (indigent defendant not entitled to public records free of charge);
and Yanke v. State, 588 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), review denied, 595 So. 2d 559
(Fla. 1992), cert. denied, 112 S .Ct. 1592 (1992) ( prisoner must pay copying and
postage charges to have copies of public records mailed to him).
Similarly, a labor union must pay the costs stipulated in Ch. 119, F.S., for copies of
documents it has requested from a public employer for collective bargaining purposes
because "[a] labor union seeking information from the employer with whom it is locked
in collective bargaining negotiations is not exempt from the Florida Public Records Act."
City of Miami Beach v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 937 So. 2d 226 (Fla.
3d 0 CA 20 06). And see State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v.
Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377, 1382n.7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (indigent person
"is not relieved by his indigency" from paying statutory costs to obtain public records).
An agency, however, is not precluded from choosing to provide informational copies
of public records without charge. AGO 90-81.
4. Are members of an advisory council entitled to copies of public records free of
charge?
A school district is under no statutory obligation to provide copies of public records
free of charge to individual members of a school advisory council, but a school district
may formulate a policy for the distribution of such records. AGO 99-46. If it is found that
the advisory council needs certain school records i n or der t 0 carry out its statutory
functions, such records should be pr ovided t 0 the council in t he same manner that
records related to agenda items are provided to school board members. Id. Cf Inf. Op.
to Martin, November 21, 2 006 ( school board policy requiring t hat a request for
information by an individual board member requiring more than sixty minutes of staff
time to prepare must be presented to the school board for approval would be invalid if
the school board member is asking under public records law; however, the school board
member would be subject to any charges allowed by Chapter 119, F.S.).
5. What are the statutory fees to obtain copies of public records?
If no fee is prescribed el sewhere in the statutes, s. 11 9.07(4 )(a) 1., F .S., authorizes
the custodian to charge a fee of up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for copies that are
14 inches by 81/2 inches or less. An agency may charge no more than an additional 5
cents for eac h two-sided duplicated copy. Section 11 9.07(4)(a)2., F .S. And see s.
119.011 (7), F .S., defining the term "duplicated copies" to mean II new copies produced
by dupl icating, as de fined ins. 283.30", F.S. "Duplicating" means II the pr ocess of
reproducing an image or images f rom a n or iginal t 0 a final substrate through t he
electrophotographic, xerographic, laser, or offset process or any combination of these
processes, by which an operator can make more than one copy without rehandling the
original. II Section 283.30(3), F .S.
A charge of up to $1.00 per copy may be as sessed for a certified copy of a publ ic
record. Section 119.07(4)(c), F.S.
For other copies, the charge is limited to the actual cost of duplication of the record.
Section 119.07(4)(a)3., F .S. The phrase "actual cost of d uplication" is defined to mean
lithe cost of the material and supplies used to duplicate the public record, but does not
include t he labor cost and overhead cost associated with such duplication. II Section
119.011 (1 ),F.S. An exception, however, ex ists f or copies 0 f county maps or aer ial
photographs supplied by county constitutional officers which may include a reasonable
charge f or t he I abor and overhead as sociated with t heir duplication. Section
119.07(4)(b), F.S. And see the discussion on the special service charge ins. M.11.,
infra.
6. Mayan agency charge for travel costs, search fees, development costs
and other incidental costs?
An ag ency should no t consider t he furnishing of public records to be a II revenue-
generating oper ation." A GO 85 -03. See also AGO 8 9-93 ( city not aut horized to sell
copies of i ts growth management bo ok for $35. 00 each when t he ac tual cost t 0
reproduce t he bo ok i s $15. 10 P er copy; city i s limited t 0 charging onl y t he costs
authorized by Ch. 119, F.S.).
The Public Records Act does not authorize the addition of overhead costs such as
utilities or other office expenses to the charge for public records. AGO 99-41. Similarly,
an agency may not charge for travel time and retrieval costs for public records stored
off-premises. AGO 9 0-07. N or may an ag ency as sess fees des igned tor ecoup t he
original cost 0 f developing or producing t he records. AGO 8 8-23 (state at torney not
authorized t 0 impose a charge tor ecover par t 0 f costs incurred i n pr oduction of a
training program; the fee to obtain a copy of the videotape of such program is limited to
the actual cost of duplication of the tape). And see State, Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377, 1382 (Fla. 1 st DCA
1994) ( once a transcript of a n ad ministrative hear ing is filed with t he ag ency, t he
transcript becomes a publ ic record regardless of who ordered the transcript or paid for
the transcription; t he agency can charge neither the parties nor the pu blic a f ee that
exceeds the charges authorized in the Public Records Act). Cf s. 119 .07(4)(b), F .S.,
providing that the charge for copies of county maps or aerial photographs supplied by
county constitutional 0 fficers m ay al so include a reasonable charge for t he I abor an d
overhead associated with their duplication.
Therefore, unless a specific request for copies requires ex tensive clerical or
supervisory as sistance or extensive use 0 f information technology resources so as to
trigger the special service charge authorized by s. 119.07(4)(d), F.S., an agency may
charge onl y t he ac tual cost 0 f duplication for copies 0 f computerized publ ic records.
AGO 9 9-41. The imposition 0 f t he service charge, however, i s dep endent upon t he
nature or volume of records requested, not on the cost to either develop or maintain the
records or the database system. Id.
7. Mayan agency require that production and copying of public records be
accomplished only through a private company that acts as a clearinghouse
for the agency's public records?
No. Although an agency may contract with private companies to provide information
also obtainable through the agency, it may not abdicate its duty to produce such records
for inspection an d copying by requiring those seeking pu blic records t 0 do s 0 only
through its designee and then paying whatever fee that company may establish for its
services. A GO 0 2-37. The ag ency is t he custodian of i ts public records and, upon
request, must pr oduce such records for inspection and copy such records a t t he
statutorily prescribed fee. Id. And see AGO 0 5-34 (while t he pr operty appr aiser may
provide publ ic records, ex cluding ex empt or confidential information, t 0 a pr ivate
company, t he pr operty appr aiser m ay receive onl y t hose fees that ar e aut horized by
statute and may not, in the absence of statutory authority, enter into an agreement with
the private company where t he property ap praiser pr ovides such records in exchange
for ei ther in-kind services or a s hare of t he pr ofits or pr oceeds from t he s ale of t he
information by the private company).
8. Should an agency charge sales tax when providing copies of public records?
No. In AGO 86-83, the Attorney General's Office advised that the sales tax imposed
pursuant to s. 212.05, F .S., is not applicable to the fee charged for providing copies of
records und er s. 119.07, F .S. See s. 5( a) of 0 epartment of Revenue Rule 1 2A-1.041,
F .A. C., stating t hat II [t]he fee pr escribed by I aw, or t he actual cost 0 f du plication, for
providing copies of public records. . . under Chapter 119, F .S., is exempt from sales
tax. II
9. Does s. 119.07(4), F .S., prescribe the fee that an agency may charge for
furnishing a copy of a record to a person who is authorized to access an
otherwise confidential record?
Unless another fee to obtain a particular record is prescribed by law, an agency may
not charge fees that exceed those in Ch. 119, F.S, when providing copies of confidential
records to persons who are authorized to obtain them. For example, in AGO 03-57, the
Attorney General's Office advised that persons who are authorized by statute to obtain
otherwise confidential aut opsy photographs should be pr ovided copies in ac cordance
with t he pr ovisions 0 f t he Public Records Act, i.e., s . 1 19.07(4), F .S. The medical
examiner is not authorized to charge a fee that exceeds those charges. Id.
10. What are the charges if the requestor makes his or her own copies (i.e.,
provides his or her own copying machine and makes the copies himself or
herself )?
Section 119.07(3)(a), F .S., pr ovides a "right 0 f ac cess to public records for t he
purpose of making photographs of the record while such record is in the possession,
custody, and control of the custodian of public records. II This subsection "applies to the
making of photographs in the conventional sense by use of a camera device to capture
images of pu blic records but excludes the duplication of microfilm in the possession of
the clerk of the circuit court" if the clerk can provide a copy of the microfilm. Section
119.07(3)(b), F.S.
The photographing is to be do ne i n t he room where t he publ ic records ar e kept.
Section 119.07(3)(d), F.S. However, if in the custodian's judgment, this is impossible or
impracticable, the copying shall be done in another room or place, as close as possible
to the room where the public records are kept. Id. Where provision of another room or
place is necessary, the expense of providing the same shall be paid by the person who
wants to copy the records. Id. The custodian may charge the person making the copies
for supervision services. Section 119.07(4)(e)2., F.S. In such cases the custodian may
not charge t he copy charges aut horized ins. 119 .07(4)(a), F .S., but may charge onl y
the supervision service charge authorized in s. 119.07(4)(e)2., F.S. See AGO 82-23.
11. When may an agency charge a special service charge for extensive use of
clerical or supervisory labor or extensive information technology
resources?
Section 119.07(4)(d), F.S. [formerly s. 119.07(1 )(b), F .S.], states that if the nature or
volume 0 f pu blic records t 0 be inspected or copied requires t he ex tensive u se of
information technology resources or ex tensive clerical or supervisory as sistance, or
both, the ag ency m ay charge a reasonable service charge bas ed on the cost actually
incurred by the agency for such extensive use of information technology resources or
personnel. See AGO 9 0-07, stating t hat a municipal police department m ay not
ordinarily charge f or travel time and retrieval costs f or publ ic records stored 0 ff-
premises; however, if the nature or v olume of the records requested, rather than the
location of the records, is such as to require extensive clerical or supervisory assistance
or extensive use of information technology resources, a reasonable service charge may
be imposed); and AGO 92-38 (town may not restrict access to and copying of public
records based upon the amount requested or the span of time which is covered by the
public records; however, if extensive use of information technology resources or clerical
or supervisory personnel is needed for retrieval of such records, the town may impose a
reasonable service charge, bas ed upon the ac tual costs incurred for t he us e 0 f such
resources). Cf. Cone & Graham, Inc. v. State, No. 97-4047 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. October 7,
1997) (an agency's decision to "archive" older e-mail messages on tapes so that they
could not be retrieved or printed without a systems programmer was analogous to an
agency's dec ision t 0 store records 0 ff-premises i n that t he ag ency rather than t he
requestor must bear t he costs for retrieving t he records and reviewing t hem for
exemptions). When warranted, the special service charge applies to requests for both
inspection a nd copies of public records. Board of County Commissioners of Highlands
County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).
Unless the nat ure or volume 0 f publ ic records to be inspected 0 r copied requires
"extensive" us e 0 f information technology resources or II extensive" clerical or
supervisory assistance, the special service charge is not authorized. If authorized due to
the nature or volume 0 far equest, the reasonable service charge should not be
routinely imposed, but should reflect the information technology resources or labor costs
actually incurred by the ag ency. AGO 9 0-07. And see AGOs 86-69 and -84-81
recognizing that t he special service charge may not be routinely imposed a nd is no t
justified merely because a record contained exempted materials.
a. What is the meaning of the term "extensive" as used in the statute?
Section 119.07(4)(d), F.S., does not contain a de finition of the term "extensive." In
1991, a divided First 0 istrict Court of Appeal uph eld a hearing officer's order rejecting
an inmate challenge to a 0 epartment 0 f Corrections rule that defined II extensive" for
purposes of the special service charge to mean that it would take more than 15 minutes
to locate, review f or confidential information, copy and r efile the requested material.
Florida Institutional Legal Services, Inc. v. Florida Department of Corrections, 579 So.
2d 2 67 (Fla. 1 st 0 CA 199 1), review denied, 592 S o. 2d 680 (Fla. 19 91). The court
agreed with the hearing officer that the burden was on the challenger to show that the
administrative rule was invalid under Ch. 120, F.S, and the record did not indicate that
the officer's ruling was "clearly erroneous" in this case. Judge Zehmer dissented, saying
that t he rule w as inconsistent with legislative intent an d ex ceeded t he ag ency's
delegated authority. More recently, however, t he Second 0 istrict Court 0 f Appeal i n
Board of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2008) , a pproved a county's similar formula for calculating i ts special service
charge.
In I ight of t he lack 0 f clear di rection in t he statute as tot he meaning of the term
"extensive, II it may be pr udent for ag encies to define "extensive" in a manner th at is
consistent with t he pu rpose a nd intent 0 f t he Public Records Act and t hat does not
constitute a n unr easonable infringement upon the pu blic's statutory and constitutional
right of access to public records.
Moreover, t he statute mandates that t he special service charge be "reasonable. II
See Carden v. Chief of Police, 696 So. 2d 772, 773 (Fla. 2d 0 CA 1996), in which the
court reviewed a challenge to a service charge t hat ex ceeded $ 4,000 for staff time
involved in responding to a pu blic records request, and said that an "excessive charge
could well serve to inhibit t he pursuit 0 frights conferred by t he Public Records A ct. II
Accordingly, the court remanded the case and required the agency to "explain in more
detail the reason for the magnitude of the assessment." Id.
b. What is meant by the term "information technology resources" as used in the
statute?
"Information technology r esources" i s de fined as data processing har dware and
software and services, communications, supplies, per sonnel, facility resources,
maintenance a nd training. Section 11 9.011 (9), F .S. The term does no t include a
videotape or a machine t 0 v iew a videotape. A GO 88 -23. The fact that t he request
involves t he use of information technology resources i s not sufficient t 0 incur the
imposition 0 f the special service charge; r ather, extensive use of such resources is
required. AGO 99-41.
c. What is meant by the term "clerical or supervisory assistance" as used in the
statute?
(1) Mayan agency charge for the cost to review records for exempt information?
An ag ency is no t or d inarily aut horized to charge for the cost tor eview records for
statutorily ex empt material. AGO 84-81. However, the special service charge m ay be
imposed for this work if the volume of records and the nu mber of potential exemptions
make review and redaction 0 f t he records a time-consuming t ask. See Florida
Institutional Legal Services v. Florida Department of Corrections, 579 S o. 2d a t 269 .
And see Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d C ir. Ct. June 9,1998), noting
that II it would not be unreasonable in these types of cases [involving many documents
and several different exemptions] to charge a reasonable special fee for the supervisory
personnel nec essary t 0 pr operly review the materials for po ssible appl ication of
exemptions. II
(2) How should the labor cost be calculated?
In Board of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, supra, the court
approved a county's special service charge pursuant to s. 119.07(4), Fla. Stat., which
included both an employee's salary and benefits i n calculating t he labor cost for t he
special service charge, recognizing, however, that the charge must be reasonable and
based upon the actual labor costs incurred by or attributable to the county. Cf AGO 00-
11, stating that it would be difficult to justify the imposition of a fee for extensive clerical
or supervisory as sistance i f t he per sonnel pr oviding such as sistance were
simultaneously performing regular duties.
The term "supervisory assistance" has not been widely interpreted. See Herskovitz
v. Leon County, No.9 8-22 (Fla. 2d C ir. C t. June 9, 1998), concluding that an
appropriate charge for supervisory review is II reasonable" i n cases involving a large
number of documents that contain some exempt information. In State v. Gudinas, No.
CR 94-7132 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. June 1, 1999), the circuit judge approved a rate of $35 per
hour for an agency attorney's review of exempt material in a v oluminous criminal case
file. The court noted that "only an attorney or paralegal" could responsibly perform this
type of review because of the "complexity of the records reviewed, the various publ ic
record exemptions and possible prohibitions, and the necessary discretionary decisions
to be made with respect to potential exemptions. . . ." However, the court concluded
that the agency could charge only a clerical rate for the time spent making copies, even
if due to staff shortages, a m ore highly pai d person did the work. See also Board of
County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, supra, i n which t he court
approved a charge based on t he salary of a lower pai d employee even though t he
director actually handled the request.
d. Mayan agency require a reasonable deposit or advance payment or must the
agency produce the records and then ask for payment?
Section 119.07(4)(a)1., F .S., states that the custodian of public records shall furnish
a copy or a certified copy of the record "upon payment of the fee prescribed by law. . .
. II See Wootton v. Cook, 590 S o. 2d 1 039, 1040 (Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 1991), stating t hat if a
requestor "identifies a record with sufficient specificity to permit [the agency] to identify it
and forwards the appropriate fee, [the ag ency] must furnish by m ail a copy 0 f the
record. II (e.s.).
In Malone v. City of Satellite Beach, No 94-10557-CA-D (Fla. Cir. Ct. Brevard Co.
December 1 5, 1 995), per curiam affirmed, 687 So. 2 d 252 (Fla. 5 th 0 CA 1997), the
court noted that a city's requirement of an advance deposit was contemplated by the
Public Records A ct. See s. 119.07(4)(d), F .S. According to the court, the city II was
authorized to require the payment of an advance deposit under the facts of this case
before proceeding with the effort and cost of preparing the voluminous copies requested
by the plaintiff ." And see Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9,
1998), in which the court said that if an agency is asked for a large number of records,
the fee should be communicated to the requestor before the work is undertaken. "If the
agency gives the requesting party an es timate of the total charge, or the hourly rate to
be applied, t he party c an then determine whether ita ppears reasonable under t he
circumstances. II Id. Cf AGO 05-28 ( custodian aut horized to b ill t he requestor for any
shortfall between the deposit and the actual cost of copying the public records when the
copies have been made and the requesting party subsequently advises the city that the
records are not needed).
An ag ency m ay refuse t 0 pr oduce additional records if t he fees f or a previous
request for records have not been paid by the requestor. See Lozman v. City of Riviera
Beach, 995 So. 2d 1 027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (s. 119.07(4), F .S., "does not require the
City to do any more than what it did in this case," i.e., require Lozman to pay the bill for
the first group 0 f records he requested before t he city would make any further
documents available).
12. Fee issues relating to specific records
a. Clerk of court records
(1) County records
Pursuant to s. 125.17, F.S., the clerk of the circuit court serves as the ex officio clerk
to the board of county commissioners. Records maintained by the clerk which relate to
this function (e.g., county resolutions, budgets, minutes, etc.) are public records which
are subject to the copying fees set forth inCh. 119, F .S., and not the service charges
set forth in Ch. 28, F.S. AGO 85-80. Accord AGO 94-60 (documents such as minutes of
public meetings, which are in the custody of the clerk as ex officio clerk of the board of
county commissioners, are not subject to the $1.00 per page charge prescribed in Ch.
28). See also AGO 8 2-23 (when members 0 f t he pu blic us e t heir ow n phot ographic
equipment to make their own copies, the clerk is not entitled to the fees prescribed in s.
28.24, F .S., b ut i sent itled onl y tot he supervisory service charge now found ins.
119.07[4][e]2., F.S.).
(2) Judicial records
When t he cl erk i s exercising h is or her dut ies der ived f rom A rticle V of the
Constitution, the clerk is not subject to legislative control. Times Publishing Company v.
Ake, 660 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1995). Thus, when the clerk is acting in his or her capacity as
part of the judicial branch of government, access to the judicial records under the clerk's
control is governed exclusively by Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420, Public Access to Judicial
Records. Id. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(b)(2), defining the term "judicial branch" for
purposes of the rule, to include lithe clerk of court when acting as an arm of the court."
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.240(i)(3) states t hat II [flees for copies 0 f
records in all ent ities in the judicial branch of government, except for copies of court
records, shall be the same as those provided in section 119.07, Florida Statutes." (e.s.).
The fees to obt ain copies 0 f court records are set forth ins. 28.24, F .S. This statute
establishes fees that are generally higher than those in Ch. 119, F .S. For example, the
charge to obtain copies 0 f court records is $1.00 per pag e, rather than 1 5 cents per
page as established in s. 119.07(4)(a)1., F.S. See also WFTV, Inc. v. Wilken, 675 So.
2d 6 74 (Fla. 4t h 0 CA 1996) (the $1 .00 per pag e copying charge ins. 2 8.24, F .S.,
applies to all court documents, whether unrecorded or recorded).
b. Traffic reports
In the absence of statutory provision, the charges authorized in s. 119.07(4) govern
the fees to obtain copies of crash reports. However, there are specific statutes which
apply to fees to obtain copies of reports from the Department of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles. Section 321.23(2)(a), F .S., provides that the fee to obtain a copy of a
crash report from the department is $10.00 per copy. A copy of a homicide report is $25
per copy. Section 321.23(2)(b), F .S. Separate charges are provided for photographs.
Section 321.23(2)(c), F.S.
Pursuant t 0 s . 3 16.066(2)(a), F .S., one 0 r more counties m ay ent er into an
agreement with the appropriate state agency to be certified by the agency to have a
traffic records center f or t he pur pose 0 f tabulating and analyzing countywide traffic
crash reports. Fees for copies 0 f publ ic records pr ovided by a certified traffic records
center are $10.00 per copy for a crash report, $25 per copy for a homicide report, and
50 cents per copy for a uniform traffic citation. Section 316.066(2)(c), F.S.
N. WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS IF AN AGENCY REFUSES TO PRODUCE PUBLIC
RECORDS FOR INSPECTION AND COPYING?
1. Voluntary mediation program
Section 16.60, F.S., establishes an informal mediation program within the Office of
the Attorney General as an alternative for resolution of open government disputes. For
more information about the voluntary mediation program, please contact the Office of
the Attorney General at the following address: The Office of the Attorney General, P L-
01, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida 3 2399-1050; telephone ( 850)245-0140; or you
may visit the Office of the Attorney General website: http://myfloridalegal.com.
By Executive 0 rder 07 -01 , t he Governor created t he 0 ffice 0 f 0 pen Government,
charged with providing the Office of the Governor and each of the executive agencies
under the Governor's purview guidance to assure full and expeditious compliance with
Florida's open government an d public records I aws. See also Executive 0 rder 07 -242
directing all gubernatorial ag encies to adop t an 0 pen Government B ill of Rights. F or
more information about the Office of Open Government, please contact the office at the
following address: The Office of Open Government, PL-04, The Capitol, Tallahassee,
Florida 32399-0001; telephone (850) 921-6099; or you m ay visit the 0 ffice of Open
Government website: http://www.flgov.com/og_home Also available 0 n the website is
the 2 009 report of t he Commission on 0 pen Government Reform at:
http://www.flgov.com/pdfs/og_ 2 009fi nal report. pdf
2. Civil action
a. Remedies
A per son denied t he right to inspect and/or copy publ ic records und er t he Public
Records Act may bring a civil action against the agency to enforce the terms of Ch. 119,
F.S. See Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (trial judge dismissal of
a writ of mandamus directed to clerk of court and court reporter who were alleged to be
records custodians was erroneous because trial judge did not issue a show cause order
to t he clerk 0 f court and court reporter, an d bec ause there was no sworn evidence
refuting the petitioner's allegations).
Before filing a lawsuit, the petitioner must have furnished a public records request to
the agency. Villarreal v. State, 687 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1996), review denied, 694
So. 2d 741 (Fla. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 316 (1997) (improper to order agency to
produce records before it has had an opportunity to comply); and Maraia v. State, 685
So. 2d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (public records action dismissed where petitioner failed
to file a request for public records with the records custodian before filing suit). See also
Mills v. State, 684 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 1996) (no abuse of discretion in trial court's failure to
order sheriff's department to pr oduce certain requested records where there was no
demonstration that the records exist); and Hillier v. City of Plantation, 935 So. 2d 105
(Fla. 4t h 0 CA 2006) (trial court finding t hat city had complied with petitioner's public
records requests w as supported by competent, substantial ev idence). Cf Coconut
Grove Playhouse, Inc. v. Knight-Ridder, Inc., 935 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (trial
court or der departed from es sential requirements 0 flaw by requiring def endant in a
public records action to produce its records as a sanction for failure to respond to a
discovery subpoena).
Where a multi-agency law enforcement task force had been created by a mutual aid
agreement and the agreement did not indicate an intent to create a separate legal entity
capable 0 f being sued in its ow n na me, a requestor could no t s ue the t ask force for
production of records; however, as the agreement did not specify which agency would
be responsible for responding to publ ic records requests, a n action could be br ought
against any of the member agencies to produce records in the possession of the task
force. Ramese's, Inc. v. Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation, 954 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2007).
Section 119.11 (1), F .S., mandates that actions brought under Ch. 119 are entitled to
an immediate hearing and take pr iority over ot her pending cases. See Salvador v.
Fennelly, 593 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (the early hearings provision reflects a
legislative recognition of the importance of time in public records cases; such hearings
must be given priority over more routine matters, and a good faith effort must be made
to accommodate the legislative desire that an immediate hearing be held). Expedited
review of denials of access to judicial records or to the records of judicial agencies shall
be pr ovided through a n ac tion for mandamus, or ot her appropriate ap pellate remedy.
Rule 2.420(h), Fla. R. Jud. Admin. Cf s. 119.07(9), F.S. (s. 119.07, F.S., may not be
used by an inmate as the basis for failing to timely litigate any postconviction action).
And see Woodfaulk v. State, 935 So. 2 d 1225 (Fla. 5t h 0 CA 2006) (s. 119. 11, F .S.,
does not place specific requirements on a party requesting public records to obtain an
accelerated hearing except the filing of an action to enforce the public records law).
(1) Mandamus
Generally, mandamus i s t he appropriate remedy t 0 enforce compliance with t he
Public Records A ct. Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2 d 940 (Fla. 1 s t DCA 1992), review
dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin, 605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992). See also Weeks v.
Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Smith v. State, 696 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1997); Donner v. Edelstein, 4 15 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 3 d 0 CA 1 982); Mills v. Doyle,
407 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). If the requestor's petition presents a prima facie
claim for relief, an order to show cause should be issued so that the claim may receive
further consideration on the merits. Staton v. McMillan, supra. Accord Gay v. State, 697
So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Cf Minasian v. State, 967 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 4th DCA
2007) (petition for writ of mandamus is the proper vehicle to seek review of the denial of
access to judicial records).
However, it has been held that mandamus is not appropriate when the language of
an exemption statute requires an exercise of discretion. In Florida Society of Newspaper
Editors, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 543 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), the
court found that discretion would be required to determine whether certain records of
the Public Service Commission constituted II proprietary confidential business
information;" thus, mandamus would not lie to compel disclosure of the records. Accord
Shea v. Cochran, 680 S o. 2d 62 8 ( Fla. 4t h 0 CA 199 6) ( mandamus w as an
inappropriate remedy where sheriff pr ovided a specific reason for refusing to comply
with a publ ic records request by claiming the records were part of an active criminal
investigation). And see Skeen v. D'Alessandro, 681 S o. 2d 7 12 (Fla. 2d 0 CA 1995)
(mandamus not a proper remedy if there is no evidence, presented or proffered, that the
requested document existed at the time of the mandamus hearing); Hall v. Liebling, 890
So. 2d 475 ( Fla. 2 d 0 CA 2004) (mandamus cannot be used t 0 compel a former
assistant pu blic defender who is now in pr ivate pr actice tor elease doc uments to his
former client because the attorney is now a private citizen, not a government official);
and Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 995 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (because s.
119.07[4], F.S., did not require city to provide additional records when bill for first group
of records requested had not been paid, requestor not entitled to writ of mandamus).
Mandamus is a II one time order by the court to force public officials to perform their
legally designated employment duties." Town of Manalapan v. Rechler, 674 So. 2d 789,
790 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), review denied, 684 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 1996). Thus, a trial court
erred when i t retained continuing jurisdiction t 0 oversee enforcement of a writ 0 f
mandamus granted i n a publ ic records case. Id. Cf Areizaga v. Board of County
Commissioners of Hillsborough County, 935 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2 d DCA 2006), review
denied, 958 So. 2d 9 18 (Fla. 2007) (circuit courts may not refer extraordinary writs to
mediation; thus, trial judge should no t have or dered mediation of pet ition for writ of
mandamus seeking production of public records).
(2) Injunction
Injunctive relief may be available upon an appropriate showing for a violation of Ch.
119, F .S. See Daniels v. Bryson, 548 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (injunctive relief
appropriate where there is adem onstrated pattern 0 f no ncompliance with t he Public
Records Act, together with a showing of likelihood of future violations; mandamus would
not be an adequate remedy since mandamus would not prevent future harm).
(3) Declaratory relief sought by agencies
Occasionally the question arises as to whether an agency, faced with a demand for
public records, m ay seek guidance from the court i n t he form 0 f a complaint for
declaratory judgment instead 0 f complying with t he request f or publ ic records or
asserting an ex emption. It h as been held that such requests for general declaratory
relief are not ap propriate. See Sarasota Herald- Tribune Company, Inc. v. Schaub, No.
CA87-2949 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. July 20,1988), per curiam affirmed, 539 So. 2d 478 (Fla.
2d 0 CA 1989) (state attorney cannot I itigate a declaratory judgment action to obt ain
judicial advice on how to perform his public duties under the Public Records Act); Wille
v. McDaniel, 18 Med. L. Rptr. 2144, No. CL-91-154-AE (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. February 18,
1991) (sheriff's stated purpose in litigating declaratory judgment action [to avoid being
assessed at torney's fees und er t he Public Records Act] i s insufficient t 0 support a
declaratory action). See also Askew v. City of Oca/a, 348 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1977) (trial
court properly dismissed complaint for declaratory relief for failure to state a cause of
action where pu blic 0 fficials disagreed with Attorney General's advisory opi nion and
sought different judicial opinion).
In WFTV, Inc. v. Robbins, 625 So.2d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), the court held that a
supervisor of elections who denied a publ ic records request to inspect certain election
results on the g rounds that a court order entered in another case involving the election
prohibited di sclosure, II unlawfully r efused" ac cess top ublic records. The court
determined that the supervisor herself had sought the confidentiality order by means of
a motion seeking "directions" from the court in the election lawsuit. The supervisor was
thus liable for payment of attorney's fees incurred by the requestor in the subsequent
public records ac tion pur suant to s . 11 9.12, F .S., providing f or an as sessment of
attorney's fees a nd costs if a n ag ency un lawfully refuses t 0 permit ex amination an d
inspection of documents under the Public Records Act. See also City of Sf. Petersburg
v. Sf. Petersburg Junior College, N o. 9 3-000421 0-CI-13, Order Awarding Attorney's
Fees (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. March 25, 1994), in which a city that had initially filed an action for
declaratory relief as tow hether records requested under C h. 1 19 were confidential
under f ederall aw was ul timately det ermined to be I iable for at torney's fees un der s .
119.12, F .S., after t he par ty seeking t he records filed a counterclaim a nd the judge
determined that the records were not exempt.
b. Procedural issues
(1) Discovery
In the absence of an evident abuse of power, the trial court's exercise of discretion in
matters as sociated with pr etrial discovery i nap ublic records ac tion w ill not b e
disturbed. Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2 d 1330, 1333 (Fla. 2d 0 CA 1 985), review denied,
475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985). In Lorei, the appellate court upheld the trial judge's denial of
a request toper mit discovery pertaining tot he ag ency's pr ocedures for maintaining
public records. Id. T he court noted that t he interrogatories related to" the mechanics
associated with t he department's record maintenance, t he internal pol icies or ac tions
which lead to the development of files, II and other matters which were not relevant to the
question of whether the requested records were exempt from disclosure. Id.
The court cautioned, however, that "discovery in a context such as the one at hand
may well be appr opriate in the circumstance w here a good faith belief ex ists that the
public agency m ay be pi aying 'fast a nd loose' with the requesting party or the court,
once its statutorily delegated authority is activated." Id. Cf Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d
725, 727 (Fla. 1997) (trial court's denial of motion to depose custodian affirmed because
there were II no allegations t hat a ny doc uments ha d been removed"); a nd Johnson v.
State, 769 S o. 2d 990, 995 ( Fla. 20 00) ( discovery not warranted based on II bare
allegations" that additional records "should" exist).
(2) Hearing
An order dismissing a public records complaint filed against a sheriff was overturned
by t he Fourth 0 istrict bec ause the judge failed to hol d a hearing before en tering t he
order. II Although t he sheriff may ul timately not be able tor etrieve these records,
because 0 f their ag e or anot her reason, t he or der i n this case, ent ered without an
evidentiary hearing, was premature." Grace v. Jenne, 855 So. 2d 262, 263 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2003).
(3) In camera inspection
Section 1 19.07(1)(g), F.S., pr ovides that in any case i n which an ex emption is
alleged to exist pursuant to s. 119.071(1)(d) or (f), (2)(d), (e), or (f), or (4)(c), F.S., the
public record or part of the record in question shall be submitted to the trial court for an
in camera examination. See City of Sf. Petersburg v. Romine ex. reI. Dillinger, 719 So.
2d 19 ( Fla. 2d 0 CA 1998) (in camera review mandated when confidential informant
exception now found at s. 119.071[2][f], F.S., is asserted). See also Walton v. Dugger,
634 So. 2d 1 059 (Fla. 1993); Lopez v. Singletary, 634 So. 2d 1 054 (Fla. 1993) (records
claimed by state attorney to constitute exempted work product must be produced for an
in camera inspection; only the judge can determine whether particular documents are
public records which must be di sclosed to death penalty de fendant in pos tconviction
proceedings. But see Jordan v. School Board of Broward County, 531 So. 2d 976 (Fla.
4th DCA 1988), in which a trial court's failure to conduct an in camera inspection of a file
containing alleged exempt attorney work product was deemed to be an invalid basis for
a new trial when neither party requested an in camera inspection, and t he agency's
attorney made no objection at trial.
If an exemption is alleged under s. 119.071(2)(c), F .S. (the exemption for active
criminal investigative or intelligence information), an inspection is discretionary with the
court. Section 119.07(1)(g), F.S. However, in Tribune Company v. Public Records, 493
So. 2 d 48 0, 4 84 ( Fla. 2d 0 CA 19 86), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune
Company, 503 So. 2d 327 ( Fla. 1987), t he court stated that notwithstanding the trial
court's discretion to provide an in camera examination if the active criminal investigative
information exemption is asserted, it is always the better practice to conduct such an
inspection i n cases where an exception tot he Public Records A ct i sin dispute.
According to the court, inspection lends credence to the decision of the trial court, helps
dispel public suspicion, and provides a much better basis for appellate review.
Similarly, in Woolling v. Lamar, 7 64 So. 2 d 7 65, 76 8-769 ( Fla. 5t h 0 CA 2 000),
review denied, 786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2001), the Fifth District concluded that because
the s tate attorney pr esented II no ev idence to meet i ts burden that t he records ar e
exempt" und er s. 119 .071 (2)(c), F .S., a n II in camera inspection by t he lower court is
therefore required so that the trial judge will have a factual basis to decide if the records
are exempt under [that statute]." And see Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2000) ("[w]e fail to see how the trial court can [determine whether an ag ency is
entitled to a claimed exemption] without examining the records"); and Garrison v. Bailey,
4 So. 3d 683 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2009) (in-camera inspection of records asserted by agency
to be exempt is generally the only way for a trial court to determine whether or not a
claim of exemption applies).
(4) Mootness
In PuIs v. City of Port Sf. Lucie, 678 So. 2 d 514 ( Fla. 4th 0 CA 1996), the court,
noting that "[p]roduction of the records after the [public records] lawsuit was filed did not
moot the issues raised in the complaint," remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing
on whether there was an unlawful refusal of access to public records. See also Times
Publishing Company v. City of Sf. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487, 491 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
(while courts do no t ordinarily resolve di sputes unless a case 0 r controversy ex ists,
"since t he instant situation is capable 0 f repetition while evading review, we find it
appropriate t 0 address t he issues be fore us concerning appl icability of t he Public
Records Act for future reference"); Mazer v. Orange County, 811 So. 2d 857, 860 (Fla.
5th 0 CA 2002) (lithe fact that t he requested doc uments were produced in the instant
case after the action was commenced, but prior to final adjudication of the issue by the
trial court, does not render the case moot or preclude consideration of [the petitioner's]
entitlement to fees under the statute"); and Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193
(Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 20 1 0), appeal pending, No. S C 1 0-798 ( Fla. April 20, 2 010) (because
damage oc curred when city refused top roduce canvassing boar d minutes until
approved by city commission, production after the fact did nothing to mollify appellants'
injury and therefore issue was not moot as city's refusal "denied any realistic access for
the 0 nly pur pose appellants sought t 0 ac hieve--review of t he Minutes before the
Commission meeting."). Compare Jacksonville Television, Inc. v. Shorstein, 608 So. 2d
592 (Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 1992) (where pu blic records lawsuit w as det ermined t 0 be moot
because records were delivered to television station prior to entry of writ of mandamus,
appellate court would not issue an II advisory opi nion" as to whether trial court's
voluntary conclusion that agency acted properly by initially withholding the records was
correct).
Similarly, in Micro de cisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d 0 CA 2004),
review denied, 902 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005), the court
found that a public records lawsuit over a custodian's requirement that a commercial
company obtain a licensing ag reement before us ing the records did not become moot
when the custodian provided the company with the requested data after the lawsuit was
filed. Because the data was delivered subject to a condition that it was for personal use
only, a controversy remained concerning the validity of the custodian restriction on the
use of the da ta. And see Southern Coatings, Inc. v. City of Tamarac, 91 6 So. 2d 19
(Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (federal court's dismissal of pendent claims based on state public
records I aw i s not a judgment 0 n t he merits and, therefore, not r es judicata i n a
subsequent lawsuit in state court).
(5) Stay
If the person seeking public records prevails in the trial court, the public agency must
comply with the court's judgment within 48 hours unless otherwise provided by the trial
court or such determination is stayed within that period by the appellate court. Section
119.11 (2), F .S. An automatic stay shall exist for 48 h ours after the filing of a notice of
appeal for public records and public meeting cases, which stay may be extended by the
lower tribunal or the court on motion. Fla. R. App. P. 9.310(b)(2).
c. Attorney's fees
Section 1 19.12, F .S., pr ovides that if a civil ac tion is filed ag ainst an ag ency to
enforce t he pr ovisions 0 f this chapter and t he court de termines that t he agency
unlawfully refused to permit a public record to be inspected or copied, the court shall
assess and award against the agency responsible the reasonable costs of enforcement
including reasonable at torney's fees. A successful pro s e litigant i sent itled t 0
reasonable costs under this section. Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA
2000); Wisner v. City of Tampa Police Department, 601 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
And see Weeks v. Golden, 846 S o. 2d 1 247 (Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 200 3) (prevailing pr 0 s e
inmate en titled tor ecover costs as sociated with pos tage, envelopes an d copying, as
well as filing and service of pr ocess fees, incurred i n public records lawsuit). Cf
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Martin, 574 So. 2d 1 223 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1991 ) (error to award attorney's fees where order requiring production of records
was entered pursuant to Adult Protective Services Act, rather than the Public Records
Act); and Downs v. Austin, 559 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 574 So.
2d 14 0 ( Fla. 199 0) (s. 119. 12, F .S., do es not constitute authority f or t he award of
attorney's fees for efforts expended to obtain the fee provided by that statute).
Section 1 19.12, F .S., is des igned t 0 enc ourage voluntarily compliance with t he
requirements of Ch. 119, F .S. See Office of the State Attorney v. Gonzalez, 953 So. 2d
759, 764 (Fla. 2 d 0 CA 2007); an d New York Times Company v. PHH Mental Health
Services, Inc., 6 16 So. 2 d 27, 29 (Fla. 1993) ("If publ ic ag encies ar e required to pay
attorney's fees and costs to parties who are wrongfully denied access to the records of
such ag encies, then t he ag encies ar e I ess likely t 0 deny proper requests for
documents. ").
"[A]ttorney's fees are awardable for unlawful refusal to provide public records under
two circumstances: first, when a court determines that the reason proffered as a basis
to deny a public records request is improper, and second, when the agency unjustifiably
fails tor espond to a public records request by del aying unt il af ter t he en forcement
action has been commenced." Office of the State Attorney v. Gonzalez, supra at 764.
Thus, attorney's fees are recoverable even where access is denied on a good faith but
mistaken belief that the documents are exempt from disclosure. WFTV, Inc. v. Robbins,
625 S o. 2 d 9 41 ( Fla. 4t h 0 CA 1 993); Times Publishing Company v. City of Sf.
Petersburg, 558 So. 2 d 487 ( Fla. 2d 0 CA 1990); News and Sun-Sentinel Company v.
Palm Beach County, 517 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).
Similarly, the court in Barfield v. Town of Eatonville, 675 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA
1996), rejected a town's defense that the delay in production of records was caused by
either the intentional wrongdoing or ineptitude of its clerk as a valid bas is for denying
recovery of attorney's fees and costs under s. 119.12, F .S. And see Office of the State
Attorney for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida v. Gonzalez, supra (attorneys fees
authorized even if failure to turn over the records was due to a mistake or ineptitude).
But see Alston v. City of Riviera Beach, 882 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (denial of
attorney's fee claim affirmed because II [t]he record supports the trial court's conclusion
that the city had a good faith and reasonable belief that Alston's request applied only to
documents un der t he control 0 f t he par ks a nd recreation de partment an d t hat Alston
failed t 0 establish that t he city unl awfully withheld pol ice de partment r ecords"). Cf
Grapski v. Machen, Case N o. 01 -2005-CA-4005 J (Fla. 8t h C ir. C t. M ay 9, 2006),
affirmed per curiam, 949 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2007) (inadvertent failure to produce
some records by an a gency seeking to comply with a publ ic records request does not
necessarily subject the agency to attorney's fees; a finding of an "unlawful" refusal or
delay in producing pu blic records requires some proof that the agency or publ ic official
took some action in hindering the production or took no action resulting in the unlawful
delay in producing the records). And see Greater Orlando Aviation Authority v. Nejame,
4 So. 3d 41 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009), in which the court denied a request for attorney's fees
as the aviation authority "did not act unreasonably or in bad faith in refusing production."
In reaching this conclusion, t he court relied on a case involving the assessment of
attorney fees against a private entity acting on behalf of a public agency and a decision
issued pr ior tot he statute's amendment i n 19 84 when t he statute au thorized t he
imposition of attorney fees when records were unreasonably withheld. The statute was
amended i n 1 984 t 0 provide for t he assessment 0 f attorney's fees w hen a n ag ency
unlawfully refuses to release a public record.
In addition, an "unjustified failure to respond to a public records request until after an
action has been commenced to compel compliance amounts to an unlawful refusal" for
purposes 0 f s. 11 9.12, F .S. Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1 s t 0 CA 2 000).
"[T]he fact that the r eq uested doc uments were pr od uced i n the instant case after the
action was commenced, b ut pr ior to final adj udication 0 f t he issue by the trial court,
does not render the case moot or preclude consideration of [the petitioner's] entitlement
to fees under the statute." Mazer v. Orange County, 811 So. 2d 857, 860 (Fla. 5th DCA
2002). Accord Barfield v. Town of Eatonville, 675 So. 2 d at 224 (appellant entitled to
attorney's fees because II [t]he ev idence clearly es tablishes that it was onl y after the
appellant filed a lawsuit that the documents he had previously sought by written request
to the Town were finally turned over to him"). And see Wisner v. City of Tampa Police
Department, supra; Brunson v. Dade County School Board, 52 5 So. 2 d 93 3 (Fla. 3 d
DCA 1988); and Office of the State Attorney v. Gonzalez, supra.
A different rule has been applied when it is unclear whether a private corporation is
an "agency" for purposes of the Public Records Act. In such cases, the private entity's
"swift" action to seek declaratory relief to obtain judicial clarification of its status under
the law, rather than immediately comply with a request for public documents, has not
been considered an "unlawful r efusal" t 0 release documents for pur poses 0 f t he
assessment of attorney's fees even though the corporation is ultimately determined to
be an "agency" for purposes of Ch. 119, F .S., disclosure requirements. See New York
Times Company v. PHH Mental Health Services, Inc., 61 6 S o. 2d 2 7 (Fla. 1993).
Accord Fox v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 545 So. 2d 94 1 (Fla. 2d DCA
1989).
In Harold v. Orange County, 668 So. 2 d 10 10, 1 012 (Fla. 5t h 0 CA 1996), the 5t h
District Court of Appeal expanded the PHH holding by determining that attorney's fees
would not be assessed against a private company, even though the prevailing party had
sued to obtain the records after being refused access:
Although the P.H.H. court commented on the fact that in that case the private
entity had ac ted swiftly to clarify its status by filing a dec laratory judgment
action, we do not find that the failure to independently seek such clarification
in this case ( considering t he swiftness 0 f appellant's ac tion), renders an
otherwise good faith--even if incorrect--refusal to disclose records an unlawful
act.
However, where the entity did not have a "reasonable" or II good faith" belief in the
soundness 0 fits pos ition in refusing pr oduction, a trial court abu sed its di scretion in
failing to award fees and costs. Knight Ridder, Inc. v. Dade Aviation Consultants, 808
So. 2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Thus, an opinion of independent counsel upon
which an ent ity relied to support its claim that records should not be released to the
requestor did not meet the good faith standard because the entity did not provide "full
and complete disclosure" of the operative facts to counsel. Id. at 1270.
As t 0 calculation 0 f t he II reasonable costs of enforcement including reasonable
attorneys' f ees" tow hich t he prevailing par ty is ent itled, t he t rial judge is i n a better
position than t he appellate court to make II a factual determination regarding t he
objectives sought by the [prevailing party], the extent of statutory enforcement obtained,
and the time expended in achieving those results." Daniels v. Bryson, 548 So. 2d 679,
682 (Fla. 3d 0 CA 1989). However, where the contract between the client and attorney
provided that t he attorney would be compensated on a flat hourly basis regardless of
the outcome at trial, the t rial court erred in awarding an en hanced fee based upon a
contingency risk multiplier. Id.
Attorney's fees may also be awarded for a successful appeal of a denial of access,
provided that at the time 0 f app eal amotion is filed in accordance with the ap pellate
rules. Downs v. Austin, supra. And see Office of the State Attorney v. Gonzalez, supra
(where motion seeking appellate attorney's fees i s g ranted by appellate court and
remanded 0 nly f or calculation 0 f such fees, lower court required t 0 follow court's
mandate without further consideration).
3. Criminal and noncriminal infraction penalties
Section 119.10(1)(b), F.S., states that a public officer who knowingly violates the
provisions of s. 119.07(1), F .S., is subject to suspension and removal or impeachment
and commits a misdemeanor of t he first deg ree, puni shable by pos sible criminal
penalties of one year in prison, or $1 ,000 fine, or both. See State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d
602 (Fla. 1 st DCA 2001) (s. 119.10[2] authorizes a conviction for violating s. 119.07 only
if a defendant is found to have committed such violation "knowingly"; statute cannot be
interpreted as allowing a conviction based on mere negligence).
Section 119.10(1 )(a), F .S., provides that a v iolation of any pr ovision 0 f C h. 1 19,
F.S., by a publ ic officer is a nonc riminal infraction, punishable by fine not exceeding
$500. Cf s. 8 38.022(1 )(b), F .S. (unlawful for a public servant, with corrupt intent to
obtain a be nefit f or any person or to cause har m to another, to conceal, c over up ,
destroy, mutilate, or al ter any 0 fficial record or 0 fficial doc ument or cause an other
person to perform such an act).
A state attorney may prosecute suits charging public officials with violations of the
Public Records Act, including those violations which may result in a finding of guilt for a
noncriminal infraction. AGO 91-38.
O. WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND DISPOSAL
OF PUBLIC RECORDS?
1. Maintenance of records
All public records should be kept in the buildings in which they are ordinarily used.
Section 1 19.021 (1 )(a), F .S. Moreover, insofar as pr acticable, a custodian 0 f pu blic
records 0 f v ital, per manent, or ar chival records shall keep them i n fireproof and
waterproof safes, vaults, or rooms fitted with no ncombustible materials and ins uch
arrangement as to be easily accessible for convenient use. Section 119.021 (1 )(b), F .S.
Records that are in need 0 f repair, restoration, or rebinding may be authorized by the
head of the governmental entity to be removed from the building or office in which such
records are ordinarily kept for the length of time required to repair, restore, or rebind
them. Section 119.021 (1 )(c), F.S.
Thus, as a general rule public records m ay not b e routinely removed from t he
building or office in which such records are ordinarily kept except for official purposes.
AGO 93-16. The retention of such records in the home of a public official would appear
to circumvent t he public ac cess requirements 0 f t he Public Records A ct and
compromise the rights of the public to inspect and copy such records. Id. And see AGO
04-43 (mail addressed to city officials at City Hall and received at City Hall should not be
forwarded unopened to the private residences of the officials, but rather the original or a
copy of the mail thatconstitutesapublicrecordshouldbemaintainedatcityoffices).Cf
Inf. Op. to Sola, March 9, 2010 (municipal election records are municipal records which
should be maintained by city even though election conducted by county supervisor of
e lecti 0 n s) .
2. Delivery of records to successor
Section 119.021(4)(a), F.S., provides that whoever has custody of public records
shall deliver such records to his or her successor at the expiration of his or her term of
office or, if there is no successor, to the records and information management program
of t he 0 ivision 0 f Library and Information Services of the 0 epartment 0 f S tate. See
Maxwell v. Pine Gas Corporation, 1 95 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th 0 CA 1967) (state, county,
and municipal records ar e not t he personal pr operty 0 f a public officer); A GO 98-59
(records in the files of the former city attorney which were made or received in carrying
out her dut ies as city at torney and which communicate, per petuate, or formalize
knowledge constitute publ ic records and ar e required t 0 be turned over t 0 he r
successor); and A GO 75 -282 ( public records regardless of us efulness or relevancy
must bet urned over tot he custodian's successor i n 0 ffice or tot he 0 epartment 0 f
State). And see s. 119.021(4)(b), F.S., providing that "[w]hoever is entitled to custody of
public records shall demand them from any person having illegal possession of them,
who must forthwith deliver the same to him or her. II
In t he absence 0 f contrary di rection i n t he legislation di ssolving a special taxing
district, the district's records should be delivered to the Department of State. AGO 95-
03. Compare AGO 0 9-39 stating that i n I ight of a court or der hol ding t hat a n
independent special district is the successor-in-interest to the powers and duties of a
municipal services benefit district, the records of the MSBU should be delivered to the
special district. Cf s. 257.36(2)(b), F .S., specifying procedures for disposition of agency
records stored in the state records center in the event that the agency is dissolved or its
functions are transferred to another agency.
3. Retention and disposal of records
Section 119.021(2)(a), F.S. requires the Division of Library and Information Services
(division) of the Department of State to adopt rules establishing retention schedules and
a di sposal pr ocess for publ ic records. Each ag ency must comply with these rules.
Section 119.021(2)(b), F.S. And see s. 119.021(2)(c), F.S., providing that public officials
must "systematically dispose" of records no longer needed, subject to the consent of the
division in accordance with s. 257.36, F.S.
The division II shall give advice and as sistance to public officials to solve problems
related to the preservation, creation, filing and public accessibility of public records in
their c ustody." Section 119.021 (2)(d), F .S. Public 0 fficials s hall assist the division by
preparing an inclusive inventory of categories of public records. Id. The division shall
establish a time period for the retention or disposal of each series of records. Id. And
see s. 119.021(3), F.S., stating that notwithstanding the provisions of Chs. 119 or 257,
F.S., certain orders that comprise final agency action must be permanently maintained.
Cf. Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.430, establishing retention schedules for court records.
Section 257.36(6), F.S., states that a II public record may be destroyed or otherwise
disposed 0 f only in ac cordance with retention schedules es tablished by the di vision. II
The division is required to adopt reasonable rules relating to destruction and disposition
of records. Id. See generally Chs. 1 B-24 and 1 B-26, F .A.C. An affected party seeking to
challenge an agency's approved records retention schedule may be entitled to a hearing
pursuant to Ch. 120, F .S. L.R. v. Department of State, Division of Archives, History and
Records Management, 48 8 So.2d 1 22 ( Fla. 3 d 0 CA 19 86). And see AGO 04-51,
regarding t he ap plication 0 f t he retention schedules to materials obtained by law
enforcement ag encies which bec ome evidence i n criminal investigations and
prosecutions; an d I nf. 0 p. toM atthews, July 12, 2 004, noting the di vision's statutory
responsibility to ado pt rules es tablishing standards for reproduction or dupl ication of
audio or audiovisual tape recordings.
Thus, for example, a municipality may not remove and destroy disciplinary notices,
with or without t he em ployee's consent, during t he course 0 f resolving collective
bargaining grievances, except in accordance with the statutory restrictions on di sposal
of records. AGO 94-75. See also AGOs 09-19 (city under an obi igation to follow public
records retention schedules established by law for information on its F acebook pag e
which constitutes a public record); 98-54 (registration and disciplinary records stored in
a national as sociation securities dealers dat abase and us ed by s tate banking
department for regulatory purposes are public records and may not be destroyed merely
because an ar bitration pan el 0 f t he national as sociation has or dered that t hey be
expunged; such records ar e subject to statutory mandates governing des truction of
records); 96-34 (public records, "e-mail" messages are subject to statutory limitations on
destruction 0 f pu blic records); and 7 5-45 (tape recordings of pr oceedings be fore a
public body must b e pr eserved i n compliance with statutory record retention a nd
disposal restrictions). Cf AGO 91-23 (clerk of circuit court not authorized to expunge a
court or der from t he Official Records, in the abs ence 0 f a court or der di recting such
action). Accord Inf. Op. to Hernandez, July 1, 2003 (agency not authorized to purge or
expunge documents it created while carrying out what it perceived to be its official duty
based upo n an accusation that t he ag ency m ay have been mistaken ins uch an
assessment).
The statutory restrictions on destruction of public records apply even if the record is
exempt f rom disclosure. For ex ample, i n A GO 8 1-12, t he Attorney General's 0 ffice
concluded that t he City of Hollywood could not destroy or di spose 0 f licensure,
certification, or em ployment ex amination question an dans wer sheets ex cept as
authorized by statute. And see AGO 8 7-48 (statutory pr ohibition ag ainst pi acing
anonymous materials in the personnel file of a school district employee did not permit
the destruction 0 f such materials received i n t he course 0 f official school business,
absent compliance with statutory restrictions on destruction of records). An exemption
only removes t he records from public ac cess requirements, it does not ex empt t he
records from the other provisions of Ch. 119, F .S., such as those requiring that public
records be kept in a safe place or those regulating t he destruction 0 f pu blic records.
AGO 93-86. See s. 11 9.021, F .S. Cf s. 11 9.07(1 )(h), F .S., pr oviding that even if an
assertion is made by the custodian that a requested record is not a public record subject
to public inspection or copying under this subsection, the requested record may not be
disposed of for a period of 30 days after the date on which a written request to inspect
or copy the record was made to the custodian; if a civil action is instituted within the 30-
day period to enforce the provisions of this section with respect to the requested record,
the custodian may not di spose of t he record except by order of a court of competent
jurisdiction after notice to all affected parties.
APPENDICES
A. PUBLIC RECORDS AND MEETINGS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Article I, Section 24, Florida Constitution
Section 24. Access to public records and meetings.
(a) Every person has the right to inspect or copy any public record made or received
in connection with the official business of any public body, officer, or employee of the
state, or persons acting on their behalf, except with respect to records exempted
pursuant to this section or specifically made confidential by this Constitution. This
section specifically includes the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of
government and each agency or department created thereunder; counties,
municipalities, and districts; and each constitutional officer, board, and commission, or
entity created pursuant to law or this Constitution.
(b) All meetings of any collegial public body of the executive branch of state
government or of any collegial public body of a county, municipality, school district, or
special district, at which official acts are to be taken or at which public business of such
body is to be transacted or discussed, shall be open and noticed to the public and
meetings of the legislature shall be open and noticed as provided in Article III, Section
4(e), except with respect to meetings exempted pursuant to this section or specifically
closed by this Constitution.
(c) This section shall be self-executing. The legislature, however, may provide by
general law passed by a two-thirds vote of each house for the exemption of records
from the requirements of subsection (a) and the exemption of meetings from the
requirements of subsection (b), provided that such law shall state with specificity the
public necessity justifying the exemption and shall be no broader than necessary to
accomplish the stated purpose of the law. The legislature shall enact laws governing the
enforcement of this section, including the maintenance, control, destruction, disposal,
and disposition of records made public by this section, except that each house of the
legislature may adopt rules governing the enforcement of this section in relation to
records of the legislative branch. Laws enacted pursuant to this subsection shall contain
only exemptions from the requirements of subsections (a) or (b) and provisions
governing the enforcement of this section, and shall relate to one subject.
(d) All laws that are in effect on July 1, 1993 that limit public access to records or
meetings shall remain in force, and such laws apply to records of the legislative and
judicial branches, until they are repealed. Rules of court that are in effect on the date of
adoption of this section that limit access to records shall remain in effect until they are
repealed.
B. GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW AND RELATED STATUTES
286.011 Public meetings and records; public inspection; criminal and civil
penalties.--
(1) All meetings of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of
any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision,
except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, at which official acts are to be taken
are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, and no resolution,
rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such
meeting. The board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all such meetings.
(2) The minutes of a meeting of any such board or commission of any such state
agency or authority shall be promptly recorded, and such records shall be open to
public inspection. The circuit courts of this state shall have jurisdiction to issue
injunctions to enforce the purposes of this section upon application by any citizen of this
state.
(3)(a) Any public officer who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a
noncriminal infraction, punishable by fine not exceeding $500.
(b) Any person who is a member of a board or commission or of any state agency or
authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision who knowingly
violates the provisions of this section by attending a meeting not held in accordance
with the provisions hereof is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable
as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(c) Conduct which occurs outside the state which would constitute a knowing
violation of this section is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided
in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(4) Whenever an action has been filed against any board or commission of any state
agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or
political subdivision to enforce the provisions of this section or to invalidate the actions
of any such board, commission, agency, or authority, which action was taken in violation
of this section, and the court determines that the defendant or defendants to such action
acted in violation of this section, the court shall assess a reasonable attorney's fee
against such agency, and may assess a reasonable attorney's fee against the individual
filing such an action if the court finds it was filed in bad faith or was frivolous. Any fees
so assessed may be assessed against the individual member or members of such
board or commission; provided, that in any case where the board or commission seeks
the advice of its attorney and such advice is followed, no such fees shall be assessed
against the individual member or members of the board or commission. However, this
subsection shall not apply to a state attorney or his or her duly authorized assistants or
any officer charged with enforcing the provisions of this section.
(5) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any
agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision appeals
any court order which has found said board, commission, agency, or authority to have
violated this section, and such order is affirmed, the court shall assess a reasonable
attorney's fee for the appeal against such board, commission, agency, or authority. Any
fees so assessed may be assessed against the individual member or members of such
board or commission; provided, that in any case where the board or commission seeks
the advice of its attorney and such advice is followed, no such fees shall be assessed
against the individual member or members of the board or commission.
(6) All persons subject to subsection (1) are prohibited from holding meetings at any
facility or location which discriminates on the basis of sex, age, race, creed, color,
origin, or economic status or which operates in such a manner as to unreasonably
restrict public access to such a facility.
(7) Whenever any member of any board or commission of any state agency or
authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political
subdivision is charged with a violation of this section and is subsequently acquitted, the
board or commission is authorized to reimburse said member for any portion of his or
her reasonable attorney's fees.
(8) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), any board or commission of any
state agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal
corporation, or political subdivision, and the chief administrative or executive officer of
the governmental entity, may meet in private with the entity's attorney to discuss
pending litigation to which the entity is presently a party before a court or administrative
agency, provided that the following conditions are met:
(a) The entity's attorney shall advise the entity at a public meeting that he or she
desires advice concerning the litigation.
(b) The subject matter of the meeting shall be confined to settlement negotiations or
strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures.
(c) The entire session shall be recorded by a certified court reporter. The reporter
shall record the times of commencement and termination of the session, all discussion
and proceedings, the names of all persons present at any time, and the names of all
persons speaking. No portion of the session shall be off the record. The court reporter's
notes shall be fully transcribed and filed with the entity's clerk within a reasonable time
after the meeting.
(d) The entity shall give reasonable public notice of the time and date of the
attorney-client session and the names of persons who will be attending the session. The
session shall commence at an open meeting at which the persons chairing the meeting
shall announce the commencement and estimated length of the attorney-client session
and the names of the persons attending. At the conclusion of the attorney-client
session, the meeting shall be reopened and the person chairing the meeting shall
announce the termination of the session.
(e) The transcript shall be made part of the public record upon conclusion of the
litigation.
Related sections read as follows:
286.0105 Notices of meetings and hearings must advise that a record is
required to appeaL--
Each bo ard, commission, or ag ency of this s tate or of a ny pol itical subdivision
thereof shall include in the notice of any meeting or hearing, if notice of the meeting or
hearing is required, of such boar d, commission, or ag ency, conspicuously on such
notice, the advice that, if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the board,
agency, or commission with respect t 0 an y matter considered at such meeting or
hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he
or she may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which
record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The
requirements of this section do not apply to the notice provided in s. 200.065(3).
286.0111 Legislative review of certain exemptions from requirements for
public meetings and record keeping by governmental entities.--
The pr ovisions of s. 119. 15, t he 0 pen Government Sunset Review A ct of 19 95,
apply to the provisions of law which provide exemptions to s. 286.011, as provided in s.
119.15.
286.0113 General exemptions from public meetings.--
(1) T hat portion of a meeting t hat would reveal a security system pi an or portion
thereof made confidential and ex empt by s. 119.071 (3)(a) is ex empt from s. 286 .011
and s. 24(b), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(2)(a) A meeting at which a neg otiation with a vendor is conducted pursuant to s.
287.057(1) is exempt from s. 286.011 and s. 24(b), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(b)1. A complete recording shall be made of any meeting made exempt in paragraph
(a). No portion of the meeting may be held off the record.
2. The recording required under subparagraph 1. is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s.
24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of a
decision or intended decision pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a) or until 20 days after the final
competitive sealed replies are all opened, whichever occurs earlier.
3. If the agency rejects all sealed replies, the recording remains exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency
provides notice of a decision or intended decision pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a)
concerning the reissued invitation to negotiate or until the agency withdraws the
reissued invitation to negotiate. A recording is not exempt for longer than 12 months
after the initial agency notice rejecting all replies.
(c) This subsection i s subject tot he 0 pen Government Sunset Review A ct i n
accordance with s . 1 19.15 and shall stand repealed on 0 ctober 2, 2011, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
286.0115 Access to local public officials; quasi-judicial proceedings on local
government land use matters.--
(1 )(a) A county or municipality may adopt a n ordinance or resolution removing the
presumption 0 f pr ejudice f rom ex par te communications with local publ ic 0 fficials by
establishing a process to disclose ex parte communications with such officials pursuant
to this subsection or by adopting an alternative process for such disclosure. However,
this subsection do es not require a county or municipality to ado pt any or dinance or
resolution establishing a disclosure process.
(b) As used in this subsection, the term "Iocal public official" means any elected or
appointed public official holding a county or municipal office who recommends or takes
quasi-judicial action as a member of a board or commission. The term does not include
a member of the board or commission of any state agency or authority.
(c) Any person not otherwise prohibited by statute, charter provision, or ordinance
may discuss with any local public official the merits of any matter on which action may
be taken by any board or commission on which the local public official is a member. If
adopted by county or municipal ordinance or resolution, adherence to the following
procedures shall remove the presumption of prejudice arising from ex parte
communications with local public officials.
1. The substance of any ex parte communication with a local public official which
relates to quasi-judicial action pending before the official is not presumed prejudicial to
the action if the subject of the communication and the identity of the person, group, or
entity with whom the communication took place is disclosed and made a part of the
record before final action on the matter.
2. A local public official may read a written communication from any person.
However, a written communication that relates to quasi-judicial action pending before a
local public official shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action, and such written
communication shall be made a part of the record before final action on the matter.
3. Local public officials may conduct investigations and site visits and may receive
expert opinions regarding quasi-judicial action pending before them. Such activities
shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action if the existence of the investigation, site
visit, or expert opinion is made a part of the record before final action on the matter.
4. Disclosure made pursuant to subparagraphs 1., 2., and 3. must be made before
or during the public meeting at which a vote is taken on such matters, so that persons
who have opinions contrary to those expressed in the ex parte communication are given
a reasonable opportunity to refute or respond to the communication. This subsection
does not subject local public officials to part III of chapter 112 for not complying with this
paragraph.
(2)(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), a county or municipality may
adopt an or dinance 0 r resolution es tablishing t he pr ocedures an d pr ovisions of this
subsection f or quasi-judicial pr oceedings on local government I and us e matters. T he
ordinance or resolution shall pr ovide pr ocedures a nd pr ovisions identical tot his
subsection. However, this subsection does not require a county or municipality to adopt
such an ordinance or resolution.
(b) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person
who appears before the decisionmaking body who is not a party or party-intervenor
shall be allowed to testify before the decisionmaking body, subject to control by the
decisionmaking body, and may be requested to respond to questions from the
decisionmaking body, but need not be sworn as a witness, is not required to be subject
to cross-examination, and is not required to be qualified as an expert witness. The
decisionmaking body shall assign weight and credibility to such testimony as it deems
appropriate. A party or party-intervenor in a quasi-judicial proceeding on local
government land use matters, upon request by another party or party-intervenor, shall
be sworn as a witness, shall be subject to cross-examination by other parties or party-
intervenors, and shall be required to be qualified as an expert witness, as appropriate.
(c) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person
may not be precluded from communicating directly with a member of the
decisionmaking body by application of ex parte communication prohibitions. Disclosure
of such communications by a member of the decisionmaking body is not required, and
such nondisclosure shall not be presumed prejudicial to the decision of the
decisionmaking body. All decisions of the decisionmaking body in a quasi-judicial
proceeding on local government land use matters must be supported by substantial,
competent evidence in the record pertinent to the proceeding, irrespective of such
communications.
(3) This section does not restrict the authority of any board or commission to
establish rules or procedures governing public hearings or contacts with local public
officials.
286.012 Voting requirement at meetings of governmental bodies.--
No member of any state, county, or municipal governmental board, commission, or
agency who is present at any meeting of any such body at which an official decision,
ruling, or other official act is to be taken or adopted may abstain from voting in regard to
any such decision, ruling, or act; and a vote shall be recorded or counted for each such
member present, except when, with respect to any such member, there is, or appears to
be, a possible conflict of interest under the provisions of s. 112.311, s. 112.313, or s.
112.3143. In such cases, said member shall comply with the disclosure requirements of
s. 112.3143.
286.26 Accessibility of public meetings to the physically handicapped.--
(1) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority, or of any
agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or other political subdivision,
which has scheduled a meeting at which official acts are to be taken receives, at least
48 hours prior to the meeting, a written request by a physically handicapped person to
attend the meeting, directed to the chairperson or director of such board, commission,
agency, or authority, such chairperson or director shall provide a manner by which such
person may attend the meeting at its scheduled site or reschedule the meeting to a site
which would be accessible to such person.
(2) If an affected handicapped person objects in the written request, nothing
contained in the provisions of this section shall be construed or interpreted to permit the
use of human physical assistance to the physically handicapped in lieu of the
construction or use of ramps or other mechanical devices in order to comply with the
provisions of this section.
C. THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES
119.01 General state policy on public records.--
(1) It is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal records are open
for personal inspection and copying by any person. Providing access to public records
is a duty of each agency.
(2)(a) Automation of public records must not erode the right of access to those
records. As each agency increases its use of and dependence on electronic
recordkeeping, each agency must provide reasonable public access to records
electronically maintained and must ensure that exempt or confidential records are not
disclosed except as otherwise permitted by law.
(b) When designing or acquiring an electronic recordkeeping system, an agency
must consider whether such system is capable of providing data in some common
format such as, but not limited to, the American Standard Code for Information
Interchange.
(c) An agency may not enter into a contract for the creation or maintenance of a
public records database if that contract impairs the ability of the public to inspect or copy
the public records of the agency, including public records that are on-line or stored in an
electronic record keeping system used by the agency.
(d) Subject to the restrictions of copyright and trade secret laws and public records
exemptions, agency use of proprietary software must not diminish the right of the public
to inspect and copy a public record.
(e) Providing access to public records by remote electronic means is an additional
method of access that agencies should strive to provide to the extent feasible. If an
agency provides access to public records by remote electronic means, such access
should be provided in the most cost-effective and efficient manner available to the
agency providing the information.
(f) Each agency that maintains a public record in an electronic record keeping system
shall provide to any person, pursuant to this chapter, a copy of any public record in that
system which is not exempted by law from public disclosure. An agency must provide a
copy of the record in the medium requested if the agency maintains the record in that
medium, and the agency may charge a fee in accordance with this chapter. For the
purpose of satisfying a public records request, the fee to be charged by an agency if it
elects to provide a copy of a public record in a medium not routinely used by the
agency, or if it elects to compile information not routinely developed or maintained by
the agency or that requires a substantial amount of manipulation or programming, must
be in accordance with s. 119.07(4).
(3) If public funds are expended by an agency in payment of dues or membership
contributions for any person, corporation, foundation, trust, association, group, or other
organization, all the financial, business, and membership records of that person,
corporation, foundation, trust, association, group, or other organization which pertain to
the public agency are public records and subject to the provisions of s. 119.07.
119.011 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, the term:
(1) "Actual cost of duplication" means the cost of the material and supplies used to
duplicate the public record, but does not include labor cost or overhead cost associated
with such duplication.
(2) "Agency" means any state, county, district, authority, or municipal officer,
department, division, board, bureau, commission, or other separate unit of government
created or established by law including, for the purposes of this chapter, the
Commission on Ethics, the Public Service Commission, and the Office of Public
Counsel, and any other public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or
business entity acting on behalf of any public agency.
(3)(a) "Criminal intelligence information" means information with respect to an
identifiable person or group of persons collected by a criminal justice agency in an effort
to anticipate, prevent, or monitor possible criminal activity.
(b) "Criminal investigative information" means information with respect to an
identifiable person or group of persons compiled by a criminal justice agency in the
course of conducting a criminal investigation of a specific act or omission, including, but
not limited to, information derived from laboratory tests, reports of investigators or
informants, or any type of surveillance.
(c) "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" shall
not include:
1. The time, date, location, and nature of a reported crime.
2. The name, sex, age, and address of a person arrested or of the victim of a crime
except as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(h).
3. The time, date, and location of the incident and of the arrest.
4. The crime charged.
5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person
arrested, except as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(h), and, except that the court in a
criminal case may order that certain information required by law or agency rule to be
given to the person arrested be maintained in a confidential manner and exempt from
the provisions of s. 119.07(1) until released at trial if it is found that the release of such
information would:
a. Be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or would jeopardize the
safety of such victim or witness; and
b. Impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant.
6. Informations and indictments except as provided in s. 905.26.
(d) The word "active" shall have the following meaning:
1. Criminal intelligence information shall be considered "active" as long as it is
related to intelligence gathering conducted with a reasonable, good faith belief that it
will lead to detection of ongoing or reasonably anticipated criminal activities.
2. Criminal investigative information shall be considered "active" as long as it is
related to an ongoing investigation which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith
anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution in the foreseeable future.
In addition, criminal intelligence and criminal investigative information shall be
considered "active" while such information is directly related to pending
prosecutions or appeals. The word "active" shall not apply to information in cases
which are barred from prosecution under the provisions of s. 775.15 or other
statute of limitation.
(4) "Criminal justice agency" means:
(a) Any law enforcement agency, court, or prosecutor;
(b) Any other agency charged by law with criminal law enforcement duties;
(c) Any agency having custody of criminal intelligence information or criminal
investigative information for the purpose of assisting such law enforcement
agencies in the conduct of active criminal investigation or prosecution or for the
purpose of litigating civil actions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organization Act, during the time that such agencies are in possession of criminal
intelligence information or criminal investigative information pursuant to their
criminal law enforcement duties; or
(d) The Department of Corrections.
(5) "Custodian of public records" means the elected or appointed state, county,
or municipal officer charged with the responsibility of maintaining the office having
public records, or his or her designee.
(6) "Data processing software" means the programs and routines used to
employ and control the capabilities of data processing hardware, including, but not
limited to, operating systems, compilers, assemblers, utilities, library routines,
maintenance routines, applications, and computer networking programs.
(7) "Duplicated copies" means new copies produced by duplicating, as defined
in s. 283.30.
(8) "Exemption" means a provision of general law which provides that a
specified record or meeting, or portion thereof, is not subject to the access
requirements of s. 119.07(1), s. 286.011, or s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(9) "Information technology resources" means data processing hardware and
software and services, communications, supplies, personnel, facility resources,
maintenance, and training.
(10) "Paratransit" has the same meaning as provided in s. 427.011.
(11) "Proprietary software" means data processing software that is protected by
copyright or trade secret laws.
(12) "Public records" means all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes,
photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing software, or other material,
regardless of the physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission, made or
received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of
official business by any agency.
(13) "Redact" means to conceal from a copy of an original public record, or to
conceal from an electronic image that is available for public viewing, that portion of
the record containing exempt or confidential information.
(14) "Sensitive," for purposes of defining agency-produced software that is
sensitive, means only those portions of data processing software, including the
specifications and documentation, which are used to:
(a) Collect, process, store, and retrieve information that is exempt from s.
119.07(1 );
(b) Collect, process, store, and retrieve financial management information of
the agency, such as payroll and accounting records; or
(c) Control and direct access authorizations and security measures for
automated systems.
119.021 Custodial requirements; maintenance, preservation, and retention of
public records.--
(1) Public records shall be maintained and preserved as follows:
(a) All public records should be kept in the buildings in which they are ordinarily
used.
(b) Insofar as practicable, a custodian of public records of vital, permanent, or
archival records shall keep them in fireproof and waterproof safes, vaults, or rooms
fitted with noncombustible materials and in such arrangement as to be easily
accessible for convenient use.
(c)1. Record books should be copied or repaired, renovated, or rebound if worn,
mutilated, damaged, or difficult to read.
2. Whenever any state, county, or municipal records are in need of repair,
restoration, or rebinding, the head of the concerned state agency, department, board,
or commission; the board of county commissioners of such county; or the governing
body of such municipality may authorize that such records be removed from the
building or office in which such records are ordinarily kept for the length of time
required to repair, restore, or rebind them.
3. Any public official who causes a record book to be copied shall attest and certify
under oath that the copy is an accurate copy of the original book. The copy shall then
have the force and effect of the original.
(2)(a) The Division of Library and Information Services of the Department of State
shall adopt rules to establish retention schedules and a disposal process for public
records.
(b) Each agency shall comply with the rules establishing retention schedules and
disposal processes for public records which are adopted by the records and
information management program of the division.
(c)Each public official shall systematically dispose of records no longer needed,
subject to the consent of the records and information management program of the
division in accordance with s. 257.36.
(d) The division may ascertain the condition of public records and shall give advice
and assistance to public officials to solve problems related to the preservation,
creation, filing, and public accessibility of public records in their custody. Public officials
shall assist the division by preparing an inclusive inventory of categories of public
records in their custody. The division shall establish a time period for the retention or
disposal of each series of records. Upon the completion of the inventory and schedule,
the division shall, subject to the availability of necessary space, staff, and other
facilities for such purposes, make space available in its records center for the filing of
semicurrent records so scheduled and in its archives for noncurrent records of
permanent value, and shall render such other assistance as needed, including the
microfilming of records so scheduled.
(3) Agency orders that comprise final agency action and that must be indexed or
listed pursuant to s. 120.53 have continuing legal significance; therefore,
notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter or any provision of chapter 257,
each agency shall permanently maintain records of such orders pursuant to the
applicable rules of the Department of State.
(4)(a) Whoever has custody of any public records shall deliver, at the expiration of
his or her term of office, to his or her successor or, if there be none, to the records and
information management program of the Division of Library and Information Services of
the Department of State, all public records kept or received by him or her in the
transaction of official business.
(b) Whoever is entitled to custody of public records shall demand them from any
person having illegal possession of them, who must forthwith deliver the same to him
or her. Any person unlawfully possessing public records must within 10 days deliver
such records to the lawful custodian of public records unless just cause exists for
failing to deliver such records.
119.07 Inspection and copying of records; photographing public records;
fees; exemptions.--
(1 )(a) Every person who has custody of a public record shall permit the record to be
inspected and copied by any person desiring to do so, at any reasonable time, under
reasonable conditions, and under supervision by the custodian of the public records.
(b) A custodian of public records or a person having custody of public records may
designate another officer or employee of the agency to permit the inspection and
copying of public records, but must disclose the identity of the designee to the person
requesting to inspect or copy public records.
(c) A custodian of public records and his or her designee must acknowledge
requests to inspect or copy records promptly and respond to such requests in good
faith. A good faith response includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other
officers or employees within the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the
location at which the record can be accessed.
(d) A person who has custody of a public record who asserts that an exemption
applies to a part of such record shall redact that portion of the record to which an
exemption has been asserted and validly applies, and such person shall produce the
remainder of such record for inspection and copying.
(e) If the person who has custody of a public record contends that all or part of the
record is exempt from inspection and copying, he or she shall state the basis of the
exemption that he or she contends is applicable to the record, including the statutory
citation to an exemption created or afforded by statute.
(f) If requested by the person seeking to inspect or copy the record, the custodian of
public records shall state in writing and with particularity the reasons for the conclusion
that the record is exempt or confidential.
(g) In any civil action in which an exemption to this section is asserted, if the
exemption is alleged to exist under or by virtue of s. 119.071 (1 )(d) or (f), (2)(d),(e), or
(f), or (4)(c), the public record or part thereof in question shall be submitted to the court
for an inspection in camera. If an exemption is alleged to exist under or by virtue of s.
119.071 (2)(c), an inspection in camera is discretionary with the court. If the court finds
that the asserted exemption is not applicable, it shall order the public record or part
thereof in question to be immediately produced for inspection or copying as requested
by the person seeking such access.
(h) Even if an assertion is made by the custodian of public records that a requested
record is not a public record subject to public inspection or copying under this
subsection, the requested record shall, nevertheless, not be disposed of for a period of
30 days after the date on which a written request to inspect or copy the record was
served on or otherwise made to the custodian of public records by the person seeking
access to the record. If a civil action is instituted within the 30-day period to enforce the
provisions of this section with respect to the requested record, the custodian of public
records may not dispose of the record except by order of a court of competent
jurisdiction after notice to all affected parties.
(i) The absence of a civil action instituted for the purpose stated in paragraph (e)
does not relieve the custodian of public records of the duty to maintain the record as a
public record if the record is in fact a public record subject to public inspection and
copying under this subsection and does not otherwise excuse or exonerate the
custodian of public records from any unauthorized or unlawful disposition of such
record.
(2)(a) As an additional means of inspecting or copying public records, a custodian
of public records may provide access to public records by remote electronic means,
provided exempt or confidential information is not disclosed.
(b) The custodian of public records shall provide safeguards to protect the contents
of public records from unauthorized remote electronic access or alteration and to
prevent the disclosure or modification of those portions of public records which are
exempt or confidential from subsection (1) or s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(c) Unless otherwise required by law, the custodian of public records may charge a
fee for remote electronic access, granted under a contractual arrangement with a user,
which fee may include the direct and indirect costs of providing such access. Fees for
remote electronic access provided to the general public shall be in accordance with the
provisions of this section.
(3)(a) Any person shall have the right of access to public records for the purpose of
making photographs of the record while such record is in the possession, custody, and
control of the custodian of public records.
(b) This subsection applies to the making of photographs in the conventional sense
by use of a camera device to capture images of public records but excludes the
duplication of microfilm in the possession of the clerk of the circuit court where a copy
of the microfilm may be made available by the clerk.
(c) Photographing public records shall be done under the supervision of the
custodian of public records, who may adopt and enforce reasonable rules governing
the photographing of such records.
(d) Photographing of public records shall be done in the room where the public
records are kept. If, in the judgment of the custodian of public records, this is
impossible or impracticable, photographing shall be done in another room or place, as
nearly adjacent as possible to the room where the public records are kept, to be
determined by the custodian of public records. Where provision of another room or
place for photographing is required, the expense of providing the same shall be paid by
the person desiring to photograph the public record pursuant to paragraph (4)(e).
(4) The custodian of public records shall furnish a copy or a certified copy of the
record upon payment of the fee prescribed by law. If a fee is not prescribed by law, the
following fees are authorized:
(a)1. Up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for duplicated copies of not more than 14
inches by 81'2 inches;
2. No more than an additional 5 cents for each two-sided copy; and
3. For all other copies, the actual cost of duplication of the public record.
(b) The charge for copies of county maps or aerial photographs supplied by county
constitutional officers may also include a reasonable charge for the labor and overhead
associated with their duplication.
(c) An agency may charge up to $1 per copy for a certified copy of a public record.
(d) If the nature or volume of public records requested to be inspected or copied
pursuant to this subsection is such as to require extensive use of information
technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance by personnel of
the agency involved, or both, the agency may charge, in addition to the actual cost of
duplication, a special service charge, which shall be reasonable and shall be based on
the cost incurred for such extensive use of information technology resources or the
labor cost of the personnel providing the service that is actually incurred by the agency
or attributable to the agency for the clerical and supervisory assistance required, or
both.
(e)1. Where provision of another room or place is necessary to photograph public
records, the expense of providing the same shall be paid by the person desiring to
photograph the public records.
2. The custodian of public records may charge the person making the photographs
for supervision services at a rate of compensation to be agreed upon by the person
desiring to make the photographs and the custodian of public records. If they fail to
agree as to the appropriate charge, the charge shall be determined by the custodian
of public records.
(5) When ballots are produced under this section for inspection or examination, no
persons other than the supervisor of elections or the supervisor's employees shall
touch the ballots. If the ballots are being examined before the end of the contest
period in s. 102.168, the supervisor of elections shall make a reasonable effort to
notify all candidates by telephone or otherwise of the time and place of the inspection
or examination. All such candidates, or their representatives, shall be allowed to be
present during the inspection or examination.
(6) An exemption contained in this chapter or in any other general or special law
shall not limit the access of the Auditor General, the Office of Program Policy Analysis
and Government Accountability, or any state, county, municipal, university, board of
community college, school district, or special district internal auditor to public records
when such person states in writing that such records are needed for a properly
authorized audit, examination, or investigation. Such person shall maintain the exempt
or confidential status of that public record and shall be subject to the same penalties
as the custodian of that record for public disclosure of such record.
(7) An exemption from this section does not imply an exemption from s. 286.011.
The exemption from s. 286.011 must be expressly provided.
(8) The provisions of this section are not intended to expand or limit the provisions
of Rule 3.220, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding the right and extent of
discovery by the state or by a defendant in a criminal prosecution or in collateral
postconviction proceedings. This section may not be used by any inmate as the basis
for failing to timely litigate any postconviction action.
119.071 General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records.--
(1) AGENCY ADMINISTRATION.--
(a) Examination questions and answer sheets of examinations administered by a
governmental agency for the purpose of licensure, certification, or employment are
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. A person who
has taken such an examination has the right to review his or her own completed
examination.
(b)1.a. Sealed bids or proposals received by an agency pursuant to invitations to
bid or requests for proposals are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the
State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of a decision or
intended decision pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a) or within 10 days after bid or proposal
opening, whichever is earlier.
b. If an agency rejects all bids or proposals submitted in response to an invitation
to bid or request for proposals and the agency concurrently provides notice of its intent
to reissue the invitation to bid or request for proposals, the rejected bids or proposals
remain exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such
time as the agency provides notice of a decision or intended decision pursuant to s.
120.57(3)(a) concerning the reissued invitation to bid or request for proposals or until
the agency withdraws the reissued invitation to bid or request for proposals. This sub-
subparagraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance
with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2011, unless reviewed and
saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
2.a. A competitive sealed reply in response to an invitation to negotiate, as defined
in s. 287.012, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution
until such time as the agency provides notice of a decision or intended decision
pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a) or until 20 days after the final competitive sealed replies
are all opened, whichever occurs earlier.
b. If an agency rejects all competitive sealed replies in response to an invitation to
negotiate and concurrently provides notice of its intent to reissue the invitation to
negotiate and reissues the invitation to negotiate within 90 days after the notice of
intent to reissue the invitation to negotiate, the rejected replies remain exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency
provides notice of a decision or intended decision pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a)
concerning the reissued invitation to negotiate or until the agency withdraws the
reissued invitation to negotiate. A competitive sealed reply is not exempt for longer
than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all replies.
c. This subparagraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2011, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(c) Any financial statement that an agency requires a prospective bidder to submit
in order to prequalify for bidding or for responding to a proposal for a road or any other
public works project is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution.
(d)1. A public record that was prepared by an agency attorney (including an
attorney employed or retained by the agency or employed or retained by another
public officer or agency to protect or represent the interests of the agency having
custody of the record) or prepared at the attorney's express direction, that reflects a
mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy, or legal theory of the attorney or the
agency, and that was prepared exclusively for civil or criminal litigation or for
adversarial administrative proceedings, or that was prepared in anticipation of
imminent civil or criminal litigation or imminent adversarial administrative proceedings,
is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until the
conclusion of the litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings. For purposes of
capital collateral litigation as set forth in s. 27.7001, the Attorney General's office is
entitled to claim this exemption for those public records prepared for direct appeal as
well as for all capital collateral litigation after direct appeal until execution of sentence
or imposition of a life sentence.
2. This exemption is not waived by the release of such public record to another
public employee or officer of the same agency or any person consulted by the agency
attorney. When asserting the right to withhold a public record pursuant to this
paragraph, the agency shall identify the potential parties to any such criminal or civil
litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings. If a court finds that the document
or other record has been improperly withheld under this paragraph, the party seeking
access to such document or record shall be awarded reasonable attorney's fees and
costs in addition to any other remedy ordered by the court.
(e) Any videotape or video signal that, under an agreement with an agency, is
produced, made, or received by, or is in the custody of, a federally licensed radio or
television station or its agent is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
(f) Data processing software obtained by an agency under a licensing agreement
that prohibits its disclosure and which software is a trade secret, as defined in s.
812.081, and agency-produced data processing software that is sensitive are exempt
from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. The designation of
agency-produced software as sensitive shall not prohibit an agency head from sharing
or exchanging such software with another public agency.
(g)1. United States Census Bureau address information, which includes maps
showing structure location points, agency records verifying addresses, and agency
records identifying address errors or omissions, held by an agency pursuant to the
Local Update of Census Addresses Program, Title 13, United States Code, Pub. L. No.
103-430, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution.
2. Such information may be released to another agency or governmental entity in the
furtherance of its duties and responsibilities under the Local Update of Census
Addresses Program.
3. An agency performing duties and responsibilities under the Local Update of
Census Addresses program shall have access to any other confidential or exempt
information held by another agency if such access is necessary in order to perform its
duties and responsibilities under the program.
4. This exemption is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed October 2, 2012, unless reviewed
and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(2) AGENCY INVESTIGATIONS.--
(a) All criminal intelligence and criminal investigative information received by a
criminal justice agency prior to January 25, 1979, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s.
24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(b) Whenever criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information
held by a non-Florida criminal justice agency is available to a Florida criminal justice
agency only on a confidential or similarly restricted basis, the Florida criminal justice
agency may obtain and use such information in accordance with the conditions imposed
by the providing agency.
(c)1. Active criminal intelligence information and active criminal investigative
information are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2.a. A request made by a law enforcement agency to inspect or copy a public
record that is in the custody of another agency and the custodian's response to the
request, and any information that would identify whether a law enforcement agency has
requested or received that public record are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art.
I of the State Constitution, during the period in which the information constitutes active
criminal intelligence information or active criminal investigative information.
b. The law enforcement agency that made the request to inspect or copy a public
record shall give notice to the custodial agency when the criminal intelligence
information or criminal investigative information is no longer active so that the request
made by the law enforcement agency, the custodian's response to the request, and
information that would identify whether the law enforcement agency had requested or
received that public record are available to the public.
c. This exemption is remedial in nature, and it is the intent of the Legislature that the
exemption be applied to requests for information received before, on, or after the
effective date of this paragraph.
(d) Any information revealing surveillance techniques or procedures or personnel is
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. Any
comprehensive inventory of state and local law enforcement resources compiled
pursuant to part I, chapter 23, and any comprehensive policies or plans compiled by a
criminal justice agency pertaining to the mobilization, deployment, or tactical operations
involved in responding to emergencies, as defined in s. 252.34(3), are exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution and unavailable for inspection,
except by personnel authorized by a state or local law enforcement agency, the office of
the Governor, the Department of Legal Affairs, the Department of Law Enforcement, or
the Department of Community Affairs as having an official need for access to the
inventory or comprehensive policies or plans.
(e) Any information revealing the substance of a confession of a person arrested is
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, until such time as
the criminal case is finally determined by adjudication, dismissal, or other final
disposition.
(f ) Any information revealing the identity of a confidential informant or a confidential
source is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(g)1.a. All complaints and other records in the custody of any agency which relate to
a complaint of discrimination relating to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age,
handicap, or marital status in connection with hiring practices, position classifications,
salary, benefits, discipline, discharge, employee performance, evaluation, or other
related activities are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution until a finding is made relating to probable cause, the investigation of the
complaint becomes inactive, or the complaint or other record is made part of the official
record of any hearing or court proceeding.
b, This provision shall not affect any function or activity of the Florida Commission
on Human Relations.
c. Any state or federal agency that is authorized to have access to such complaints
or records by any provision of law shall be granted such access in the furtherance of
such agency's statutory duties.
2. When the alleged victim chooses not to file a complaint and requests that
records of the complaint remain confidential, all records relating to an allegation of
employment discrimination are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a),
Art. I of the State Constitution.
3. This paragraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2013, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(h)1. The following criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the
State Constitution:
a. Any information, including the photograph, name, address, or other fact, which
reveals the identity of the victim of the crime of child abuse as defined by chapter 827.
b. Any information which may reveal the identity of a person who is a victim of any
sexual offense, including a sexual offense proscribed in chapter 794, chapter 796,
chapter 800, chapter 827, or chapter 847.
c. A photograph, videotape, or image of any part of the body of the victim of a
sexual offense prohibited under chapter 794, chapter 796, chapter 800, chapter 827,
or chapter 847, regardless of whether the photograph, videotape, or image identifies
the victim.
2. Criminal investigative information and criminal intelligence information made
confidential and exempt under this paragraph may be disclosed by a law enforcement
agency:
a. In the furtherance of its official duties and responsibilities.
b. For print, publication, or broadcast if the law enforcement agency determines
that such release would assist in locating or identifying a person that such agency
believes to be missing or endangered. The information provided should be limited to
that needed to identify or locate the victim and not include the sexual nature of the
offense committed against the person.
c. To another governmental agency in the furtherance of its official duties and
responsibilities.
3. This exemption applies to such confidential and exempt criminal intelligence
information or criminal investigative information held by a law enforcement agency
before, on, or after the effective date of the exemption.
4. This paragraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15, and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2013, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(i) Any criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information that
reveals the personal assets of the victim of a crime, other than property stolen or
destroyed during the commission of the crime, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s.
24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
U) Any document that reveals the identity, home or employment telephone number,
home or employment address, or personal assets of the victim of a crime and
identifies that person as the victim of a crime, which document is received by any
agency that regularly receives information from or concerning the victims of crime, is
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. Any information
not otherwise held confidential or exempt from s. 119.07(1) which reveals the home or
employment telephone number, home or employment address, or personal assets of a
person who has been the victim of sexual battery, aggravated child abuse, aggravated
stalking, harassment, aggravated battery, or domestic violence is exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, upon written request by the
victim, which must include official verification that an applicable crime has occurred.
Such information shall cease to be exempt 5 years after the receipt of the written
request. Any state or federal agency that is authorized to have access to such
documents by any provision of law shall be granted such access in the furtherance of
such agency's statutory duties, notwithstanding this section.
2.a. Any information in a videotaped statement of a minor who is alleged to be or
who is a victim of sexual battery, lewd acts, or other sexual misconduct proscribed in
chapter 800 or in s. 794.011, s. 827.071, s. 847.012, s. 847.0125, s. 847.013, s.
847.0133, or s. 847.0145, which reveals that minor's identity, including, but not limited
to, the minor's face; the minor's home, school, church, or employment telephone
number; the minor's home, school, church, or employment address; the name of the
minor's school, church, or place of employment; or the personal assets of the minor;
and which identifies that minor as the victim of a crime described in this subparagraph,
held by a law enforcement agency, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s.
24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. Any governmental agency that is authorized to
have access to such statements by any provision of law shall be granted such access
in the furtherance of the agency's statutory duties, notwithstanding the provisions of
this section.
b. A public employee or officer who has access to a videotaped statement of a
minor who is alleged to be or who is a victim of sexual battery, lewd acts, or other
sexual misconduct proscribed in chapter 800 or in s. 794.011, s. 827.071, s. 847.012,
s. 847.0125, s. 847.013, s. 847.0133, or s. 847.0145 may not willfully and knowingly
disclose videotaped information that reveals the minor's identity to a person who is not
assisting in the investigation or prosecution of the alleged offense or to any person
other than the defendant, the defendant's attorney, or a person specified in an order
entered by the court having jurisdiction of the alleged offense. A person who violates
this provision commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s.
775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) SECURITY.--
(a)1. As used in this paragraph, the term "security system plan" includes all:
a. Records, information, photographs, audio and visual presentations, schematic
diagrams, surveys, recommendations, or consultations or portions thereof relating
directly to the physical security of the facility or revealing security systems;
b. Threat assessments conducted by any agency or any private entity;
c. Threat response plans;
d. Emergency evacuation plans;
e. Sheltering arrangements; or
f. Manuals for security personnel, emergency equipment, or security training.
2. A security system plan or portion thereof for:
a. Any property owned by or leased to the state or any of its political subdivisions;
or
b. Any privately owned or leased property held by an agency is confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This exemption
is remedial in nature, and it is the intent of the Legislature that this exemption apply to
security system plans held by an agency before, on, or after the effective date of this
paragraph.
3. Information made confidential and exempt by this paragraph may be disclosed by
the custodian of public records to:
a. The property owner or leaseholder; or
b. Another state or federal agency to prevent, detect, guard against, respond to,
investigate, or manage the consequences of any attempted or actual act of terrorism,
or to prosecute those persons who are responsible for such attempts or acts.
(b)1. Building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings, and diagrams, including draft,
preliminary, and final formats, which depict the internal layout and structural elements
of a building, arena, stadium, water treatment facility, or other structure owned or
operated by an agency are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution.
2. This exemption applies to building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings, and
diagrams, including draft, preliminary, and final formats, which depict the internal
layout and structural elements of a building, arena, stadium, water treatment facility, or
other structure owned or operated by an agency before, on, or after the effective date
of this act.
3. Information made exempt by this paragraph may be disclosed:
a. To another governmental entity if disclosure is necessary for the receiving entity
to perform its duties and responsibilities;
b. To a licensed architect, engineer, or contractor who is performing work on or
related to the building, arena, stadium, water treatment facility, or other structure
owned or operated by an agency; or
c. Upon a showing of good cause before a court of competent jurisdiction.
4. The entities or persons receiving such information shall maintain the exempt
status of the information.
(c)1. Building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings, and diagrams, including draft,
preliminary, and final formats, which depict the internal layout or structural elements of
an attractions and recreation facility, entertainment or resort complex, industrial
complex, retail and service development, office development, or hotel or motel
development, which records are held by an agency are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and
s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. This exemption applies to any such records held by an agency before, on, or
after the effective date of this act.
3. Information made exempt by this paragraph may be disclosed to another
governmental entity if disclosure is necessary for the receiving entity to perform its
duties and responsibilities; to the owner or owners of the structure in question or the
owner's legal representative; or upon a showing of good cause before a court of
com petent j u risd iction.
4. This paragraph does not apply to comprehensive plans or site plans, or
amendments thereto, which are submitted for approval or which have been approved
under local land development regulations, local zoning regulations, or development-of-
regional-Impact review.
5. As used in this paragraph, the term:
a. "Attractions and recreation facility" means any sports, entertainment,
amusement, or recreation facility, including, but not limited to, a sports arena, stadium,
racetrack, tourist attraction, amusement park, or pari-mutuel facility that:
(I) For single-performance facilities:
(A) Provides single-performance facilities; or
(B) Provides more than 10,000 permanent seats for spectators.
(II) For serial-performance facilities:
(A) Provides parking spaces for more than 1 ,000 motor vehicles; or
(B) Provides more than 4,000 permanent seats for spectators.
b. "Entertainment or resort complex" means a theme park comprised of at least 25
acres of land with permanent exhibitions and a variety of recreational activities, which
has at least 1 million visitors annually who pay admission fees thereto, together with
any lodging, dining, and recreational facilities located adjacent to, contiguous to, or in
close proximity to the theme park, as long as the owners or operators of the theme
park, or a parent or related company or subsidiary thereof, has an equity interest in
the lodging, dining, or recreational facilities or is in privity therewith. Close proximity
includes an area within a 5-mile radius of the theme park complex.
c. "Industrial complex" means any industrial, manufacturing, processing,
distribution, warehousing, or wholesale facility or plant, as well as accessory uses and
structures, under common ownership that:
(I) Provides onsite parking for more than 250 motor vehicles;
(II) Encompasses 500,000 square feet or more of gross floor area; or
(III) Occupies a site of 100 acres or more, but excluding wholesale facilities or
plants that primarily serve or deal onsite with the general public.
d. "Retail and service development" means any retail, service, or wholesale
business establishment or group of establishments which deals primarily with the
general public onsite and is operated under one common property ownership,
development plan, or management that:
(I) Encompasses more than 400,000 square feet of gross floor area; or
(II) Provides parking spaces for more than 2,500 motor vehicles.
e. "Office development" means any office building or park operated under common
ownership, development plan, or management that encompasses 300,000 or more
square feet of gross floor area.
f. "Hotel or motel development" means any hotel or motel development that
accommodates 350 or more units.
(4) AGENCY PERSONNEL INFORMATION.--
(a) The social security numbers of all current and former agency employees which
numbers are held by the employing agency are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This paragraph is subject to the
Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand
repealed on October 2, 2014, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through
reenactment by the Legislature.
(b)1. Medical information pertaining to a prospective, current, or former officer or
employee of an agency which, if disclosed, would identify that officer or employee is
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. However, such
information may be disclosed if the person to whom the information pertains or the
person's legal representative provides written permission or pursuant to court order.
2.a. Personal identifying information of a dependent child of a current or former
officer or employee of an agency, which dependent child is insured by an agency
group insurance plan, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution. For purposes of this exemption, "dependent child" has the same meaning
as in s. 409.2554.
b. This exemption is remedial in nature and applies to personal identifying
information held by an agency before, on, or after the effective date of this exemption.
c. This subparagraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2014, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(c) Any information revealing undercover personnel of any criminal justice agency
is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(d)1.a. The home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, and
photographs of active or former law enforcement personnel, including correctional and
correctional probation officers, personnel of the Department of Children and Family
Services whose duties include the investigation of abuse, neglect, exploitation, fraud,
theft, or other criminal activities, personnel of the Department of Health whose duties
are to support the investigation of child abuse or neglect, and personnel of the
Department of Revenue or local governments whose responsibilities include revenue
collection and enforcement or child support enforcement; the home addresses,
telephone numbers, social security numbers, photographs, and places of employment
of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the names and locations of
schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such personnel are exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
b. The home addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of firefighters
certified in compliance with s. 633.35; the home addresses, telephone numbers,
photographs, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such
firefighters; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by
the children of such firefighters are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
c. The home addresses and telephone numbers of justices of the Supreme Court,
district court of appeal judges, circuit court judges, and county court judges; the home
addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment of the spouses and
children of justices and judges; and the names and locations of schools and day care
facilities attended by the children of justices and judges are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
d. The home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, and
photographs of current or former state attorneys, assistant state attorneys, statewide
prosecutors, or assistant statewide prosecutors; the home addresses, telephone
numbers, social security numbers, photographs, and places of employment of the
spouses and children of current or former state attorneys, assistant state attorneys,
statewide prosecutors, or assistant statewide prosecutors; and the names and
locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of current or
former state attorneys, assistant state attorneys, statewide prosecutors, or assistant
statewide prosecutors are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution.
e. The home addresses and telephone numbers of general magistrates, special
magistrates, judges of compensation claims, administrative law judges of the Division
of Administrative Hearings, and child support enforcement hearing officers; the home
addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of general magistrates, special magistrates, judges of compensation claims,
administrative law judges of the Division of Administrative Hearings, and child support
enforcement hearing officers; and the names and locations of schools, and day care
facilities attended by the children of general magistrates, special magistrates, judges of
compensation claims, administrative law judges of the Division of Administrative
Hearings, and child support enforcement hearing officers are exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution if the general magistrate, special
magistrate, judge of compensation claims, administrative law judge of the Division of
Administrative Hearings, or child support hearing officer provides a written statement
that the general magistrate, special magistrate, judge of compensation claims,
administrative law judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, or child support
hearing officer has made reasonable efforts to protect such information from being
accessible through other means available to the public. This sub-subparagraph is
subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15, and
shall stand repealed on October 2, 2013, unless reviewed and saved from repeal
through reenactment by the Legislature.
f. The home addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of current or former
human resource, labor relations, or employee relations directors, assistant directors,
managers, or assistant managers of any local government agency or water
management district whose duties include hiring and firing employees, labor contract
negotiation, administration, or other personnel-related duties; the names, home
addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities
attended by the children of such personnel are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a),
Art. I of the State Constitution.
g. The home addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of current or former
code enforcement officers; the names, home addresses, telephone numbers, and
places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the names
and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
h. The home addresses, telephone numbers, places of employment, and
photographs of current or former guardians ad litem, as defined in s. 39.820, and the
names, home addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment of the
spouses and children of such persons; and the names and locations of schools and
day care facilities attended by the children of such persons are exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, if the guardian ad litem provides
a written statement that the guardian ad litem has made reasonable efforts to protect
such information from being accessible through other means available to the public.
This sub-subparagraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2015, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
i. The home addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of current or former
juvenile probation officers, juvenile probation supervisors, detention superintendents,
assistant detention superintendents, senior juvenile detention officers, juvenile
detention officer supervisors, juvenile detention officers, house parents I and II, house
parent supervisors, group treatment leaders, group treatment leader supervisors,
rehabilitation therapists, and social services counselors of the Department of Juvenile
Justice; the names, home addresses, telephone numbers, and places of employment
of spouses and children of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools
and day care facilities attended by the children of such personnel are exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This sub-subparagraph is
subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and
shall stand repealed on October 2, 2011, unless reviewed and saved from repeal
through reenactment by the Legislature.
j. The home addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of current or former
public defenders, assistant public defenders, criminal conflict and civil regional counsel,
and assistant criminal conflict and civil regional counsel; the home addresses,
telephone numbers, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such
defenders or counsel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities
attended by the children of such defenders or counsel are exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This sub-subparagraph is subject to the
Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand
repealed on October 2, 2015, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through
reenactment by the Legislature.
2. An agency that is the custodian of the information specified in subparagraph 1.
and that is not the employer of the officer, employee, justice, judge, or other person
specified in subparagraph 1. shall maintain the exempt status of that information only if
the officer, employee, justice, judge, other person, or employing agency of the
designated employee submits a written request for maintenance of the exemption to
the custodial agency.
(5) OTHER PERSONAL INFORMATION.--
(a)1.a. The Legislature acknowledges that the social security number was never
intended to be used for business purposes but was intended to be used solely for the
administration of the federal Social Security System. The Legislature is further aware
that over time this unique numeric identifier has been used extensively for identity
verification purposes and other legitimate consensual purposes.
b. The Legislature recognizes that the social security number can be used as a tool
to perpetuate fraud against an individual and to acquire sensitive personal, financial,
medical, and familial information, the release of which could cause great financial or
personal harm to an individual.
c. The Legislature intends to monitor the use of social security numbers held by
agencies in order to maintain a balanced public policy.
2.a. An agency may not collect an individual's social security number unless the
agency has stated in writing the purpose for its collection and unless it is:
(I) Specifically authorized by law to do so; or
(II) Imperative for the performance of that agency's duties and responsibilities as
prescribed by law.
b. An agency shall identify in writing the specific federal or state law governing the
collection, use, or release of social security numbers for each purpose for which the
agency collects the social security number, including any authorized exceptions that
apply to such collection, use, or release. Each agency shall ensure that the collection,
use, or release of social security numbers complies with the specific applicable federal
or state law.
c. Social security numbers collected by an agency may not be used by that agency
for any purpose other than the purpose provided in the written statement.
3. An agency collecting an individual's social security number shall, provide that
individual with a copy of the written statement required in subparagraph 2. The written
statement also shall state whether collection of the individual's social security number
is authorized or mandatory under federal or state law.
4. Each agency shall review whether its collection of social security numbers is in
compliance with subparagraph 2. If the agency determines that collection of a social
security number is not in compliance with subparagraph 2, the agency shall
immediately discontinue the collection of social security numbers for that purpose.
5. Social security numbers held by an agency are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This exemption applies to social
security numbers held by an agency before, on, or after the effective date of this
exemption. This exemption does not supersede any federal law prohibiting the release
of social security numbers or any other applicable public records exemption for social
security numbers existing prior to May 13, 2002, or created thereafter.
6. Social security numbers held by an agency may be disclosed if any of the
following apply:
a. The disclosure of the social security number is expressly required by federal or
state law or a court order.
b. The disclosure of the social security number is necessary for the receiving
agency or governmental entity to perform its duties and responsibilities.
c. The individual expressly consents in writing to the disclosure of his or her social
security number.
d. The disclosure of the social security number is made to comply with the USA
Patriot Act of 2001, Pub. L. No.1 07-56, or Presidential Executive Order 13224.
e. The disclosure of the social security number is made to a commercial entity for
the permissible uses set forth in the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18
U.S.C. ss. 2721 et seq., the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. ss. 1681 et seq., or
the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999,15 U.S.C. ss. 6801 et seq.,
provided that the authorized commercial entity complies with the requirements of this
paragraph.
f. The disclosure of the social security number is for the purpose of the
administration of health benefits for an agency employee or his or her dependents.
g. The disclosure of the social security number is for the purpose of the
administration of a pension fund administered for the agency employee's retirement
fund, deferred compensation plan, or defined contribution plan.
h. The disclosure of the social security number is for the purpose of the
administration of the Uniform Commercial Code by the office of the Secretary of State.
7.a. For purposes of this subsection, the term:
(I) "Commercial activity" means the permissible uses set forth in the federal
Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. ss. 2721 et seq., the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. ss. 1681 et seq., or the Financial Services Modernization Act
of 1999, 15 U.S.C. ss. 6801 et seq., or verification of the accuracy of personal
information received by a commercial entity in the normal course of its business,
including identification or prevention of fraud or matching, verifying, or retrieving
information. It does not include the display or bulk sale of social security numbers to
the public or the distribution of such numbers to any customer that is not identifiable
by the commercial entity.
(II) "Commercial entity" means any corporation, partnership, limited partnership,
proprietorship, sole proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, or association that
performs a commercial activity in this state.
b. An agency may not deny a commercial entity engaged in the performance of a
commercial activity access to social security numbers, provided the social security
numbers will be used only in the performance of a commercial activity and provided the
commercial entity makes a written request for the social security numbers. The written
request must:
(I) Be verified as provided in s. 92.525;
(II) Be legibly signed by an authorized officer, employee, or agent of the commercial
entity;
(III) Contain the commercial entity's name, business mailing and location
addresses, and business telephone number;
(IV) Contain a statement of the specific purposes for which it needs the social
security numbers and how the social security numbers will be used in the performance
of a commercial activity, including the identification of any specific federal or state law
that permits such use.
c. An agency may request any other information reasonably necessary to verify the
identity of a commercial entity requesting the social security numbers and the specific
purposes for which the numbers will be used.
8.a. Any person who makes a false representation in order to obtain a social
security number pursuant to this paragraph, or any person who willfully and knowingly
violates this paragraph, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in
s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
b. Any public officer who violates this paragraph commits a noncriminal infraction,
punishable by a fine not exceeding $500 per violation.
9. Any affected person may petition the circuit court for an order directing
compliance with this paragraph.
(b) Bank account numbers and debit, charge, and credit card numbers held by an
agency are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This
exemption applies to bank account numbers and debit, charge, and credit card
numbers held by an agency before, on, or after the effective date of this exemption.
(c)1. For purposes of this paragraph, the term:
a. "Child" means any person younger than 18 years of age.
b. "Government-sponsored recreation program" means a program for which an
agency assumes responsibility for a child participating in that program, including, but
not limited to, after-school programs, athletic programs, nature programs, summer
camps, or other recreational programs.
2. Information that would identify or locate a child who participates in a
government-sponsored recreation program is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a),
Art. I of the State Constitution.
3. Information that would identify or locate a parent or guardian of a child who
participates in a government-sponsored recreation program is exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
4. This exemption applies to records held before, on, or after the effective date of
this exemption.
(d) All records supplied by a telecommunications company, as defined by s.
364.02, to an agency which contain the name, address, and telephone number of
subscribers are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the
State Constitution.
(e) Any information provided to an agency for the purpose of forming ridesharing
arrangements, which information reveals the identity of an individual who has provided
his or her name for ridesharing, as defined in s. 341.031, is exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(f ) Medical history records and information related to health or property insurance
provided to the Department of Community Affairs, the Florida Housing Finance
Corporation, a county, a municipality, or a local housing finance agency by an
applicant for or a participant in a federal, state, or local housing assistance program
are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution. Governmental entities or their agents shall have access to such
confidential and exempt records and information for the purpose of auditing federal,
state, or local housing programs or housing assistance programs. Such confidential
and exempt records and information may be used in any administrative or judicial
proceeding, provided such records are kept confidential and exempt unless otherwise
ordered by a court.
(g)1. Biometric identification information held by an agency before, on, or after the
effective date of this exemption is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the
State Constitution. As used in this paragraph, the term "biometric identification
information" means:
a. Any record of friction ridge detail;
b. Fingerprints;
c. Palm prints; and
d. Footprints.
2. This exemption applies to personal identifying information of an applicant for or
a recipient of paratransit services which is held by an agency before, on, or after the
effective date of this exemption.
(h)1. Personal identifying information of an applicant for or a recipient of paratransit
services which is held by an agency is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s.
24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. This exemption applies to personal identifying information of an applicant for or a
recipient of paratransit services which is held by an agency before, on, or after the
effective date of this exemption.
3. Confidential and exempt personal identifying information shall be disclosed:
a. With the express written consent of the individual or the individual's legally
authorized representative;
b. In a medical emergency, but only to the extent that is necessary to protect the
health or life of the individual;
c. By court order upon a showing of good cause; or
d. To another agency in the performance of its duties and responsibilities.
4. This paragraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in
accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2011, unless
reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(i)1. For purposes of this paragraph, "identification and location information" means
the:
a. Home address, telephone number, and photograph of a current or former United
States attorney, assistant United States attorney, judge of the United States Courts of
Appeal, United States district judge, or United States magistrate;
b. Home address, telephone number, photograph, and place of employment of the
spouse or child of such attorney, judge, or magistrate; and
c. Name and location of the school or day care facility attended by the child of such
attorney, judge, or magistrate.
2. Identification and location information held by an agency is exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution if such attorney, judge, or
magistrate submits to an agency that has custody of the identification and location
information:
a. A written request to exempt such information from public disclosure; and
b. A written statement that he or she has made reasonable efforts to protect the
identification and location information from being accessible through other means
available to the public.
119.0711 Executive branch agency exemptions from inspection or copying of
public records.--
When an agency of the executive branch of state government seeks to acquire real
property by purchase or through the exercise of the power of eminent domain, all
appraisals, other reports relating to value, offers, and counteroffers must be in writing
and are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until
execution of a valid option contract or a written offer to sell that has been conditionally
accepted by the agency, at which time the exemption shall expire. The agency shall
not finally accept the offer for a period of 30 days in order to allow public review of the
transaction. The agency may give conditional acceptance to any option or offer
subject only to final acceptance by the agency after the 30-day review period. If a valid
option contract is not executed, or if a written offer to sell is not conditionally accepted
by the agency, then the exemption shall expire at the conclusion of the condemnation
litigation of the subject property. An agency of the executive branch may exempt title
information, including names and addresses of property owners whose property is
subject to acquisition by purchase or through the exercise of the power of eminent
domain, from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution to the same
extent as appraisals, other reports relating to value, offers, and counteroffers. For the
purpose of this subsection, the term "option contract" means an agreement of an
agency of the executive branch of state government to purchase real property subject
to final agency approval. This subsection has no application to other exemptions from
s. 119.07(1) which are contained in other provisions of law and shall not be construed
to be an express or implied repeal thereof.
119.0712 Executive branch agency-specific exemptions from inspection or
copying of public records.--
(1) DEPARTMENT OF HEAL TH.--
All personal identifying information contained in records relating to an individual's
personal health or eligibility for health-related services held by the Department of
Health are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution, except as otherwise provided in this subsection. Information made
confidential and exempt by this subsection shall be disclosed:
(a) With the express written consent of the individual or the individual's legally
authorized representative.
(b) In a medical emergency, but only to the extent necessary to protect the health or
life of the individual.
(c) By court order upon a showing of good cause.
(d) To a health research entity, if the entity seeks the records or data pursuant to a
research protocol approved by the department, maintains the records or data in
accordance with the approved protocol, and enters into a purchase and data-use
agreement with the department, the fee provisions of which are consistent with s.
119.07(4). The department may deny a request for records or data if the protocol
provides for intrusive follow-back contacts, has not been approved by a human studies
institutional review board, does not plan for the destruction of confidential records after
the research is concluded, is administratively burdensome, or does not have scientific
merit. The agreement must restrict the release of any information that would permit the
identification of persons, limit the use of records or data to the approved research
protocol, and prohibit any other use of the records or data. Copies of records or data
issued pursuant to this paragraph remain the property of the department.
(2) DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES.--
(a) For purposes of this subsection, the term "motor vehicle record" means any
record that pertains to a motor vehicle operator's permit, motor vehicle title, motor
vehicle registration, or identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles.
(b) Personal information, including highly restricted personal information as defined
in 18 U.S.C. s. 2725, contained in a motor vehicle record is confidential pursuant to the
federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994,18 U.S.C. ss. 2721 et seq. Such
information may be released only as authorized by that act; however, information
received pursuant to that act may not be used for mass commercial solicitation of
clients for litigation against motor vehicle dealers.
(c)1. Emergency contact information contained in a motor vehicle record is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. Without the express consent of the person to whom such emergency contact
information applies, the emergency contact information contained in a motor vehicle
record may be released only to law enforcement agencies for purposes of contacting
those listed in the event of an emergency.
(d) The department may adopt rules to carry out the purposes of this subsection
and the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. ss. 2721 et seq.
Rules adopted by the department may provide for the payment of applicable fees and,
prior to the disclosure of personal information pursuant to this subsection or the federal
Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994,18 U.S.C. ss. 2721 et seq., may require the
meeting of conditions by the requesting person for the purposes of obtaining
reasonable assurance concerning the identity of such requesting person, and, to the
extent required, assurance that the use will be only as authorized or that the consent of
the person who is the subject of the personal information has been obtained. Such
conditions may include, but need not be limited to, the making and filing of a written
application in such form and containing such information and certification requirements
as the department requires.
119.0713 Local government agency exemptions from inspection or copying of
public records.--
(1) All complaints and other records in the custody of any unit of local government
which relate to a complaint of discrimination relating to race, color, religion, sex, national
origin, age, handicap, marital status, sale or rental of housing, the provision of
brokerage services, or the financing of housing are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s.
24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until a finding is made relating to probable cause,
the investigation of the complaint becomes inactive, or the complaint or other record is
made part of the official record of any hearing or court proceeding. This provision shall
not affect any function or activity of the Florida Commission on Human Relations. Any
state or federal agency that is authorized to have access to such complaints or records
by any provision of law shall be granted such access in the furtherance of such
agency's statutory duties. This subsection shall not be construed to modify or repeal any
special or local act.
(2) The audit report of an internal auditor prepared for or on behalf of a unit of local
government becomes public record when the audit becomes final. As used in this
subsection, the term "unit of local government" means a county, municipality, special
district, local agency, authority, consolidated city-county government, or any other local
governmental body or public body corporate or politic authorized or created by general
or special law. An audit becomes final when the audit report is presented to the unit of
local government. Audit workpapers and notes related to such audit report are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution
until the audit is completed and the audit report becomes final.
(3) Any data, record, or document used directly or solely by a municipally owned
utility to prepare and submit a bid relative to the sale, distribution, or use of any service,
commodity, or tangible personal property to any customer or prospective customer is
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 124(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. This exemption
commences when a municipal utility identifies in writing a specific bid to which it intends
to respond. This exemption no longer applies when the contract for sale, distribution, or
use of the service, commodity, or tangible personal property is executed, a decision is
made not to execute such contract, or the project is no longer under active
consideration. The exemption in this subsection includes, the bid documents actually
furnished in response to the request for bids. However, the exemption for the bid
documents submitted no longer applies after the bids are opened by the customer or
prospective customer.
119.0714 Court files; court records; official records.--
(1) COURT FILES.--Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to exempt from s.
119.07(1) a public record that was made a part of a court file and that is not
specifically closed by order of court, except:
(a) A public record that was prepared by an agency attorney or prepared at the
attorney's express direction as provided in s. 119.071 (1 )(d).
(b) Data processing software as provided in s. 119.071(1)(f).
(c) Any information revealing surveillance techniques or procedures or personnel
as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(d).
(d) Any comprehensive inventory of state and local law enforcement resources,
and any comprehensive policies or plans compiled by a criminal justice agency, as
provided in s. 119.071 (2)(d).
(e) Any information revealing the substance of a confession of a person arrested
as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(e).
(f ) Any information revealing the identity of a confidential informant or confidential
source as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(f ).
(g) Any information revealing undercover personnel of any criminal justice agency as
provided in s. 119.071 (4)(c).
(h) Information or records that may reveal the identity of a person who is a victim of
a sexual offense as provided in s. 119.071 (2)(h).
(i) Social security numbers as provided in s. 119.071 (5)(a).
U) Bank account numbers and debit, charge, and credit card numbers as provided in
s. 119.071 (5)(b).
(2) COURT RECORDS.--
(a) Until January 1, 2012, if a social security number or a bank account, debit,
charge, or credit card number is included in a court file, such number may be included
as part of the court record available for public inspection and copying unless redaction
is requested by the holder of such number or by the holder's attorney or legal guardian.
(b) A request for redaction must be a signed, legibly written request specifying the
case name, case number, document heading, and page number. The request must be
delivered by mail, facsimile, electronic transmission, or in person to the clerk of the
court. The clerk of the court does not have a duty to inquire beyond the written request
to verify the identity of a person requesting redaction.
(c) A fee may not be charged for the redaction of a social security number or a bank
account, debit, charge, or credit card number pursuant to such request.
(d) The clerk of the court has no liability for the inadvertent release of social security
numbers, or bank account, debit, charge, or credit card numbers, unknown to the clerk
of the court in court records filed on or before January 1, 2012.
(e)1. On January 1, 2012, and thereafter, the clerk of the court must keep social
security numbers confidential and exempt as provided for in s. 119.071 (5)(a), and
bank account, debit, charge, and credit card numbers exempt as provided for in s.
119.071 (5)(b), without any person having to request redaction.
2. Section 119.071 (5)(a)7. and 8. does not apply to the clerks of the court with
respect to court records.
(3) OFFICIAL RECORDS.--
(a) Any person who prepares or files a record for recording in the official records as
provided in chapter 28 may not include in that record a social security number or a bank
account, debit, charge, or credit card number unless otherwise expressly required by
law.
(b)1. If a social security number or a bank account, debit, charge, or credit card
number is included in an official record, such number may be made available as part
of the official records available for public inspection and copying unless redaction is
requested by the holder of such number or by the holder's attorney or legal guardian.
2. If such record is in electronic format, on January 1, 2011, and thereafter, the
county recorder must use his or her best effort, as provided in paragraph (h), to keep
social security numbers confidential and exempt as provided for in s. 119.071 (5)(a),
and to keep complete bank account, debit, charge, and credit card numbers exempt
as provided for in s. 119.071 (5)(b), without any person having to request redaction.
3. Section 119.071(5)(a)7. and 8. does not apply to the county recorder with
respect to official records.
(c) The holder of a social security number or a bank account, debit, charge, or
credit card number, or the holder's attorney or legal guardian, may request that a
county recorder redact from an image or copy of an official record placed on a county
recorder's publicly available Internet website or on a publicly available Internet website
used by a county recorder to display public records, or otherwise made electronically
available to the public, his or her social security number or bank account, debit,
charge, or credit card number contained in that official record.
(d) A request for redaction must be a signed, legibly written request and must be
delivered by mail, facsimile, electronic transmission, or in person to the county
recorder. The request must specify the identification page number of the record that
contains the number to be redacted.
(e) The county recorder does not have a duty to inquire beyond the written request
to verify the identity of a person requesting redaction.
(f ) A fee may not be charged for redacting a social security number or a bank
account, debit, charge, or credit card number.
(g) A county recorder shall immediately and conspicuously post signs throughout
his or her offices for public viewing, and shall immediately and conspicuously post on
any Internet website or remote electronic site made available by the county recorder
and used for the ordering or display of official records or images or copies of official
records, a notice stating, in substantially similar form, the following:
1. On or after October 1, 2002, any person preparing or filing a record for
recordation in the official records may not include a social security number or a bank
account, debit, charge, or credit card number in such document unless required by law.
2. Any person has a right to request a county recorder to remove from an image or
copy of an official record placed on a county recorder's publicly available Internet
website or on a publicly available Internet website used by a county recorder to display
public records, or otherwise made electronically available to the general public, any
social security number contained in an official record. Such request must be made in
writing and delivered by mail, facsimile, or electronic transmission, or delivered in
person, to the county recorder. The request must specify the identification page
number that contains the social security number to be redacted. A fee may not be
charged for the redaction of a social security number pursuant to such a request.
(h) If the county recorder accepts or stores official records in an electronic format,
the county recorder must use his or her best efforts to redact all social security
numbers and bank account, debit, charge, or credit card numbers from electronic
copies of the official record. The use of an automated program for redaction shall be
deemed to be the best effort in performing the redaction and shall be deemed in
compliance with the requirements of this subsection.
(i) The county recorder is not liable for the inadvertent release of social security
numbers, or bank account, debit, charge, or credit card numbers, filed with the county
recorder.
119.084 Copyright of data processing software created by governmental
agencies; sale price and licensing fee.--
(1) As used in this section, "agency" has the same meaning as in s. 119.011 (2),
except that the term does not include any private agency, person, partnership,
corporation, or business entity.
(2) An agency is authorized to acquire and hold a copyright for data processing
software created by the agency and to enforce its rights pertaining to such copyright,
provided that the agency complies with the requirements of this subsection.
(a) An agency that has acquired a copyright for data processing software created
by the agency may sell or license the copyrighted data processing software to any
public agency or private person. The agency may establish a price for the sale and a
licensing fee for the use of such data processing software that may be based on
market considerations. However, the prices or fees for the sale or licensing of
copyrighted data processing software to an individual or entity solely for application to
information maintained or generated by the agency that created the copyrighted data
processing software shall be determined pursuant to s. 119.07(4).
(b) Proceeds from the sale or licensing of copyrighted data processing software
shall be deposited by the agency into a trust fund for the agency's appropriate use for
authorized purposes. Counties, municipalities, and other political subdivisions of the
state may designate how such sale and licensing proceeds are to be used.
(c) The provisions of this subsection are supplemental to, and shall not supplant or
repeal, any other provision of law that authorizes an agency to acquire and hold
copyrights.
119.092 Registration by federal employer's registration number.--Each state
agency which registers or licenses corporations, partnerships, or other business
entities shall include, by July 1, 1978, within its numbering system, the federal
employer's identification number of each corporation, partnership, or other business
entity registered or licensed by it. Any state agency may maintain a dual numbering
system in which the federal employer's identification number or the state agency's own
number is the primary identification number; however, the records of such state
agency shall be designed in such a way that the record of any business entity is
subject to direct location by the federal employer's identification number. The
Department of State shall keep a registry of federal employer's identification numbers
of all business entities, registered with the Division of Corporations, which registry of
numbers may be used by all state agencies.
119.10 Violation of chapter; penalties.--
(1) Any public officer who:
(a) Violates any provision of this chapter commits a noncriminal infraction,
punishable by fine not exceeding $500.
(b) Knowingly violates the provisions of s. 119.07(1) is subject to suspension and
removal or impeachment and, in addition, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree,
punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) Any person who willfully and knowingly violates:
(a) Any of the provisions of this chapter commits a misdemeanor of the first degree,
punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(b) Section 119.105 commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in
s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
119.105 Protection of victims of crimes or accidents.--Police reports are public
records except as otherwise made exempt or confidential. Every person is allowed to
examine nonexempt or nonconfidential police reports. A person who comes into
possession of exempt or confidential information contained in police reports may not
use that information for any commercial solicitation of the victims or relatives of the
victims of the reported crimes or accidents and may not knowingly disclose such
information to any third party for the purpose of such solicitation during the period of
time that information remains exempt or confidential. This section does not prohibit the
publication of such information to the general public by any news media legally entitled
to possess that information or the use of such information for any other data collection
or analysis purposes by those entitled to possess that information.
119.11 Accelerated hearing; immediate compliance.--
(1) Whenever an action is filed to enforce the provisions of this chapter, the court
shall set an immediate hearing, giving the case priority over other pending cases.
(2) Whenever a court orders an agency to open its records for inspection in
accordance with this chapter, the agency shall comply with such order within 48 hours,
unless otherwise provided by the court issuing such order, or unless the appellate
court issues a stay order within such 48-hour period.
(3) A stay order shall not be issued unless the court determines that there is a
substantial probability that opening the records for inspection will result in significant
damage.
(4) Upon service of a complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim in a civil action
brought to enforce the provisions of this chapter, the custodian of the public record
that is the subject matter of such civil action shall not transfer custody, alter, destroy,
or otherwise dispose of the public record sought to be inspected and examined,
notwithstanding the applicability of an exemption or the assertion that the requested
record is not a public record subject to inspection and examination under s. 119.07(1),
until the court directs otherwise. The person who has custody of such public record
may, however, at any time permit inspection of the requested record as provided in s.
119.07(1) and other provisions of law.
119.12 Attorney's fees.--If a civil action is filed against an agency to enforce the
provisions of this chapter and if the court determines that such agency unlawfully
refused to permit a public record to be inspected or copied, the court shall assess and
award, against the agency responsible, the reasonable costs of enforcement including
reasonable attorneys' fees.
119.15 Legislative review of exemptions from public meeting and public
records requirements.--
(1) This section may be cited as the "Open Government Sunset Review Act. II
(2) This section provides for the review and repeal or reenactment of an exemption
from s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution and s. 119.07(1) or s. 286.011. This act does
not apply to an exemption that:
(a) Is required by federal law; or
(b) Applies solely to the Legislature or the State Court System.
(3) In the 5th year after enactment of a new exemption or substantial amendment of
an existing exemption, the exemption shall be repealed on October 2nd of the 5th year,
unless the Legislature acts to reenact the exemption.
(4)(a) A law that enacts a new exemption or substantially amends an existing
exemption must state that the record or meeting is:
1. Exempt from s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution;
2. Exempt from s. 119.07(1) or s. 286.011; and
3. Repealed at the end of 5 years and that the exemption must be reviewed by the
Legislature before the scheduled repeal date.
(b) For purposes of this section, an exemption is substantially amended if the
amendment expands the scope of the exemption to include more records or
information or to include meetings as well as records. An exemption is not substantially
amended if the amendment narrows the scope of the exemption.
(c) This section is not intended to repeal an exemption that has been amended
following legislative review before the scheduled repeal of the exemption if the
exemption is not substantially amended as a result of the review.
(5)(a) By June 1 in the year before the repeal of an exemption under this section,
the Division of Statutory Revision of the Office of Legislative Services shall certify to the
President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives the
language and statutory citation of each exemption scheduled for repeal the following
year.
(b) Any exemption that is not identified and certified to the President of the Senate
and the Speaker of the House of Representatives is not subject to legislative review
and repeal under this section. If the division fails to certify an exemption that it
subsequently determines should have been certified, it shall include the exemption in
the following year's certification after that determination.
(6)(a) As part of the review process, the Legislature shall consider the following:
1. What specific records or meetings are affected by the exemption?
2. Whom does the exemption uniquely affect, as opposed to the general public?
3. What is the identifiable public purpose or goal of the exemption?
4. Can the information contained in the records or discussed in the meeting be
readily obtained by alternative means? If so, how?
5. Is the record or meeting protected by another exemption?
6. Are there multiple exemptions for the same type of record or meeting that it
would be appropriate to merge?
(b) An exemption may be created, revised, or maintained only if it serves an
identifiable public purpose, and the exemption may be no broader than is necessary to
meet the public purpose it serves. An identifiable public purpose is served if the
exemption meets one of the following purposes and the Legislature finds that the
purpose is sufficiently compelling to override the strong public policy of open
government and cannot be accomplished without the exemption:
1. Allows the state or its political subdivisions to effectively and efficiently administer
a governmental program, which administration would be significantly impaired without
the exemption;
2. Protects information of a sensitive personal nature concerning individuals, the
release of which information would be defamatory to such individuals or cause
unwarranted damage to the good name or reputation of such individuals or would
jeopardize the safety of such individuals. However, in exemptions under this
subparagraph, only information that would identify the individuals may be exempted; or
3. Protects information of a confidential nature concerning entities, including, but not
limited to, a formula, pattern, device, combination of devices, or compilation of
information which is used to protect or further a business advantage over those who do
not know or use it, the disclosure of which information would injure the affected entity in
the marketplace.
(7) Records made before the date of a repeal of an exemption under this section
may not be made public unless otherwise provided by law. In deciding whether the
records shall be made public, the Legislature shall consider whether the damage or
loss to persons or entities uniquely affected by the exemption of the type specified in
subparagraph (6)(b)2. or subparagraph (6)(b)3. would occur if the records were made
public.
(8) Notwithstanding s. 768.28 or any other law, neither the state or its political
subdivisions nor any other public body shall be made party to any suit in any court or
incur any liability for the repeal or revival and reenactment of an exemption under this
section. The failure of the Legislature to comply strictly with this section does not
invalidate an otherwise valid reenactment.
D. Exempt, confidential and limited access public documents and meetings -
exemption summaries. It is recommended that these summaries be used as a
reference only--interested parties should refer to the full text in the Florida
Statutes before drawing legal conclusions.
NOTE: DUE TO SPACE LIMITATIONS, THE EXEMPTIONS FROM
DISCLOSURE FOUND IN CHAPTER 119 (THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT)
ARE NOT SUMMARIZED IN THIS APPENDIX. PLEASE REFER TO
APPENDIX C (CONTAINING THE COMPLETE TEXT OF CH. 119) FOR THE
CH. 119 EXEMPTIONS.
Section 11.0431(2), F.S. -- The text of s. 11.0431, F.S., relating to exemptions from
disclosure for legislative records, is set forth in Appendix F.
Section 11.045(5)(b), F.S. -- The legislative committee responsible for ethical
conduct of lobbyists shall make sufficient deletions in advisory opinions issued pursuant
to this subsection to prevent disclosing the identity of persons in the decisions or
opinions.
Section 11.26(1), F.S. -- Subject to s. 11.0431, legislative employees may not
reveal to anyone outside the area of their direct responsibility the contents or nature of
any request for services made by a legislator except with the consent of the member
making the request.
Section 11.45(3)(i), F.S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to Enterprise
Florida, Inc., who desires to remain anonymous is confidential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 11.45(3)(j), F.S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to the capital
development board who desires to remain anonymous is confidential and exempt from
public disclosure requirements and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's
report.
Section 11.45(4)(c), F.S. -- Audit reports prepared by the Auditor General become
public records when final. Audit workpapers and notes are not public records; however,
those materials necessary to support the computations in the final audit report may be
made available by majority vote of the Legislative Auditing Committee after a public
hearing showing proper cause.
Section 14.28, F.S. -- All records developed or received by a state entity relating to
a Board of Executive Clemency investigation are exempt from disclosure; however,
such records may be released upon the approval of the Governor.
Section 15.07, F.S. -- The journal of the executive session of the Senate shall be
kept free from inspection or disclosure except upon order of the Senate or court of
com petent j u risd iction.
Section 17.0401, F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided by this section, information
relative to an investigation by the Division of Accounting and Auditing of the Department
of Financial Services pursuant to s. 17.04 is confidential and exempt from disclosure
until the investigation is complete or ceases to be active, or if the division submits such
information to a law enforcement or prosecutorial agency, until that agency's
investigation is complete or ceases to be active as that term is defined in the section.
Section 17.076(5), F.S. -- All direct deposit records made prior to October 1, 1986,
are exempt from s. 119.07(1). With respect to direct deposit records made on or after
October 1, 1986, the names of the authorized financial institutions and the account
numbers of the beneficiaries, as defined in the section, are confidential and exempt.
Section 17.325(3), F .S. -- A call on the governmental efficiency hotline established
by the Chief Financial Officer under this section may be anonymous and, if the caller
provides his or her name, the name is confidential.
Section 20.055(5)(b), F.S. -- Inspector general audit workpapers and reports are
public records to the extent that they do not include information which has been made
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). However, when the inspector general or a
member of the staff receives from an individual a complaint or information that falls
within the definition provided in s. 112.3187(5), the name or identity of the individual
shall not be disclosed to anyone else without the individual's written consent, unless the
inspector general determines that such disclosure is unavoidable during the course of
the audit or investigation.
Section 24.105(12)(a), F .S. -- The Department of the Lottery shall determine by rule
information relating to the operation of the lottery which is confidential and exempt from
disclosure. Such information includes trade secrets; security measures, systems, or
procedures; security reports; information concerning bids or other contractual data, the
disclosure of which would impair the efforts of the department to contract for goods and
services on favorable terms; employee personnel information unrelated to
compensation, duties, qualifications, or responsibilities; and information obtained by the
Division of Security pursuant to its investigations which is otherwise confidential. To be
deemed confidential, the information must be necessary to the security and integrity of
the lottery. Confidential information may be released to other governmental entities as
needed in connection with the performance of their duties; such governmental entities
shall retain the confidentiality of the information as provided for in the subsection.
Section 24.105(12)(b), F .S. -- The Department of the Lottery shall maintain the
confidentiality of the street address and telephone number of a winner, in that such
information is confidential and exempt from disclosure, unless the winner consents to
the release of such information, or as provided for in s. 24.115(4) or s. 409.2577.
Section 24.108(7)(b), F.S. -- The portion of the Lottery Department's security report
that contains specific recommendations is confidential and exempt from disclosure and
may be released only as authorized in the subsection.
Section 27.151, F .S. -- An executive order assigning or exchanging state attorneys
pursuant to s. 27.14 or s. 27.15, if designated by the Governor to be confidential, is
exempt from disclosure. The Governor may make public any such executive order by a
subsequent executive order and at the expiration of a confidential executive order or
any extensions thereof, the executive order and all associated orders and reports shall
be open to the public pursuant to Ch. 119 unless the information contained in the
executive order is confidential pursuant to cited laws.
Section 28.222(3)(g), F.S. -- Certified copies of death certificates authorized for
issuance by the Department of Health which exclude information made confidential
under s. 382.008 and certified death certificates issued by another state shall be
recorded by the clerk of circuit court.
Section 28.2221, F.S. -- The clerk of court is prohibited from placing certain records
(military discharge or death certificate, and family law, probate, or juvenile court
records) on a publicly available Internet website. Those records which have already
been placed on the Internet must be removed if the subject of the record requests
removal.
Section 30.49(3), F.S. -- The sheriff shall furnish to the board of county
commissioners or to the budget commission, if there is one, relevant information
regarding past and proposed expenditures as the board or commission deems
necessary; however, the board or commission may not require confidential information
concerning details of investigations. Such information is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 39.0132(3), F .S. -- The clerk shall keep official records required by this
chapter separate from other court records. The records may be inspected only upon
court order by persons deemed to have a proper interest therein, except that, subject to
the provisions of s. 63.162, a child and the parents of the child and their attorneys,
guardian ad litem, law enforcement agencies, the Department of Children and Family
Services and its designees shall have a right to inspect and copy records pertaining to
the child.
Section 39.0132(4)(a)1., F .S. -- All information obtained pursuant to this part in the
discharge of official duty by any of the officials specified in the subsection is confidential
and may not be disclosed to anyone other than persons entitled to receive such
information under Ch. 39 or upon court order.
Section 39.0132(4)(a)2., F.S. -- The following information held by a guardian ad
litem is confidential and exempt: medical, mental health, substance abuse, child care,
education, law enforcement, court, social services, and financial records; and any other
information maintained by a guardian ad litem which is identified as confidential
information under Ch. 39, F.S. Such confidential and exempt information may not be
disclosed to anyone except as authorized in the exemption.
Section 39.201(1)(b), F.S. -- Reporters to the central abuse hotline in occupation
categories designated in s. 39.201 (1 )(b) are required to provide their names to the
hotline staff. The names of reporters shall be entered into the record of the report but
shall be held confidential as provided in s. 39.202.
Section 39.201 (2)(h), F.S. -- A telephone number, fax number, or Internet protocol
address from which the report was received by the hotline which is included in the
abuse report pursuant to this subsection shall enjoy the same confidentiality provided to
the identity of the reporter pursuant to s. 39.202.
Section 39.202(1), F.S. -- All records held by the Department of Children and Family
Services concerning reports of child abandonment, abuse or neglect including reports
made to the central abuse hotline and all records generated as a result of such reports
are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be disclosed except as
specifically authorized by this chapter. Such exemption from s. 119.07(1) applies to
information in possession of those entities granted access pursuant to this section.
Section 39.202(2)(0), F.S. -- Access to records concerning reports of child abuse or
neglect shall be granted to any person in the event of the death of a child determined to
be a result of abuse, abandonment, or neglect. Information identifying the person
reporting abuse, abandonment, or neglect shall not be released, nor shall any
information otherwise made confidential or exempt by law.
Section 39.202(5), F.S. -- The name of any person reporting child abuse,
abandonment, or neglect shall not be released to any person except as authorized in
the subsection, without the written consent of the reporter.
Section 39.202(6), F.S. -- All records and reports of the child protection team of the
Department of Health are confidential and exempt from ss. 119.07(1) and 456.057, and
shall not be disclosed, except as provided in the subsection.
Section 39.301 (19), F .S. -- When the initial interview with the child in a child
protective investigation or criminal investigation is conducted at school in the presence
of school staff, information received during the interview or from any other source
regarding the alleged abuse or neglect of the child shall be confidential and exempt,
except as otherwise provided by court order.
Section 39.507(2), F.S. -- Dependency adjudicatory hearings are open to the public,
unless by special order the court determines that the public interest or welfare of the
child is best served by closing the hearing.
Section 39.510(4) and (5), F.S. -- The case on appeal in a dependency proceeding
and any papers filed in appellate court shall be entitled with child's initials. The papers
shall remain sealed and shall not be open to public inspection. The original order of the
appellate court with papers filed in an appeal shall be sealed and not open to inspection
except by order of the appellate court.
Section 39.702(5)(d), F.S. -- An independent not-for-profit agency authorized to
administer a citizen review panel established to make recommendations concerning
foster care as provided in this section shall ensure that all panel members have read,
understood, and signed an oath of confidentiality relating to written or verbal information
provided to members for review hearings.
Section 39.809(4), F.S. -- All hearings involving termination of parental rights are
confidential and closed to the public.
Section 39.814(3) and (4), F.S. -- All court records required by this part (termination
of parental rights) shall be kept separate from other records. Such records are not open
to public inspection. All information obtained pursuant to this part by officials specified
therein shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may not be disclosed to
anyone other than the authorized officials and agencies, except by court order.
Section 39.815(4) and (5), F .S. -- An appeal in a case involving a termination of
parental rights must be docketed, and any papers filed in the appellate court must be
titled with the initials, but not the name, of the child and the court case number, and the
papers must remain sealed in the office of the appellate court clerk when not in use by
the court and may not be open to public inspection. The original order of the appellate
court, with all papers filed in the case on appeal, must remain in the clerk's office,
sealed and not open to inspection except by court order.
Section 39.821(1), F.S. -- Information collected pursuant to the security background
investigation for a guardian ad litem is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 39.827(4), F.S. -- The hearing for appointment of a guardian advocate is
confidential. The court records are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may
be inspected only upon court order or by the persons and entities identified in the
subsection. All information obtained pursuant to this part is confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be disclosed to anyone other than authorized personnel
of the court or the Department of Children and Family Services and its designees,
except upon court order.
Section 39.908, F.S. -- Information about clients received by the Department of
Children and Family Services or by authorized persons employed by or volunteering
services to a domestic violence center, through files, reports, inspection or otherwise is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Except as provided in the section,
information about the location of domestic violence centers and facilities is confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 40.50(2), F.S. -- The court should emphasize the confidentiality of notes
taken by jurors as provided in this subsection.
Section 44.102(3), F.S. -- All written communications in a court-ordered mediation
proceeding, other than an executed settlement agreement, shall be exempt from the
requirements of Ch. 119.
Section 44.201 (5), F.S. -- Any information relating to a dispute which is obtained by
any person while performing any duties for a Citizen Dispute Settlement Center is
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 44.405(1), F.S. -- Except as provided in the section, mediation
communications, as defined in the Mediation Confidentiality and Privilege Act, are
confidential.
Section 61.052(8), F.S. -- Disclosure of social security numbers provided by parties
to a dissolution of marriage proceeding shall be limited to child support enforcement
purposes.
Section 61.125(7), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this section, all
communications made by, between, or among the parties and the parenting coordinator
during parenting coordination sessions are confidential, and the parenting coordinator
and each party designated in the order appointing the coordinator may not testify or
offer evidence about communications made by, between, or among the parties and the
parenting coordinator during parenting coordination sessions, except as provided in the
statute.
Section 61.13(7) and (8), F .S. -- Disclosure of social security numbers provided by
parties to a paternity or child support proceeding shall be limited to child support
enforcement purposes.
Section 61.1827, F.S. -- Any information that reveals the identity of applicants for or
recipients of child-support services, including the name, address, and telephone number
of such persons, held by a non-Title IV-D county child-support enforcement agency is
confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 61.183(3), F.S. -- Information concerning mediation proceedings involving
contested issues relating to custody parental responsibility, primary residence, access
to, visitation with, or support of a child pursuant to this section which is obtained by any
person performing mediation duties is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 61.404, F.S. -- A guardian ad litem shall maintain as confidential all
information and documents received from any source described in s. 61.403(2) and may
not disclose such information or documents except, in the guardian ad litem's discretion,
in a report to the court or as directed by the court.
Section 63.022(4)(j), F.S. -- The records of all proceedings concerning custody and
adoption of a minor are confidential and exempt except as provided in s. 63.162.
Section 63.0541, F.S. -- All information contained in the Florida Putative Father
Registry is confidential and exempt except as provided in the section.
Section 63.089(8), F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, all records relating
to a petition to terminate parental rights pending adoption are subject to the provisions
of s. 63.162, F .S.
Section 63.102(1), F .S. -- Except for a joint petition for the ~ adoption of a
stepchild, a relative, or an adult, any name by which the minor was previously known
may not be disclosed in the petition for adoption, the notice of hearing, or the judgment
of adoption, or the court docket as provided in s. 63.162(3).
Section 63.162(1), F.S. -- Hearings held in proceedings under the Florida Adoption
Act are closed.
Section 63.162(2), F .S. -- All papers and records pertaining to an adoption are
confidential and subject to inspection only upon court order. Adoption papers and
records of the Department of Children and Family Services, a court, or any other
governmental agency are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 63.162(4), F.S. -- A person may not disclose from the records the name and
identity of a birth parent, an adoptive parent, or an adoptee except as authorized in the
subsection.
Section 63.162(6), F.S. -- Except as provided in s. 63.162(4), identifying information
regarding birth parents, adoptive parents, and adoptees may not be disclosed unless a
birth parent, adoptive parent, or adoptee has authorized in writing the release of such
information concerning himself or herself.
Section 63.165(1), F.S. -- Except as provided in this section, information in the state
registry of adoption information is confidential and exempt.
Section 69.081 (8), F.S. -- Any portion of an agreement which conceals information
relating to the settlement or resolution of any claim or action against an agency is void,
contrary to public policy and may not be enforced.
Section 73.0155, F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, specified business
information provided by the owner of a business to a governmental condemning
authority as part of an offer of business damages is confidential and exempt from
disclosure requirements, if the owner requests in writing that the business information
be held confidential and exempt.
Section 90.502(5), F.S. -- Communications made by a person who seeks or
receives services from the Department of Revenue under the child support enforcement
program to the attorney representing the department shall be confidential and privileged
and shall not be disclosed to anyone other than the agency except as provided in this
section.
Section 92.56, F.S. -- The confidential and exempt status of criminal intelligence
information or criminal investigative information made confidential and exempt pursuant
to s. 119.071(2)(h) must be maintained in court records pursuant to s. 119.0714(1)(h)
and in court proceedings, including testimony from witnesses.
Section 97.057(2)(a)4., F .S. -- All declinations to register to vote pursuant to this
section will remain confidential and may be used only for voter registration purposes.
Section 97.0585, F .S. -- The following information is confidential and exempt and
may be used only for purposes of voter registration: declinations to register to vote
made pursuant to ss. 97.057 and 97.058; information relating to the place where a
person registered to vote or where a person updated a voter registration; the social
security number, driver's license number, and Florida identification number of a voter
registration applicant or voter. The signature of a voter registration applicant or a voter
is exempt from the copying requirements. The names, addresses, and telephone
numbers of victims of stalking or aggravated stalking are exempt in the same manner as
participants in the Address Confidentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence
under s. 741.465 are exempt from disclosure, provided the victim files a sworn
statement of stalking with the Office of the Attorney General and otherwise complies
with ss. 741.401-741.409.
Section 98.045(3), F.S. -- Each supervisor shall maintain for at least 2 years and
make available for public inspection and copying, all records concerning implementation
of registration list maintenance programs and activities conducted pursuant to cited
statutes. The records must include lists of the name and address of each person to
whom a notice was sent and information as to whether each such person responded to
the mailing, but may not include any information that is confidential or exempt from
public records requirements under the Election Code.
Section 101.5607(1)(d), F.S. -- Section 119.071(1)(f) which provides an exemption
from s. 119.07(1) for data processing software designated as sensitive, applies to all
software on file with the Department of State.
Section 101.62(3), F.S. -- Information regarding a request for absentee ballot that is
recorded by the supervisor of elections pursuant to this subsection is confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall be made available to or reproduced only for the
individuals and entities set forth in the exemption, for political purposes only.
Section 106.0706, F .S. -- All user identifications and passwords held by the
Department of State pursuant to s. 106.0705 are confidential and exempt from
disclosure. Information entered in the electronic filing system for purposes of generating
a report pursuant to s. 106.0705 is exempt but is no longer exempt once the report is
generated and filed with the Division of Elections.
Section 106.25(7), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the subsection, sworn
complaints filed pursuant to Ch. 106 with the Florida Elections Commission,
investigative reports or other papers of the commission relating to a violation of Chs.
106 or 104, and proceedings of the commission relating to a violation of said chapters
are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 286.011.
Section 110.1091 (2), F .S. -- A state employee's personal identifying information
contained in records held by the employing agency relating to an employee's
participation in an employee assistance program is confidential and exempt.
Section 11 0.1127(3)(d) and (e), F .S. -- It is a first degree misdemeanor to willfully
use criminal records information obtained pursuant to security background checks
required for certain positions for purposes other than screening for employment or to
release such information to other persons for purposes other than screening for
employment. It is a felony of the third degree for any person willfully, knowingly, or
intentionally to use juvenile records information for any purpose other than specified in
this section or to release such information to other persons other than specified in this
section.
Section 110.123(5)(a), F.S. -- A physician's fee schedule used in the health and
accident plan is not available for inspection or copying by medical providers or other
persons not involved in the administration of the state group insurance program.
Section 110.123(9), F.S. -- Patient medical records and medical claims records of
state employees, former state employees, and their eligible covered dependents, in the
custody or control of the state group insurance program are confidential and exempt.
Section 110.201(4), F.S. -- All discussions between the Department of Management
Services and the Governor, and between the Department of Management Services and
the Administration Commission, or agency heads, or between any of their respective
representatives, relative to collective bargaining, are exempt from s. 286.011 and all
work products relative to collective bargaining developed in conjunction with such
discussions are confidential and exempt.
Section 112.0455(8)(1), F .S. -- All documentation relative to a state agency
employer's explanation as to why a job applicant or employee's explanation of positive
drug test results is unsatisfactory, along with the report of the positive test results, are
confidential and exempt.
Section 112.0455(8)(u), F .S. -- The documentation prepared by a state agency
employer which formed the basis of the employer's determination that reasonable
suspicion existed to warrant drug testing under this section is confidential and exempt,
except that a copy of this documentation shall be given to the employee upon request.
Section 112.0455(11)(a), F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, all
information, interviews, reports, statements, memoranda, and drug test results, written
or otherwise, received or produced as a result of a state agency's drug testing program
are confidential and are exempt from disclosure except as provided in this section.
Section 112.08(7), F.S. -- Medical records and medical claims records in the
custody of county or municipal government relating to county or municipal employees,
former county or municipal employees, or eligible dependents of such employees
enrolled in a county or municipal group insurance plan or self-insurance plan are
confidential and are exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such records shall not be furnished to
any person other than the employee or the employee's legal representative, except as
provided in the subsection.
Section 112.08(8), F .S. -- Patient med ical records and med ical claims records of
water management district employees, former employees, and eligible dependents in
the custody or control of a water management district under its group insurance plan
established pursuant to s. 373.605 are confidential and exempt. Such records shall not
be furnished to any person other than the employee or the employee's legal
representative except as provided in the subsection.
Section 112.21(1), F.S. -- All records identifying individual participants in any
contract or account under s. 112.21 (relating to tax-sheltered annuities or custodial
accounts for governmental employees) and their personal account activities are
confidential and exempt.
Section 112.215(7), F.S. -- All records identifying individual participants in any
deferred compensation plan and their personal account activities shall be confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 112.3188(1), F.S. -- The identity of an individual who discloses in good faith
to the Chief Inspector General, an agency inspector general, a local chief executive
officer, or other appropriate local official information that alleges that an employee or
agent of an agency or independent contractor has violated certain laws or committed, or
is suspected of committing, specified acts may not be disclosed to anyone other than
staff of the above officials without the written consent of the individual, unless such
official determines that disclosure is authorized for the reasons specified in the
subsection.
Section 112.3188(2), F .S. -- Except as specifically authorized by s. 112.3189, or this
subsection, all information received by the Chief Inspector General or an agency
inspector general or information produced or derived from fact-finding or other
investigations conducted by the Department of Law Enforcement or the Florida
Commission on Human Relations, is confidential and exempt from disclosure if the
information is being received or derived from allegations as set forth in subsection (1)
and an investigation is active. All information received by a local chief executive officer
or appropriate local official or information produced or derived from fact-finding or
investigations conducted by a local government pursuant to s. 112.3187(8)(b), is
confidential and exempt if the information is received or derived from allegations as set
forth in s. 112.3188(1)(a) or (b) and the investigation is active.
Section 112.31901, F.S. --If certified pursuant to the exemption, an investigatory
record of the Chief Inspector General within the Office of the Governor or of the
employee designated by an agency head as the agency inspector general under s.
112.3189 is exempt from disclosure requirements for the time period specified in the
exemption. The provisions of this section do not apply to whistle-blower investigations
conducted pursuant to the whistle-blower act.
Section 112.3215(8)(b), F.S. -- All proceedings, the complaint, and other records
relating to the investigation of a sworn complaint of a violation of this section which
relates to executive branch and Constitution Revision Commission lobbyists, and any
meeting held pursuant to the investigation, are confidential and exempt from disclosure
until the alleged violator requests in writing that such investigation and associated
records and meetings be made public, or until the Ethics Commission determines
whether probable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred.
Section 112.3215(8)(d), F.S. -- Records relating to an audit of a lobbying firm
lobbying the executive branch or the Constitution Revision Commission or an
investigation of violations of the lobbying compensation reporting laws and any
meetings held pursuant to the investigation or at which such an audit is discussed are
exempt from public records and meetings requirements either until the lobbying firm
requests in writing that such records and meetings be made public or until the
Commission on Ethics determines there is probable cause that the audit reflects a
violation of the reporting laws.
Section 112.324(2), F .S. -- The complaint and records relating to the complaint or to
any preliminary investigation held by the Ethics Commission, a Commission on Ethics
and Public Trust established by a county or municipality, or by any county or
municipality that has established a local investigatory process to enforce more stringent
standards of conduct and disclosure requirements as provided in s. 112.326 are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and any proceeding conducted by the
commission, or a county or municipality that has established such local investigatory
process, is exempt from open meetings requirements until the complaint is dismissed as
legally insufficient, until the alleged violator requests in writing that such records and
proceedings be made public, or until the commission or a county or municipality that
has established such local investigatory process determines, based on investigation,
whether probable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred.
Section 112.533(2)(a), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a
complaint filed against a law enforcement officer or correctional officer with a law
enforcement agency or correctional agency and all information obtained pursuant to the
investigation of the complaint is confidential until the investigation ceases to be active,
or until the agency head or agency head's designee provides written notice to the officer
who is the subject of the complaint, that the agency has either concluded the
investigation with a finding not to proceed with disciplinary action or to file charges; or
concluded the investigation with a finding to proceed with disciplinary action or to file
charges.
NOTE: DUE TO SPACE LIMITATIONS, THE EXEMPTIONS FROM
DISCLOSURE FOUND IN CHAPTER 119 (THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT) ARE
NOT SUMMARIZED IN THIS APPENDIX. PLEASE REFER TO APPENDIX C
(CONTAINING THE COMPLETE TEXT OF CH. 119) FOR THE CH. 119
EXEMPTIONS.
Section 121.031(5), F.S. -- The names and addresses of retirees are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the extent that no state or local governmental agency
may provide the names or addresses of such persons in aggregate, compiled, or list
form to any person except as authorized in the subsection.
Section 121.4501 (19), F .S. -- Personal identifying information regarding a
participant in the Public Employee Optional Retirement Program contained in Florida
Retirement System records held by the State Board of Administration or the Department
of Management Services is exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 125.0104(3)(h), F.S. -- Department of Revenue records showing the
amount of tourist development taxes collected, including the amount of taxes collected
for and from each county in which the tourist development tax is applicable, are open for
inspection except as provided in s. 213.053.
Section 125.0104(9)(d)1., F.S. -- Information given to a county tourism promotion
agency which, if released, would reveal the identity of persons or entities who provide
information as a response to a sales promotion effort, an advertisement, or a research
project or whose names, addresses, meeting or convention plan information or
accommodations or other visitation needs become booking or reservation list data, is
exempt from disclosure.
Section 125.0104(9)(d)2., F.S. -- When held by a county tourism promotion agency,
the following are exempt from disclosure: a trade secret, as defined in s. 812.081;
booking business records, as defined in s. 255.047; trade secrets and commercial or
financial information gathered from a person and privileged or confidential, as defined
and interpreted under 5 U.S.C. s. 552(b)(4), as amended.
Section 125.012(26), F .S. -- Pursuant to authorization granted by this section
concerning certain transportation-related projects defined in s. 125.011, a board of
county commissioners is empowered to maintain the confidentiality of trade information
and data to the extent that such information is protected under applicable federal and
federally-enforced patent and copyright laws.
Section 125.025, F .S. -- Pursuant to authorization granted by this section
concerning operation of export trading companies, a board of county commissioners is
empowered to maintain the confidentiality of trade information to the extent such
information is protected under applicable federal export trading company law, and under
federal and federally enforced patent and copyright laws.
Section 125.355(1), F .S. -- Appraisals, offers, and counteroffers relating to a
county's purchase of real property pursuant to this section are not available for public
disclosure and are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed or, if no
option contract is executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for purchase is
considered for approval by the board of county commissioners. If a contract or
agreement for purchase is not submitted to the board for approval, then the exemption
from s. 119.07(1) expires 30 days after the negotiations end. A county that does not
utilize the exemptions provided in this section may follow any procedure not in conflict
with Ch. 119 for the purchase of real property which is authorized in its charter or
established by ordinance.
Section 125.585(2), F .S. -- A county employee's personal identifying information
contained in records held by the employing county relating to that employee's
participation in an employee assistance program is confidential and exempt.
Section 125.901 (11), F .S. -- Personal identifying information of a child or the parent
or guardian of the child, held by a council on children's services, juvenile welfare board,
or other similar entity created under this section or by special law, or held by a service
provider or researcher under contract with such entity, is exempt from disclosure
requirements.
Section 155.40(8)(b), F.S. -- A "complete sale", as defined in the statute, of a public
hospital to a private purchaser shall not be construed as (1) a transfer of governmental
function to the private purchaser; (2) constituting a financial interest of the public seller
in the private purchaser; (3) making the private purchaser an "agency" as that term is
used in statutes; (4) making the private purchaser an integral part of the public seller's
decisionmaking process; or (5) indicating that the private purchaser is "acting on behalf
of a public agency" as that term is used in statutes.
Section 163.01 (15)(m), F .S. -- Material received by a public agency in connection
with its joint ownership or right to the services, output, capacity, or energy of an electric
project under the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act, which is designated by the person
supplying such material as proprietary confidential business information, as defined in
the paragraph, or which a court of competent jurisdiction has designated as confidential
or secret, shall be kept confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 163.64, F .S. -- An agency that participates in the creation or administration
of a collaborative client information system may share client information, including
confidential client information, with other members of the collaborative system as long
as the restrictions governing the confidential information are observed by any other
agency granted access to the confidential information.
Section 166.0444, F .S. -- A municipal employee's personal identifying information
contained in records held by the employing municipality relating to that employee's
participation in an employee assistance program is confidential and exempt.
Section 166.045(1), F .S. -- Appraisals, offers, and counteroffers relating to a
municipality's purchase of real property pursuant to this section are not available for
public disclosure and are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed
or, if no option contract is executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for
purchase is considered for approval by the governing body of the municipality. If a
contract or agreement for purchase is not submitted to the governing body for approval,
then the exemption from s. 119.07(1) expires 30 days after the negotiations end. A
municipality that does not utilize the exemptions from Ch. 119 provided in this section
may follow any procedure not in conflict with Ch. 119 for the purchase of real property
which is authorized in its charter or established by ordinance.
Section 192.0105(4), F.S. -- Taxpayers have the right to have information kept
confidential, including those records set forth in the exemption.
Section 192.105, F.S. -- Federal tax information obtained pursuant to 26 U.S.C. s.
6103 is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 193.074, F.S. -- All returns of property and returns required by former s.
201.022 submitted by the taxpayer pursuant to law shall be deemed to be confidential in
the hands of the property appraiser, the clerk of the circuit court, the Department of
Revenue, the tax collector, the Auditor General, and the Office of Program Policy
Analysis and Government Accountability, and their employees and persons acting
under their supervision and control, except upon court order or order of an
administrative body having quasi-judicial powers in ad valorem tax matters.
Section 193.114(5), F.S. -- For the purpose of furnishing copies of the tax roll under
119.07(1), the property appraiser is the custodian of the tax roll. The Department of
Revenue or any state or local agency may use copies of the tax roll received by it for
official purposes and shall permit inspection and examination thereof pursuant to s.
119.07(1), but is not required to furnish copies of the records. A social security number
submitted under s. 196.011 (1) (application for tax exemption) is confidential and
exempt.
Section 195.027(3), F.S. -- Financial records produced by a taxpayer under this
section shall be confidential in the hands of the property appraiser, the Department of
Revenue, the tax collector, and the Auditor General and shall not be divulged to any
person, firm, or corporation, except upon court order or order of an administrative body
having quasi-judicial powers in ad valorem tax matters, and such records are exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 195.027(6), F.S. -- The information form disclosing unusual fees, costs and
terms of financing of the sale or purchase of property shall be filed with the clerk of the
circuit court at the time of recording and shall be confidential and exempt in the hands of
all persons after delivery to the clerk, except as provided in the subsection.
Section 195.084(1), F.S. -- This section (authorizing the exchange of information
among the Department of Revenue, the property appraisers, the tax collector, the
Auditor General, and the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government
Accountability) shall supersede statutes prohibiting disclosure only with respect to those
entities, but the Department of Revenue may establish regulations setting reasonable
conditions upon access to and custody of such information. The Auditor General, the
Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, the tax collectors and
the property appraisers shall be bound by the same requirements of confidentiality as
the department.
Section 195.096(2)(e), F.S. -- All data and samples developed or obtained by the
Department of Revenue in the conduct of assessment ratio studies are confidential and
exempt until a presentation of the study findings is made to the property appraiser.
Section 196.101(4)(c), F.S. -- Records of gross income produced by a taxpayer
claiming exemption for totally and permanently disabled persons are exempt from s.
119.07(1) and are confidential in the hands of the property appraiser, the Department of
Revenue, the tax collector, the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government
Accountability, and the Auditor General and shall not be divulged to any person, firm, or
corporation, except upon court order or order of an administrative body having quasi-
judicial powers in ad valorem tax matters.
Section 202.195, F.S. -- Proprietary confidential business information, as defined in
the exemption, which is obtained from a telecommunications company or franchised
cable company for the purposes of imposing fees for occupying the public rights-of-way,
assessing the local communications services tax, or regulating the public rights-of-way,
held by a local government entity, is confidential and exempt from public disclosure
requirements. Maps or other engineering data held by a local governmental entity that
relate to the exact location and capacity of facilities for the provision of communications
services shall be exempt from disclosure but only for 60 days after completion of
construction of the facilities.
Section 206.27(2), F.S. -- Any information concerning audits in progress or those
records or files of the Department of Revenue described in this section which are
currently the subject of pending investigation by the Department of Revenue or the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and are
considered confidential; and may not be released except as authorized in the
subsection.
Section 211.125(10), F .S. -- All returns and information filed with the Department of
Revenue under this part providing for a tax on production of oil and gas are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and such returns or information shall be protected from
unauthorized disclosures as provided in s. 213.053.
Section 211.33(5), F.S. -- The use of information contained in any tax return filed by
a producer (i.e., a person severing solid minerals from the soils and waters of the state)
or in any books, records or documents of a producer shall be as provided in s. 213.053,
and shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 212.0305(3)(d), F.S. -- Records of the Department of Revenue showing the
amount of taxes collected, including taxes collected from each county in which a resort
tax is levied, are subject to the provisions of s. 213.053, and are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 213.015(9), F.S. -- Unless otherwise specified by law, Florida taxpayers
have the right to have taxpayer tax information kept confidential.
Section 213.053(2)(a), F .S. -- All information contained in returns, reports, accounts,
or declarations received by the Department of Revenue, including investigative reports
and information and including letters of technical advice, is confidential except for official
purposes and is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 213.0532(8), F .S. -- Any financial records obtained pursuant to this section
relating to information-sharing arrangements between the Department of Revenue and
financial institutions may be disclosed only for the purpose of, and to the extent
necessary, to administer and enforce the tax laws of this state.
Section 213.0535(5), F .S. -- Any provision of law imposing confidentiality upon data
shared under this section (providing for the Registration Information Sharing and
Exchange Program within the Department of Revenue), including, but not limited to, any
provision imposing penalties for disclosure, applies to recipients of this data and their
employees. Data exchanged under this section may not be provided to any person or
entity other than as provided in this section and such data may not be used for any
purpose other than for enforcing those tax or licensing provisions.
Section 213.21 (3)(a), F .S. -- The Department of Revenue shall maintain records of
all compromises of a taxpayer's liability; the records of compromises shall not be subject
to disclosure pursuant to s. 119.07(1) and shall be considered confidential information
governed by s. 213.053.
Section 213.22(2), F.S. -- The Department of Revenue may not disclose, pursuant
to s. 119.07(1), a technical assistance advisement or request therefor to any person
other than the person requesting the advisement or his or her representative, or for
official departmental purposes without deleting identifying details of the person to whom
the advisement was issued.
Section 213.27(6), F .S. -- Confidential information shared by the Department of
Revenue with debt collection or auditing agencies under contract with the department is
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and such debt collection or auditing agencies are bound by
the same requirements of confidentiality as the department.
Section 213.28(6), F .S. -- Certified public accountants entering into contracts with
the Department of Revenue are bound by the same confidentiality requirements and
subject to the same penalties as the department under s. 213.053. Any return, return
information, or documentation obtained from the Internal Revenue Service under an
information-sharing agreement is confidential and exempt from disclosure and shall not
be divulged or disclosed in any manner by any department officer or employee to any
certified public accountant under a contract authorized by this section unless the
department and the Internal Revenue Service mutually agree to such disclosure.
Section 215.44(8)(a), F .S. -- Records and information of the State Board of
Administration relating to acquiring, hypothecating, or disposing of real property or
specified related interests are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) in order to
achieve certain stated purposes. Records relating to value, offers, counteroffers, or
negotiations are confidential and exempt until closing is complete and all funds have
been disbursed. Records relating to tenants, leases, and other specified matters are
confidential and exempt until the executive director determines that release would not
be detrimental to the board's interest or conflict with its fiduciary responsibilities.
Section 215.44(8)(b), F.S. -- Records and other information relating to investments
made by the State Board of Administration are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until 30 days after completion of an investment transaction. However, if in the
executive director's opinion, it would be detrimental to the board's financial interests or
cause a conflict with its fiduciary responsibilities, information concerning service
provider fees may be kept confidential until 6 months after negotiations relating to such
fees have been terminated.
Section 215.44(8)(c)2., F.S. -- "Proprietary confidential business information", as
defined in the exemption, that is held by the State Board of Administration regarding
alternative investments is confidential and exempt for a period of 10 years after the
termination of the alternative investment unless disclosure is permitted under the
circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 215.555(4)(f), F.S. -- Information described in 215.557 which is contained in
an examination report conducted on an insurer pursuant to this subsection, is
confidential and exempt, as provided in s. 215.557.
Section 215.557, F.S. -- The reports of insured values under certain insurance
policies by zip code submitted to the State Board of Administration pursuant to s.
215.555 are confidential and exempt.
Section 220.242, F.S. -- Estimated tax returns filed under the Florida Income Tax
Code are confidential, and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 252.355(5), F.S. -- Records relating to the registration of persons with
special needs for emergency management purposes pursuant to this section are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except such information is available to other
emergency response agencies, as determined by the local emergency management
director. Local law enforcement agencies shall be given complete shelter roster
information upon request.
Section 252.88(1), F .S. -- Trade secret information which applicable federal law
authorizes an employer to exclude from materials submitted shall be furnished to the
State Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Commission upon request. However,
such information shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be
disclosed by the Commission except as authorized in the subsection.
Section 252.88(2) and (3), F.S. -- When applicable law authorizes the withholding of
disclosure of the location of specific hazardous chemicals, such information is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). All information, including, but not limited to,
site plans and specific location information on hazardous chemicals furnished to a fire
department pursuant to applicable law, shall be confidential and exempt while in the
possession of the fire department.
Section 252.943, F.S. -- In accordance with the federal Clean Air Act, trade secret
information provided to the Department of Community Affairs by the owner or operator
of a stationary source subject to the Accidental Release Prevention Program is
confidential and exempt from disclosure, except as provided in the exemption.
Section 253.025(6)(d), F.S. -- Appraisal reports prepared for the Board of Trustees
of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund or an agency pursuant to this section
(acquisition of state-owned lands for purposes other than preservation, conservation,
and recreation purposes) are confidential and exempt until an option contract is
executed or, if no option contract is executed, until 2 weeks before a contract or
agreement for purchase is considered for approval by the board of trustees. However,
the Division of State Lands may disclose appraisal information to public agencies or
nonprofit organizations under the conditions specified in the paragraph. The agency
may release an appraisal report when the passage of time has rendered the
conclusions of value invalid.
Section 253.025(7)(d), F.S. -- All offers or counteroffers shall be documented in
writing and shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is
executed, or if no option contract is executed, until 2 weeks before a contract or
agreement for purchase is considered for approval by the Board of Trustees of the
Internal Improvement Trust Fund.
Section 253.034(6)(g), F.S. -- A written valuation of land determined to be surplus
and related documents are confidential and exempt. The exemption expires 2 weeks
before the contract or agreement regarding the disposition of the surplus land is first
considered for approval by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust
Fund.
Section 255.047(2), F.S. -- The booking business records (as defined in the section)
of a publicly owned or operated convention center, sports stadium, coliseum, or
auditorium are exempt from disclosure. However, such facility shall furnish its booking
business records and related information to the Department of Revenue upon the
department's request if necessary for the department to administer its duties.
Section 255.25001 (2)(b), F.S. -- The studies of the evaluation process which are
developed by the Department of Management Services pursuant to this subsection shall
be considered confidential and exempt to the same extent that appraisal reports are
considered confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) pursuant to s. 253.025(6)(d).
Section 257.261, F .S. -- Registration and circulation records of public libraries,
except statistical reports of registration and circulation are confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1). Except as authorized by court order, a person may not make known in any
manner any information contained in such records, except as provided in this section.
Violation of this section is a second degree misdemeanor.
Section 257.38(2) and (3), F .S. -- Public records transferred to the Division of
Library and Information Services of the Department of State are subject to s. 119.07(1),
except that any record provided by law to be confidential shall not be made accessible
until 50 years after creation of the record. Any nonpublic manuscript or other archival
material which is placed in the keeping of the division under special terms and
conditions, shall be made accessible only in accordance with such taw terms and
conditions and shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the extent necessary to meet the
terms and conditions for a nonpublic manuscript or other archival material.
Section 257.38(4), F .S. -- Any nonpublic manuscript or other archival material that is
donated to and held by an official archive of a municipality or county contingent upon
special terms and conditions that limit the right to inspect or copy such material is
confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements except as otherwise authorized in
the special conditions. Such nonpublic manuscript or archival material shall be made
available for inspection and copying 50 years after the date of the creation of the
nonpublic manuscript or material, at an earlier date specified in the special terms and
conditions, or upon a showing of good cause before a court of competent jurisdiction.
Section 259.041 (7)(e), F.S. -- Generally, appraisal reports prepared for the Board of
Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund or an agency pursuant to this section
(acquisition of state-owned lands for preservation, conservation, and recreation
purposes) are confidential and exempt until an option contract is executed or, if no
option contract is executed, until 2 weeks before a contract or agreement for purchase
is considered for approval by the board of trustees. However, disclosure is authorized
under some circumstances, as described in the paragraph. The agency may release a
report when the passage of time has rendered the conclusions of value invalid or when
the acquiring agency has terminated negotiations.
Section 259.041 (8)(c), F.S. -- All offers and counteroffers for land acquisition are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed, or if no
option contract is executed, until 2 weeks before a contract or agreement for purchase
is considered for approval by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust
Fund.
Section 265.605(2), F.S. -- Information which, if released, would identify donors and
amounts contributed by donors to the Cultural Endowment Program Trust Fund, or to
the local organization's matching fund, is, at the request of the donor, confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1). Information which, if released, would identify prospective
donors is confidential and exempt unless the name has been obtained from another
organization or source.
Section 267.076, F.S. -- Information identifying a donor or prospective donor to a
publicly owned house museum designated by the United States Department of the
Interior as a National Historic Landmark who desires to remain anonymous is
confidential and exempt.
Section 267.135, F.S. --Information identifying the location of an archaeological site
held by the Division of Historical Resources of the Department of State is exempt from
public disclosure if the division finds that disclosure will create a substantial risk of harm,
theft, or destruction at such site.
Section 267.17(3), F .S. -- The identity of donors who desire to remain anonymous
shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and that anonymity shall be
maintained in the auditor's report of a citizen support organization to the Division of
Historical Resources of the Department of State.
Section 267.1732(8), F .S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor of property
to a direct-support organization of the University of West Florida which is established to
support the historic preservation efforts of the university, who desires to remain
anonymous, is confidential and exempt from disclosure; and that anonymity must be
maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 267.1736(9)(a), F .S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to the
direct-support organization, authorized by the University of Florida to assist it in carrying
out its historic preservation and historic preservation education purposes and
responsibilities for the City of St. Augustine, who desires to remain anonymous, and all
information identifying such donor or prospective donor, is confidential and exempt, and
that anonymity must be maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 279.11 (1), F .S. -- Records with regard to ownership of, or security interests
in, registered public obligations are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 280.16(3), F .S. -- Any information contained in a report of a qualified public
depository required under this chapter or any rule adopted under this chapter, together
with any information required of a financial institution that is not a qualified public
depository, shall, if made confidential by any law of the United States or of this state, be
considered confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and not subject to dissemination
to anyone other than the Chief Financial Officer under the provisions of this chapter.
Section 281.301, F .S. -- The following are confidential and exempt from ss.
119.07(1) and 286.011: Information relating to the security systems for any property
owned by or leased to the state or any of its political subdivisions; information relating to
the security systems for any privately owned or leased property which is in the
possession of any agency as defined in s. 119.011 (2); and all meetings relating directly
to or that would reveal such systems or information.
Section 282.318(4), F .S. -- Risk analysis information relative to security threats to
data, information, and information technology resources of an agency is confidential and
exempt. Internal policies and procedures to assure the security of the data and
information technology resources that, if disclosed, could facilitate the unauthorized
modification, disclosure, or destruction of data, information, or information technology
resources are confidential and exempt. Results of periodic internal audits and
evaluations of the security program for an agency's data and information technology
resources are confidential and exempt.
Section 284.40(2), F.S. -- Claim files maintained by the Division of Risk
Management of the Department of Financial Services are confidential, and shall be only
for the use of the Department of Financial Services in fulfilling its duties and are exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 286.011 (8), F.S. -- A state or local governmental board or commission and
the chief administrative or executive officer of the governmental entity may meet in
private with the entity's attorney to discuss pending litigation to which the entity is
presently a party before a court or administrative agency, provided that the conditions
set forth in the subsection are met.
Section 286.0113(1), F .S. -- That portion of a meeting that would reveal a security
system plan or portion thereof made confidential and exempt by s. 119.071 (3)(a) is
exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 286.0113(2), F .S. -- A meeting at which a negotiation with a vendor is
conducted pursuant to s. 287.057(1), is exempt from open meetings requirements.
However, a complete recording shall be made of any such exempt meeting. The
recording is exempt until such time as the agency provides notice of a decision or
intended decision pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a) or until 20 days after the final competitive
sealed replies are all opened, whichever occurs first. If the agency rejects all sealed
replies, the recording remains exempt until such time as the agency provides notice of a
decision or intended decision pursuant to s. 120.57(3)(a) concerning the reissued
invitation to negotiate or until the agency withdraws the reissued invitation to negotiate.
Section 287.0595(3), F .S. -- Bids submitted to the Department of Environmental
Protection for pollution response action contracts are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1), until selection of a bidder on such contract has been made and a contract
signed or until the bids are no longer under active consideration.
Section 288.047(5)(e), F.S. -- Information relating to wages and performance of
participants which is submitted pursuant to a grant agreement prepared by Workforce
Florida, Inc., pursuant to the Quick-Response Training Program which, if released,
would disclose the identity of the person to whom the information pertains or the
person's employer is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.047(7), F.S. -- In providing instruction pursuant to the Quick-Response
Training Program, materials relating to methods of manufacture or production, potential
trade secrets, business transactions, or proprietary information received or discovered
by employees of specified agencies are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.075, F.S. -- Upon written request, information held by an economic
development agency concerning the plans or interests of a private entity to locate,
relocate or expand its business activities in Florida is confidential and exempt from
disclosure for 12 months after the agency receives a request for confidentiality or the
information is otherwise disclosed, whichever occurs first. Confidentiality may be
extended for up to an additional 12 months under certain conditions. A public employee
or officer may not enter into a binding agreement with such entity until 90 days after the
information is made public except as provided therein. Trade secrets and the federal
employer identification number, unemployment compensation account number, or
Florida sales tax registration number held by an economic development agency are
confidential and exempt. Proprietary confidential business information is confidential
and exempt until such information is otherwise publicly available or is no longer treated
by the proprietor as confidential business information. Certain information related to
sales, receipts, wages and taxes as specified therein held by an economic development
agency pursuant to the administration of an economic incentive program for qualified
businesses is exempt and confidential for a period not to exceed the duration of the
incentive agreement or upon termination of the agreement.
Section 288.1224(7), F .S. -- The identity of any person who responds to a
marketing or advertising research project conducted by the Florida Commission on
Tourism pursuant to this section, and trade secrets, as defined by s. 812.081, obtained
pursuant to such research, are confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 288.1226(6), F .S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to the
Florida Tourism Industry Marketing Corporation who desires to remain anonymous and
all information identifying such donor or prospective donor are confidential and exempt
from disclosure, and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 288.1226(8), F .S. -- The identity of any person who responds to a
marketing or advertising research project conducted by the Florida Tourism Industry
Marketing Corporation pursuant to this section, and trade secrets, as defined by s.
812.081, obtained pursuant to such research, are exempt from disclosure.
Section 288.12295, F.S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to the direct-
support organization authorized under s. 288.1229 to assist in the promotion of sports-
related industries who desires to remain anonymous and all information identifying such
donor or prospective donor are confidential and exempt and such anonymity shall be
maintained in audit reports.
Section 288.776(3)(d), F.S. -- Personal financial records, trade secrets or
proprietary information of applicants for loans extended by the Florida Export Finance
Corporation are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.809(4), F.S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to the
Florida Intergovernmental Relations Foundation who desires to remain anonymous and
all information identifying such donor or prospective donor are confidential and exempt
from disclosure, and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report of the
foundation.
Section 288.9520, F.S. -- Materials that relate to methods of manufacture or
production, potential trade secrets, potentially patentable material, actual trade secrets,
business transactions, financial and proprietary information and agreements or
proposals to receive funding that are received, generated, ascertained, or discovered by
Enterprise Florida, Inc., including its affiliates and participants, are confidential and
exempt from disclosure, except that a recipient of Enterprise Florida, Inc., research
funds shall make available, upon request, the title and description of the project, the
name of the researcher, and the amount and source of funding provided for the project.
Section 288.9551 (2) and (3), F.S. -- Specified information held by the Scripps
Florida Funding Corporation under s. 288.955 is confidential and exempt from
disclosure requirements. That portion of a meeting of the board of directors of the
corporation at which such information is presented or discussed is exempt from s.
286.011, F.S. and Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const. Records generated during any portion of an
exempt meeting are confidential and exempt.
Section 288.9607(5), F.S. -- Personal financial records, trade secrets or proprietary
information of applicants delivered to or obtained by the Florida Development Finance
Corporation are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.9626, F.S. -- Materials relating to methods of manufacture or
production, potential trade secrets, or patentable material received, generated, or
discovered through research by universities and other publicly supported organizations
in this state; information identifying an investor or potential investor wishing to remain
anonymous; information received from another state or federal government that is
confidential under their law; and proprietary confidential business information for
alternative investments held by the Florida Opportunity Fund and the Institute for the
Commercialization of Public Research are confidential and exempt and may not
released except as provided therein. Meetings of the board of the fund or the institute at
which such confidential information is discussed are exempt from s. 286.011 and Art. I,
s. 24(b); the exempt portion of meeting shall be records and transcribed as provided
therein.
Section 288.982, F.S. -- Specified records relating to military installations or
missions subject to the United States Department of Defense Base Realignment and
Closure 2005 process which are held by the Governor's Advisory Council on Base
Realignment and Closure, Enterprise Florida, Inc., or the Office of Tourism, Trade, and
Economic Development are confidential and exempt. Meetings or portions of meetings
of the Governor's Advisory Council at which such confidential records are presented or
discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 288.985, F.S. -- Specified information held by the Florida Council on Military
Base and Mission Support relating to military base realignment and closure is exempt
and that portion of the council meeting where such information is presented and
discussed is closed as well as records generated during the closed meeting.
Section 288.99(15), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the exemption,
information concerning an investigation or Office of Financial Regulation review of a
certified capital company is confidential and exempt from disclosure until the
investigation or review is complete or ceases to be "active" as that term is defined in the
exemption. However, certain records may remain confidential if disclosure would result
in any of the consequences listed in the exemption.
Section 292.055, F .S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to the
Department of Veterans' Affairs direct-support organization who desires to remain
anonymous, and all information identifying such donor or prospective donor, is
confidential and exempt; portions of meetings of the direct support organization during
which the identity of donors or prospective donors are discussed are exempt.
Section 296.09(1), F .S. -- The health record and annual reevaluation of residents of
the Veterans' Domiciliary Home of Florida are confidential and exempt from disclosure
and must be preserved for a period of time as determined by the director.
Section 310.102(3)(e) and (5)(a), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the
section, all information obtained by the probable cause panel of the Board of Pilot
Commissioners from the consultant as part of an approved treatment program for
impaired licensees is confidential and exempt. Except as otherwise provided in the
section, all information obtained by the consultant and the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation pursuant to this section is confidential and exempt.
Section 311.13, F .S. -- Seaport security plans created pursuant to s., 311.12 are
exempt from public disclosure. Materials that depict critical seaport operating facilities
are also exempt if the seaport reasonably determines that such items contain
information that is not generally known and that could jeopardize seaport security. The
exemption does not apply to information relating to real estate leases, layout plans,
blueprints, and information related thereto.
Section 315.18, F .S. -- Any proposal or counterproposal exchanged between a
deepwater port listed in s. 311.09(1) and any nongovernmental entity, relating to the
sale, use or lease of land or of port facilities, and any financial records submitted by any
nongovernmental entity to such a deepwater port for the purpose of the sale, use or
lease of land or of port facilities, are confidential and exempt from disclosure until 30
days before such proposal or counterproposal is considered for approval by the
governing body of the deepwater port. If no proposal or counterproposal is submitted to
the governing body, the proposal or counterproposal shall cease to be exempt 90 days
after the cessation of negotiations.
Section 316.066{S}(3)(a), F.S. --Except as otherwise provided in the exemption,
crash reports that reveal the identity, home or employment telephone number or home
or employment address of, or other personal information concerning the parties involved
in the crash and that are held by an agency that regularly receives or prepares
information from or concerning the parties to motor vehicle crashes are confidential and
exempt from public disclosure requirements for a period of 60 days after the date the
report is filed.
Section 320.025(3), F.S. -- All records relating to the registration application of a law
enforcement agency, Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, or public
defender's office for motor vehicle or vessel registration and license plates or decals
issued under fictitious names, are exempt from s. 119.07(1) as long as the information
is retained by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
Section 320.05(2), F.S. -- Information on motor vehicle or vessel registration
records of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall not be made
available to a person unless the person requesting the information furnishes positive
proof of identification.
Section 322.125(3) and (4), F.S. -- When a member of the Medical Advisory Board
acts directly as a consultant to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, a
board member's individual review of the physical and mental qualifications of a licensed
driver or applicant is exempt from s. 286.011. Reports received or made by the board or
its members for the purpose of assisting the department in determining whether a
person is qualified to be licensed are for confidential use of the board or department and
may not be divulged to any person except to the driver or applicant or used as evidence
in any trial except proceedings under s. 322.271 or s. 322.31.
Section 322.126(3), F .S. -- Disability reports are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and may be used solely for the purpose of determining the qualifications of
any person to operate a motor vehicle.
Section 322.142(4), F.S. -- Reproductions of color photographic or digital imaged
licenses shall be made and issued only for the purposes set forth in the subsection and
are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 322.20(3), F.S. -- The release by the Department of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles of the driver history record, with respect to crashes involving a licensee,
shall not include any notation or record of the occurrence of a motor vehicle crash
unless the licensee received a traffic citation as a direct result of the crash, and to this
extent such notation or record is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 322.20(9), F.S. -- The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
shall furnish without charge specified driver license information from the Division of
Driver Licenses to the courts for the purpose of jury selection or to any state agency,
state attorney, sheriff or chief of police. Such court, state agency, state attorney, or law
enforcement agency may not sell, give away, or allow the copying of such information.
Noncompliance with this prohibition shall authorize the department to charge the
noncomplying court, state agency, state attorney, or law enforcement agency the
appropriate fee for any subsequent lists requested.
Section 328.40(3), F.S. -- All records kept or made by the Department of Highway
Safety and Motor Vehicles under the vessel registration law are public records except
for confidential reports.
Section 331.22, F.S. -- Airport security plans of an aviation authority or aviation
department of a county or municipality which operates an international airport are
exempt from disclosure. In addition, except as otherwise provided in the section,
specified materials that depict critical airport operating facilities are exempt to the extent
that the authority or department which operates an airport determines that such
information is not generally known and could jeopardize the security of the airport.
Section 331.326, F.S. -- Information held by Space Florida which is a trade secret,
as defined in s. 812.081, including trade secrets of Space Florida, any spaceport user,
or the space industry business is confidential and exempt from disclosure and may not
be disclosed. Any meeting or portion of a meeting of Space Florida's board is exempt
from open meetings requirements when the board is discussing trade secrets. Any
public record generated during the closed portions of the meetings, such as notes,
minutes, and tape recordings, is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 334.049(4), F.S. -- Information obtained by the Department of
Transportation as a result of research and development projects and revealing a
method of process, production, or manufacture which is a trade secret as defined by s.
688.002, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 337.14(1), F .S. -- Financial information required by the Department of
Transportation pursuant to this subsection shall be confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1 ).
Section 337.162, F .S. -- Complaints submitted to the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation and maintained by the Department of Transportation pursuant
to this section relating to alleged violations of state professional licensing laws or rules
shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Any complaints submitted to the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation are confidential and exempt
pursuant to Ch. 455 and applicable state law.
Section 337.168, F .S. -- The Department of Transportation's official project cost
estimates and potential bidders' identities are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07 for
a limited period of time as prescribed therein. The department's bid analysis and
monitoring system is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 338.155(6), F .S. -- Personal identifying information that is in the possession
of the Department of Transportation, a county, or an expressway authority that relates
to payment of tolls by credit card, charge card, or check is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 339.0805(1)(c), F.S. -- The application and financial information required for
certification by the Department of Transportation as a socially and economically
disadvantaged business enterprise are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 341.3026, F.S. -- Personal identifying information held by a public transit
provider for the purpose of facilitating the prepayment of transit fares or the acquisition
of a prepaid transit fare card or similar device is exempt from disclosure.
Section 350.121, F .S. -- Any records obtained by the Public Service Commission
pursuant to an inquiry are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) while such inquiry
is pending. If, at the conclusion of an inquiry the commission undertakes a formal
proceeding, any matter determined by the commission or by a court or administrative
agency to be trade secrets or confidential proprietary business information coming into
its possession pursuant to such inquiry shall be confidential and exempt.
Section 364.107, F.S. -- Personal identifying information of a participant in a
telecommunications carrier's Lifeline Assistance Plan under s. 364.10 held by the Public
Service Commission is confidential and exempt except as provided therein.
Section 364.183, F .S. -- Records provided by a telecommunications company to the
Public Service Commission which are found by the commission to constitute proprietary
confidential business information as defined in the section shall be confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 365.171(12), F.S. -- Any record, recording, or information, or portions
thereof, obtained by a public agency or public safety agency for the purpose of
providing emergency services and which reveals the name, address, telephone number,
or personal information about, or information which may identify any person requesting
emergency service or reporting an emergency by accessing an emergency
communications E911 system is confidential and exempt from public disclosure
requirements except that such record or information may be disclosed to a public safety
agency. The exemption applies only to the name, address, telephone number, or
personal information which may identify any person requesting emergency services or
reporting an emergency while such information is in the custody of the public agency or
public safety agency providing emergency services.
Section 365.174, F.S. -- Proprietary confidential business information, as defined in
the exemption, that is submitted by a wireless 911 provider to the Wireless 911 Board or
the State Technology Office is confidential and exempt from public disclosure
requirements.
Section 366.093, F.S. -- Records provided by a public utility company to the Public
Service Commission which, upon the request of the public utility or any person, are
found by the commission to constitute proprietary confidential business information as
defined in the section shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 367.156, F.S. -- Records provided by a water or wastewater utility to the
Public Service Commission which, upon the request of the utility or any person, are
found by the commission to constitute proprietary confidential business information as
defined in the section shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 368.108, F .S. -- Records provided by a natural gas transmission company
to the Public Service Commission which, upon the request of the company or any other
person, are found by the commission to constitute proprietary confidential business
information as defined in the section shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 373.139(3)(a), F .S. -- Appraisal reports, offers, and counteroffers for the
acquisition of real property by water management districts created under Ch. 373 are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed, or, if no
option contract is executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for purchase is
considered for approval by the governing board. However, disclosure is authorized
under some circumstances as described in the subsection. If negotiations are
terminated by the district, the appraisal report, offers and counteroffers shall become
available pursuant to s. 119.07(1).
Section 373.69(8) and (9), F.S. -- The mediator selected by parties to the
Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin Compact shall not divulge confidential
information disclosed to the mediator by the parties or by witnesses in the course of the
mediation. All records received by a mediator while serving as mediator shall be
considered confidential and each party to the mediation shall maintain the confidentiality
of the information.
Section 377.075(4)(f), F .S. -- Company data collected by the State Geologist from
specified agencies may be maintained as confidential subject to the same requirements
as that required by the federal agency of jurisdiction or, if no specific language exists in
federal law, the confidential period shall not exceed 10 years.
Section 377.22(2)(h), F.S. -- Information required by this paragraph relating to oil
and gas resources, at the request of the operator, shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and held confidential by the Division of Resource Management of the Department of
Environmental Protection for a period of 1 year after the completion of a well.
Section 377.2408(3), F .S. -- Any information relating to the location of the
geophysical operation and other information relating to leasing plans, exploration
budgets, and other proprietary information that could provide an economic advantage to
competitors shall be kept confidential by the Department of Environmental Protection for
10 years and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and shall not be released to the public without
the consent of the person submitting the application to conduct geophysical operations.
Section 377.2409, F.S. -- Information on geophysical activities conducted on state-
owned mineral lands received by the Division of Resource Management of the
Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to this section shall, upon the request
of the person conducting the activities, be held confidential for 10 years and shall be
exempt from disclosure.
Section 377.2421 (2), F .S. -- Geologic data which is maintained by the Division of
Resource Management of the Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to this
section shall be subject to the same confidentiality requirements that are required by the
federal agency and are exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the extent necessary to meet
federal requirements.
Section 377.2424(3), F .S. -- The Department of Environmental Protection shall
share geophysical permit information with a county or municipality upon request and
may, on its own initiative, share such information with a county or municipality.
However, the county or municipality shall maintain the confidential status of such
information, as required by s. 377.2408(3) and such information is exempt from s.
119.07(1 ).
Section 377.606, F .S. -- Proprietary information obtained by the Department of
Community Affairs as the result of a required report, investigation, or verification relating
to energy resources shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) if disclosure
would be likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person
providing the information and the provider has requested confidentiality.
Section 377.701(4), F.S. -- No state employee may divulge or make known in any
manner any proprietary information under the Petroleum Allocation Act, if the disclosure
of such information would be likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position
of the person providing such information and if the person requests that such
information be held confidential, except in accordance with a court order, or in the
publication of statistical information compiled by methods which would not disclose the
identity of individual suppliers or companies. Such proprietary information is confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 378.208(5), F.S. -- The Department of Environmental Protection may adopt
rules to require mine operators to submit a copy of their most recent annual financial
statements. The financial statement, except for a financial statement that is a public
record in the custody of another governmental agency, shall be confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07, and the department shall ensure the confidentiality of such statements.
Section 378.406(1)(a), F.S. -- Any information relating to prospecting, rock grades,
or secret processes or methods of operation which may be required, ascertained, or
discovered by inspection or investigation shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1) if the
applicant requests the Department of Environmental Protection to keep such
information confidential and informs the department of the basis for such confidentiality.
Should the secretary determine that such information shall not be confidential, the
secretary shall provide notice of his or her intent to release the information.
Section 379.223(3), F.S. -- The identity and all information identifying a donor or
prospective donor to a citizen support organization established by the Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission who desires to remain anonymous is confidential and
exempt from disclosure, and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report
of the citizen support organization.
Section 379.3511 (3), F.S. -- All social security numbers that are provided pursuant
to cited statutes and are contained in records of any subagent for the sale of fishing,
hunting and trapping licenses under this section are confidential as provided in those
statutes.
Section 379.352(3), F.S. -- Disclosure of a license applicant's social security
number which is obtained by the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission as
required by statute is limited to child support enforcement purposes and use by the
commission, and as otherwise provided by law.
Section 379.362(6), F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, reports required of
wholesale dealers regarding saltwater products are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1 ).
Section 381.0031 (4), F.S. -- Information submitted in reports of diseases of public
health significance to the Department of Health as required by this section is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and shall be open only when necessary to
public health.
Section 381.004(3), (4), (5), and (6), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided, human
immunodeficiency virus test results, and the identity of any person upon whom a test
has been performed, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). No person to whom
the results of a test have been disclosed pursuant to this section may disclose the
results to another person except as authorized in the section. Such confidential
information is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.0041 (9), F.S. -- All blood banks shall be governed by the provisions of
s. 381.004(3) relating to confidentiality of HIV test results and the identity of test
subjects.
Section 381.0055(1) and (2), F.S. -- Information which is confidential by operation
of law and which is obtained by the Department of Health and the health agencies
specified in this section relating to quality assurance activities shall retain its confidential
status and be exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information which is obtained by a
hospital or health care provider from the department or health agencies pursuant to this
section shall retain its confidential status and be exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.0055(3), F.S. -- Portions of meetings, proceedings, reports and records
of the Department of Health and the health agencies set forth in this section, which
relate solely to patient care quality assurance and where specific persons or incidents
are discussed are confidential and exempt from s. 286.011, and are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.0056(5)(a)16., F .S. -- Provisions in the school health services plan
developed pursuant to this section for maintenance of health records of individual
students must be in accordance with s. 1002.22, relating to confidentiality of student
records.
Section 381.775, F.S. --Except as provided in the exemption, all oral and written
records, information, letters, and reports received, made, or maintained by the
Department of Health relative to any applicant for or recipient of services under the
brain and spinal cord injury program are privileged, confidential, and exempt from s.
119.07(1). The in camera proceeding before designated officials to determine whether
records are relevant to an inquiry and should be released and all records relating
thereto are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.83, F.S. -- Trade secrets as defined in s. 812.081 (1 )(c) obtained by the
Department of Health pursuant to Ch. 381 relating to public health are confidential and
exempt from disclosure except as provided in the section. The person submitting such
trade secret information must request that it be kept confidential and inform the
department of the basis for the claim of trade secret. The department shall determine
whether the information, or portions thereof, is a trade secret.
Section 381.8531, F .S. -- The following information held by the Florida Center for
Brain Tumor Research is confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements: An
individual's medical record and any information received from an individual from another
state or nation or the federal government that is otherwise confidential or exempt
pursuant to the laws of that state or nation or pursuant to federal law.
Section 381.95(1), F.S. -- Information identifying or describing the name, location,
pharmaceutical cache, contents, capacity, equipment, physical features, or capabilities
of individual medical facilities, storage facilities, or laboratories established, maintained,
or regulated by the Department of Health as part of the state's plan of defense against
terrorism is exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 382.008(6), F.S. -- All information relating to cause of death in all death and
fetal death records and the parentage, marital status, and medical information included
in all fetal death records are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except for
health research purposes approved by the Department of Health, nor shall copies of
same be provided except as provided in s. 382.025.
Section 382.013(4), F.S. -- In the event that a child of undetermined parentage is
later identified and a new certificate of birth is prepared, the original birth certificate shall
be sealed and filed, shall be confidential and exempt, and shall not be opened to
inspection except by, nor shall certified copies of the same be issued except by court
order to, any person other than the registrant if of legal age.
Section 382.013(5), F .S. -- The original birth certificate shall contain all information
required by the Department of Health for legal, social, and health research purposes.
However, information concerning parentage, marital status, and medical details shall be
confidential and exempt, except for health research purposes as approved by the
department, nor shall copies be issued except as provided by s. 382.025.
Section 382.017(1), F .S. -- After registering a certificate of foreign birth in the new
name of an adoptee, the Department of Health shall place the adoption report or decree
under seal, not to be broken except pursuant to court order.
Section 382.025(1), F .S. -- Except for birth records over 100 years old which are not
under seal pursuant to court order, all birth records of this state are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1). Certified copies of the original birth certificate or a new or
amended certificate, or affidavits thereof, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and shall be issued only as authorized by the Department of Health to those individuals
and entities listed in the subsection.
Section 382.025(2), F.S. -- A certification of the death or fetal death certificate which
includes the confidential portions, shall be issued by the Department of Health only to
the individuals and entities specified in the subsection. All portions of a death certificate
shall cease to be exempt 50 years after the death.
Section 382.025(3), F.S. -- Records or data issued by the Department of Health to
government and research entities as set forth in this subsection are exempt from s.
119.07(1) and copies of records or data issued pursuant to this subsection remain the
property of the department.
Section 382.025(4), F.S. -- Except as provided in this section, preparing or issuing
certificates of live birth, death, or fetal death is exempt from the provisions of s.
119.07(1), F .S.
Section 383.14(3)(d), F.S. -- The confidential registry of cases maintained by the
Department of Health pursuant to this section [relating to phenylketonuria and other
metabolic, hereditary and congenital disorders] shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 383.32(3), F.S. -- Birth center clinical records are confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1). A client's clinical records shall be open to inspection only if the client
has signed a consent to release information or the review is made for a licensure survey
or complaint investigation.
Section 383.325, F.S. -- Inspection reports of birth centers which have been filed
with or issued by any governmental agency are to be maintained as public information.
However, any record which, by state or federal law or regulation, is deemed confidential
shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be distributed or made available as
public information unless or until such confidential status expires, except as provided in
s. 383.32(2)(c) requiring records to be made available for audit by licensure personnel.
Section 383.412, F.S. --Information that reveals the identity of the deceased child's
surviving siblings, family members, or others living in the home of a deceased child who
is the subject of review by, and which is held by, the State Child Abuse Death Review
Committee or local committee, as defined therein, is confidential and exempt. Portions
of committee meetings at which information made confidential and exempt pursuant to
subsection (2) are discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements. The closed
portion of the meeting must be recorded; however, the recording is exempt from
disclosure.
Section 383.51, F .S. --The identity of parents who leave a newborn infant at a
hospital, emergency medical services station, or fire station in accordance with s.
383.50, is confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 384.26(2), F.S. -- All information gathered by the Department of Health and
its authorized representatives in the course of contact investigation of sexually
transmissible disease infection shall be considered confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1), and subject to the provisions of s. 384.29.
Section 384.282(3), F.S. -- Except as provided in this section, the name of any
person subject to proceedings initiated by the Department of Health relating to a public
health threat resulting from a sexually transmissible disease, shall be confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 384.287(6), F.S. -- An authorized person who receives the results of a test
for sexually transmissible disease pursuant to this section, which results disclose
human immunodeficiency virus infection and are otherwise confidential pursuant to law,
shall maintain the confidentiality of the information received and the identity of the
person tested as required by s. 381.004.
Section 384.29, F.S. -- All information and records held by the Department of Health
and its authorized representatives relating to known or suspected cases of sexually
transmissible diseases are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information
may not be released or made public by the department or its representatives, or by a
court or parties to a lawsuit, except as provided in the section. Except as provided in the
section, information disclosed pursuant to a subpoena is confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 384.30(2), F.S. -- The fact of consultation, examination, and treatment of a
minor for a sexually transmissible disease is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and shall not be divulged directly or indirectly, such as sending a bill for services
rendered to a parent or guardian, except as provided in s. 384.29.
Section 385.202(3), F.S. -- Information which discloses or could lead to the
disclosure of the identity of any person whose condition or treatment has been reported
and studied pursuant to this section relating to the statewide cancer registry shall be
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) except as provided in the subsection.
Section 390.01114(4)(e), F.S.-- A court that conducts proceedings for a waiver of
the notice requirements pertaining to a minor seeking to terminate her pregnancy shall
order that a confidential record be maintained. All hearings under this section, including
appeals, shall remain confidential and closed to the public, as provided by court rule.
Section 390.01116, F .S. -- Any information that can be used to identify a minor
petitioning a circuit court for a judicial waiver, as provided in s. 390.01114, of the notice
requirements under the Parental Notice of Abortion Act if held by a circuit court or an
appellate court or the office of criminal conflict and civil regional counselor the Justice
Administrative Commission.
Section 390.0112(3), F .S. -- Reports concerning pregnancy termination which are
submitted to the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant to this section shall be
confidential and exempt and shall not be revealed except upon court order in a civil or
criminal proceeding.
Section 392.54(2), F.S. -- All information gathered by the Department of Health and
its authorized representatives in the course of contact investigation of tuberculosis
exposure or infection shall be confidential, subject to the provisions of s. 392.65. Such
information is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 392.545(3), F.S. -- The name of any person subject to proceedings initiated
by the Department of Health relating to a public health threat from tuberculosis shall not
be revealed by the department, its authorized representatives, the courts, and other
parties to the lawsuit except as permitted in s. 392.65.
Section 392.65, F.S. -- All information and records held by the Department of Health
and its authorized representatives relating to known or suspected cases of tuberculosis
or exposure to tuberculosis shall be strictly confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Such information may not be released or made public by the department or its
representatives, or by a court or parties to a lawsuit, except as authorized in the
subsection. Except as provided in the section, information disclosed pursuant to a
subpoena is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 393.0674, F.S. -- It is a third degree felony for any person to willfully,
knowingly, or intentionally release information from the juvenile records, and a first
degree misdemeanor for any person to willfully, knowingly, or intentionally release
information from the criminal records or central abuse registry, of a person obtained
under s. 393.0655, s. 393.066, or s. 393.067 to any other person for any purpose other
than screening for employment as specified in those sections.
Section 393.13(4)(i)1., F .S. -- Central client records of persons with developmental
disabilities are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and no part of such records
shall be released except as authorized in this paragraph.
Section 394.4615(1) and (7), F .S. -- Clinical records of persons subject to "The
Baker Act" are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such records may be
released only under the circumstances specified in the statute. Any person, agency, or
entity receiving information pursuant to this section shall maintain such information as
confidential and exempt.
Section 394.467(6)(a)2., F.S. -- The independent expert's report which is submitted
at a hearing on involuntary inpatient placement is confidential and not discoverable,
unless the expert is to be called as a witness for the patient at the hearing.
Section 394.907(7), F.S. -- Records of quality assurance programs of community
mental health centers which relate solely to actions taken in carrying out the provisions
of this section and records obtained by the Department of Children and Family Services
to determine licensee compliance with this section are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). Meetings or portions of meetings of quality assurance program committees
that relate solely to actions taken pursuant to this section are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 395.0162(2), F .S. -- Any records, reports or documents which are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), shall not be distributed or made available for
purposes of compliance with this section (relating to inspection reports of licensed
facilities) unless or until such confidential status expires.
Section 395.0193(4), F.S. -- Reports of final disciplinary actions taken by the
governing board of a licensed facility pursuant to s. 395.0193(3) which have been
forwarded to the Division of Health Quality Assurance of the Agency for Health Care
Administration pursuant to this subsection are not subject to inspection under the
provisions of s. 119.07(1), even if the division's investigation results in a finding of
probable cause.
Section 395.0193(7), F.S. -- The proceedings and records of peer review panels,
committees, or governing boards of licensed facilities (i.e., a hospital or surgical facility
licensed in accordance with Ch. 395) which relate solely to actions taken in carrying out
this section (i.e., disciplinary proceedings against staff) are not subject to inspection
under s. 119.07(1) and meetings held to achieve the objectives of such panels,
committees or governing boards are not open to the public under Ch. 286.
Section 395.0197(6)(c), F.S. -- The annual report submitted by a facility licensed
under Ch. 395 (hospitals and surgical facilities) to the Agency for Health Care
Administration concerning information on incidents as provided in this section is
confidential and is not available to the public pursuant to s. 119.07(1) or any other law
providing access to public records.
Section 395.0197(7), F .S. -- An adverse incident report submitted by a facility
licensed under Ch. 395 to the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant to this
subsection shall not be available to the public pursuant to s. 119.07(1) or any other law
providing access to public records, except as authorized therein.
Section 395.0197(13), F .S. -- Records of licensed facilities which are obtained by
the Agency for Health Care Administration under cited subsections in order to carry out
the provisions of this section relating to incidents and injuries are not available to the
public under s. 119.07(1), nor shall they be discoverable or admissible in any civil or
administrative action, except in disciplinary proceedings by the agencies set forth in the
subsection.
Section 395.0197(14), F.S. -- The meetings of the committees and governing board
of a facility licensed under this chapter (hospitals and surgical facilities) held solely for
the purpose of achieving the objectives of risk management as provided by this section
shall not be open to the public under Ch. 286. The records of such meetings are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except as provided in subsection (13).
Section 395.1025, F.S. -- Notification to an emergency medical technician,
paramedic or other person that a patient they treated or transported has an infectious
disease shall be done in a manner to protect the confidentiality of such patient
information and shall not include the patient's name.
Section 395.1046(3), F .S. -- A complaint against a hospital and all information
obtained by the Agency for Health Care Administration during an investigation pursuant
to this section are exempt from disclosure and may not be disclosed until 10 days after
probable cause has been found by the agency or the subject of the investigation waives
his or her privilege of confidentiality, whichever occurs first. In cases where the agency
finds the complaint is not legally sufficient or when the agency determines that no
probable cause exists, all such records are confidential and exempt from disclosure;
however, the complaint and a summary of the agency's findings shall be available
although information identifying an individual shall not be disclosed.
Section 395.1056, F .S. -- Those portions of a comprehensive emergency
management plan that address the response of a public or private hospital to an act of
terrorism held by specified agencies are confidential and exempt from disclosure
requirements but may be disclosed to another agency for anti-terrorism efforts as set
forth in the exemption. That portion of a public meeting which would reveal information
contained in a comprehensive emergency management plan that addresses the
response of a hospital to an act of terrorism is exempt from open meetings
requirements.
Section 395.3025(4), F.S. -- Patient records are confidential and must not be
disclosed without the consent of the patient or his or her legal representative except that
appropriate disclosure may be made as provided in the subsection.
Section 395.3025(7)(a), F.S. -- If the content of any patient treatment record is
provided under this section, the recipient, if other than the patient or the patient's
representative, may use such information only for the purpose provided and may not
further disclose any information unless expressly permitted by written consent of the
patient. The content of such patient records is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 395.3025(8), F.S. -- Patient records at hospitals and surgical facilities are
exempt from disclosure under s. 119.07(1), except as provided in subsections (1)
through (5) of this section.
Section 395.3025(9), F.S. -- A facility licensed under Ch. 395 (hospitals and surgical
facilities) may prescribe the content and custody of limited-access records which the
facility may maintain on its employees. Such records are limited to information regarding
evaluations of employee performance and shall be accessible only as provided in the
subsection. Such limited-access employee records are exempt from s. 119.07(1) for a
period of 5 years from the date such records are designated limited-access records.
Section 395.3025(10) and (11), F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, the
home addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of employees of any licensed
hospital or surgical facility who provide direct patient care or security services, as well
as specified information about the spouses and children of such employees, are
confidential and exempt. The same information must also be held confidential by the
facility upon written request by other employees who have a reasonable belief, based
upon specific circumstances that have been reported in accordance with the procedure
adopted by the facility, that release of the information may be used to threaten,
intimidate, harass, inflict violence upon, or defraud the employee or any member of the
employee's family.
Section 395.3035(2), F.S. -- Certain public hospital records and information, as
described in the subsection, are confidential and exempt from disclosure. For more
information, please refer to the discussion on hospital records found in Part II. s. I. of
this manual.
Section 395.3035(3), F.S. -- Those portions of a meeting of a public hospital's
governing board, relating to contract negotiations as described in the subsection are
exempt from the public meeting requirements; however, all governing board meetings at
which the board is scheduled to vote on contracts, except managed care contracts, are
open to the public. All portions of a board meeting closed to the public shall be subject
to procedural requirements as set forth in the subsection.
Section 395.3035(4), F.S. -- Those portions of a meeting of a public hospital's
governing board at which written strategic plans that are confidential pursuant to s.
395.3035(2), are discussed, reported on, modified, or approved by the governing board
are exempt from open meetings requirements provided that certain procedural
requirements as set forth in the subsection are complied with.
Section 395.3035(5), F.S. -- Any public records such as tapes, minutes, and notes,
generated at a public hospital governing board meeting which is closed to the public
pursuant to this section are confidential and exempt from disclosure. All such records
shall be retained and shall cease to be exempt at the same time as the transcript of the
meeting becomes available to the public.
Section 395.3036, F.S. -- The records of a private corporation that leases a public
hospital or other public health care facility are confidential and exempt from disclosure
and the meetings of the governing board of a private corporation are exempt from open
meetings requirements when the public lessor complies with the public finance
accountability provisions of s. 155.40(5) with respect to the transfer of any public funds
to the private lessee and when the private lessee meets at least 3 of 5 criteria set forth
in the exemption.
Section 395.4025(12), F .S. -- Patient care, transport, or treatment records or
reports, or patient care quality assurance proceedings, records, or reports obtained or
made pursuant to this section (relating to trauma centers) or pursuant to other statutes
cited in the subsection, must be held confidential by the Department of Health and are
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 395.404(1)(b), F.S. -- Trauma registry data obtained pursuant to this
subsection are confidential and exempt from disclosure except as set forth in the
statute.
Section 395.51(1),(2), F.S. -- Information which is confidential by operation of law
and which is obtained by a trauma agency or committee assembled pursuant to s.
395.50, shall retain its confidential status and be exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such
information which is obtained by a hospital or emergency medical services provider
from a trauma agency or committee shall retain its confidential status and be exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 395.51 (3), F.S. -- Portions of meetings, proceedings, reports and records of
a trauma agency or committee assembled pursuant to this chapter, which relate solely
to patient care quality assurance are confidential and exempt from s. 286.011. Patient
care quality assurance, for the purpose of this section, shall include consideration of
specific persons, cases, incidents relevant to the performance of quality control and
system evaluation.
Section 397.419(5), F.S. -- Records of substance abuse service providers which
relate solely to actions taken in carrying out this section relating to quality improvement
and records obtained by the Department of Children and Family Services to determine a
provider's compliance with this section are confidential and exempt. Meetings or
portions of meetings of quality improvement program committees that relate solely to
actions taken pursuant to this section are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 397.461 (3), F .S. -- It is a first degree misdemeanor to willfully, knowingly, or
intentionally release any criminal or juvenile information obtained under Ch. 397,
"Substance Abuse Services," for any purpose other than background checks of
personnel for employment.
Section 397.501 (7), F .S. -- Records of substance abuse service providers
pertaining to the identity, diagnosis, and prognosis of and service provision to any
individual are confidential in accordance with Ch. 397 and federal confidentiality
regulations, and are exempt from disclosure. Such records may not be disclosed
without the individual's written consent except under circumstances specified in the
subsection.
Section 397.752, F.S. -- An inmate's substance abuse service records are
confidential in accordance with s. 397.501 (7).
Section 400.0077(1), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the subsection, the
following records relating to long-term care ombudsman councils are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1): resident records held by an ombudsman or by the state or a
local ombudsman council; the names or identities of complainants or residents involved
in a complaint; and any other information about a complaint.
Section 400.0077(2), F.S. -- That portion of a long-term care ombudsman council
meeting in which the council discusses information that is confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) is closed to the public and exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 400.022(1)(m), F.S. -- Personal and medical records of nursing home
residents are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 400.0255(14), F.S. -- Except as provided in this subsection, in any
proceeding under this section (relating to hearings of facility decisions to transfer or
discharge nursing home residents) the following information concerning the parties is
confidential and exempt from disclosure: names and addresses, medical services
provided, social and economic conditions, personal information evaluations, medical
data, and information verifying income eligibility and amount of medical assistance
payments.
Section 400.119, F .S. -- Records of meetings of the risk-management and quality
assurance committee of a long-term care facility, as well as incident reports filed with
the facility's risk manager and administrator, notifications of the occurrence of an
adverse incident, and adverse-incident reports from the facility are confidential and
exempt. Meetings of an internal risk management and quality assurance committee are
exempt from open meetings requirements and are not open to the public.
Section 400.494(1), F.S. -- Information about patients received by persons
employed by, or providing services to, a home health agency or received by the
licensing agency through reports or inspection is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and shall be disclosed only as authorized in the exemption.
Section 400.611 (3), F.S. -- Patient records of hospice care are confidential and may
not be released except as provided in the subsection. Information obtained from patient
records by a state agency pursuant to its statutory authority to compile statistical data is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 400.945, F.S. -- Medical and personal identifying information about patients
of a home medical equipment provider which is received by the licensing agency
through reports or inspection is confidential and exempt.
Section 401.30(3), F.S. -- Reports to the Department of Health from emergency
medical services licensed pursuant to Part III, Ch. 401, which cover statistical data are
public records except that the names of patients and other patient identifying
information contained in such reports are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 401.30(4), F.S. -- Records of emergency calls which contain patient
examination or treatment information are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and
may not be disclosed except as provided in the subsection.
Section 401.414(3), F.S. -- A complaint concerning an alleged violation of Part III of
Ch. 401, relating to emergency medical services, and all information obtained in the
investigation by the Department of Health shall be confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until 10 days after probable cause is found or the subject of the investigation
waives confidentiality, whichever occurs first. However, the department is not prohibited
from providing such information to a law enforcement or regulatory agency.
Section 401.425(5), F.S. -- The records obtained or produced by an emergency
medical review committee providing quality assurance activities as described in
subsections (1) through (4) of the section are exempt from disclosure and committee
proceedings and meetings regarding quality assurance activities are exempt from open
meetings requirements.
Sections 402.165(8) and 402.166(8), F.S. -- All information obtained or produced by
the Florida Statewide Advocacy Councilor by a local advocacy council that is made
confidential by law, that relates to the identity of a client subject to the protections of this
section, or that relates to the identity of an individual providing information to the council
about abuse or alleged violations of rights, is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Portions of meetings before such councils relating to the identity of such individuals or
where testimony is provided relating to records otherwise made confidential by law are
not subject to open meetings requirements. All records prepared by council members
which reflect a mental impression, investigative strategy, or theory are exempt from s.
119.07(1) until completion of the investigation or the investigation ceases to be active as
defined in the section.
Section 402.22(3), F.S. -- Statutory confidentiality requirements apply to information
used by interdisciplinary teams involved in decisions regarding the design and delivery
of specified services to students residing in residential care facilities operated by the
Department of Children and Family Services and the Agency for Persons with
Disabilities, and such information is exempt from ss. 119.07(1) and 286.011.
Section 402.308(3)(a), F.S. -- Disclosure of the social security number submitted by
an applicant for a child care facility license issued by the Department of Children and
Family Services shall be limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 403.067(7)(c)5., F.S. -- Agricultural records relating to production methods,
profits, or financial information held by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services in connection with its duties relating to water pollution reduction are
confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements.
Section 403.074(3), F.S. -- Proprietary information obtained by the Department of
Environmental Protection during a visit to provide onsite technical assistance pursuant
to the Pollution Prevention Act shall be treated in accordance with s. 403.111, unless
such confidentiality is waived by the party who requested assistance.
Section 403.111, F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this section, upon a
determination of confidentiality by the Department of Environmental Protection in
accordance with the standard and procedures established in subsection (1), specified
manufacturing or financial information which is obtained through inspection or
investigation by the department shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1), shall not be
disclosed in public hearings, and shall be kept confidential by the department.
Section 403.7046(2)and (3)(b), F.S. -- Information reported to the Department of
Environmental Protection or to a local government by a recovered materials dealer
pursuant to this section which, if disclosed, would reveal a trade secret, as defined in s.
812.081 (1 )(c), is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 403.73, F.S. -- Trade secrets as defined in s. 812.081(1)(c) contained in
records, reports, or information obtained from any person under the Florida Resource
Recovery and Management Act which have been determined by the Department of
Environmental Protection, in accordance with the procedures set forth in this section, to
constitute trade secrets, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) except as
provided in the section.
Section 405.02, F.S. -- Research groups, governmental health agencies, medical
societies and in-hospital medical staff committees may use or publish released
information only for the purpose of advancing medical research or education.
Section 405.03, F.S. -- The identity of any person treated or studied as provided in
this chapter (relating to medical information available for research) shall be confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 406.075(3)(b), F.S. -- All proceedings and findings of the probable cause
panel investigating a medical examiner are exempt from s. 286.011 until probable cause
has been found or the subject of the investigation waives confidentiality. The complaint,
investigative findings, and recommendations of the probable cause panel are exempt
from s. 119.07(1) until 10 days after probable cause has been found or until the subject
has waived confidentiality. The commission may provide such information at any time to
any law enforcement or regulatory agency.
Section 406.135, F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, autopsy photographs
and video and audio recordings of an autopsy held by the medical examiner are
confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 408.061(1)(d), F.S. -- Specific provider contract reimbursement data which
are obtained by the Agency for Health Care Administration from health care facilities,
health care providers, or health insurers as a result of onsite inspections may not be
used by the state for purposes of direct provider contracting and are confidential and
exempt from disclosure.
Section 408.061 (7), F.S. -- Portions of patient records obtained or generated by the
Agency for Health Care Administration which contain identifying information of any
person or the spouse, relative, or guardian of such person or any other identifying
information which is patient-specific or otherwise identifies the patient, either directly or
indirectly, are confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 408.061 (8), F.S. -- The identity of any health care provider, health care
facility, or health care insurer who submits proprietary business information, as defined
in the section, to the Agency for Health Care Administration is confidential and exempt
from disclosure except as provided in the subsection.
Section 408.061 (1 0), F .S. -- Confidential health care information may be released to
other governmental entities or to parties contracting with the Agency for Health Care
Administration; however, the receiving entity shall retain the confidentiality of such
information as provided in this section.
Section 408.185, F .S. -- Trade secrets and other confidential proprietary business
information submitted by a member of the health care community to the Office of the
Attorney General pursuant to a request for an antitrust no-action letter is confidential
and exempt from disclosure for one year after the date of submission.
Section 408.7056(14), F.S. -- Any information that identifies a subscriber which is
held by the subscriber assistance panel, Agency for Health Care Administration, or the
Department of Financial Services pursuant to this section is confidential and exempt
from disclosure. Meetings of the panel shall be open to the public unless the provider or
subscriber whose grievance will be heard requests a closed meeting or the agency or
the department determines that information which discloses the subscriber's medical
treatment or history or information relating to internal risk management programs may
be revealed at the panel meeting, in which case that portion of the meeting shall be
exempt from open meetings requirements. All closed meetings shall be recorded by a
certified court reporter.
Section 409.175(12), F.S. -- It is unlawful for any person, agency, summer day
camp, or summer 24-hour camp providing care for children to release information from
the criminal or juvenile records obtained under this section to any other person for any
purpose other than screening for employment as specified in this section.
Section 409.175(16), F .S. -- Specified personal information about foster parent
applicants, licensed foster parents, and the families of foster parent applicants and
licensees, held by the Department of Children and Family Services is exempt from
disclosure unless otherwise provided by a court or as provided in the exemption. The
name, address, and telephone number of persons providing character or neighbor
references are exempt.
Section 409.176(12), F .S. -- It is unlawful for any person or facility to release
information from the criminal or juvenile records obtained under Ch. 435, s. 409.175 or
this section (relating to registration of residential child-caring agencies) for any purpose
other than screening for employment as specified in those statutes.
Section 409.25661, F.S. -- Information obtained by the Department of Revenue
under an insurance claims data exchange system is confidential and exempt until such
time as the department determines whether a match exists. If a match exists, such
information becomes available for public disclosure. If a match does not exist, the
nonmatch information shall be destroyed as provided in s. 409.25659, F.S.
Section 409.2577, F.S. -- Information gathered or used by the parent locator service
is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and such information may be made
available only to the persons and agencies and for the purposes listed in the section.
Section 409.2579, F.S. -- Information concerning applicants for or recipients of Title
IV-D child support services is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). The use or
disclosure of such information by the IV-D program is limited to the purposes, and
subject to the limitations, set forth in the section.
Section 409.441 (4), F.S. -- All information about clients which is part of a runaway
youth center's intake and client records system is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1 ).
Section 409.821, F.S. -- Information identifying a Florida Kidcare applicant or
enrollee held by specified agencies is confidential and exempt, and may be disclosed
only as authorized in the exemption.
Section 409.910(17)(d), F.S. -- All information obtained and documents prepared
pursuant to an investigation of a Medicaid recipient, the recipient's legal representative,
or any other person relating to an allegation of recipient fraud or theft is confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1): until such time as the Agency for Health Care Administration
takes final agency action; until the case is referred for criminal prosecution; until an
indictment or information is filed in a criminal case; or at all times if otherwise protected
by law.
Section 409.910(20)(a), F .S. -- All information obtained from the Office of Insurance
Regulation of the Financial Services Commission relative to certain items of medical
care and services furnished to eligible persons provided health services under this
section shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except as provided therein.
Section 409.91196(1) and (2), F .S. -- The rebate amount, percent of rebate,
manufacturer's pricing, and supplemental rebate, and other trade secrets that the
Agency for Health Care Administration has identified for use in negotiations, held by the
agency under s. 409.912(39)(a)7., are confidential and exempt from public disclosure
requirements. That portion of a meeting of the Medicaid Pharmaceutical and
Therapeutics Committee at which this information is discussed is exempt from public
meetings requirements. A record of an exempt portion of a meeting must be made and
maintained.
Section 409.913(12), F .S. -- The complaint and all information obtained pursuant to
an investigation of a Medicaid provider, or the authorized representative of a provider,
relating to an allegation of fraud, abuse, or neglect are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until such time as the Agency for Health Care Administration takes final
agency action; until the Attorney General refers the case for criminal prosecution; until
10 days after the complaint is determined to be without merit; or at all times if otherwise
protected by law.
Section 409.920(9)(f), F.S. -- Pursuant to the conduct of the statewide program of
Medicaid fraud control, the Attorney General shall safeguard the privacy rights of all
individuals and provide safeguards to prevent the use of patient medical records beyond
the scope of a specific investigation of fraud or abuse without the patient's written
consent.
Section 410.037, F.S. -- Information about disabled adults receiving services under
ss. 410.031-410.036 (relating to home care of disabled adults) which is received by the
Department of Children and Family Services or its authorized employees, or by persons
who provide services to disabled adults or elderly persons as volunteers or pursuant to
contracts with the department is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such
information may not be disclosed publicly in a manner that identifies a disabled adult
without the written consent of the person or his or her legal guardian.
Section 410.605, F.S. -- Information about disabled adults receiving services under
the Community Care for Disabled Adults Act which is received by the Department of
Children and Family Services or its authorized employees, or by persons who provide
services to disabled adults as volunteers or pursuant to contracts with the department is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information may not be disclosed
publicly in a manner which would identify a disabled adult without the written consent of
such person or the disabled adult's legal guardian.
Section 411.011, F.S. -- Individual records of children enrolled in school readiness
programs, held by an early learning coalition or the Agency for Workforce Innovation,
are confidential and exempt from public disclosure. The child's parent or guardian and
other entities as set forth in the exemption are authorized to have access to the records.
Section 413.012(1), F.S. -- All records furnished to the Division of Blind Services in
connection with state or local vocational rehabilitation programs and containing
information as to personal facts about applicants or clients given to the state or local
vocational rehabilitation agency, its representatives or its employees in the course of the
administration of the program including lists of names, addresses and records of client
evaluations are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 413.341, F.S. -- Oral and written records, information, letters and reports
received, made, or maintained by the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation of the
Department of Education relative to any applicant or eligible individual are privileged,
confidential, and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and may not be released except as provided
in the section. Records that come into the possession of the division and that are
confidential by other provisions of law are confidential and exempt from the provisions
of s. 119.07(1), and may not be released by the division, except as provided in this
section.
Section 413.405(11), F .S. -- Meetings, hearings, and forums of the Florida
Rehabilitation Council established to assist the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation in
the planning and development of statewide rehabilitation programs and services shall
be open and accessible to the public unless there is a valid reason for an executive
session.
Section 413.615(7)(a) and (b), F.S. -- The identity of, and all information identifying,
a donor or prospective donor to the Florida Endowment Foundation for Vocational
Rehabilitation who desires to remain anonymous is confidential and exempt from
disclosure. Portions of the meetings of the foundation during which the identity of
donors or prospective donors is discussed are exempt from open meetings
requirements. Records relating to clients or applicants to the Division of Vocational
Rehabilitation that come into the possession of the foundation and that are confidential
by other provisions of law are confidential and exempt from disclosure, and may not be
released by the foundation. Portions of meetings of the foundation during which the
identities of such clients or applicants are discussed are exempt from open meetings
requirements.
Section 413.615(11), F.S. -- The identities of donors and prospective donors to the
Florida Endowment for Vocational Rehabilitation who desire to remain anonymous shall
be protected and the anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 414.106, F.S. -- That portion of a meeting held by the Department of
Children and Family Services, Workforce Florida, Inc., a regional workforce board, or a
local committee at which personal identifying information contained in records relating to
temporary cash assistance is discussed is exempt from open meetings requirements, if
the information identifies a participant, a participant's family or household member.
Section 414.295(1), F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, personal
identifying information of a temporary cash assistance program participant, a
participant's family or a participant's family or household member, except for information
identifying a noncustodial parent, held by the agencies set forth in the exemption, is
confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 415.1045(1)(a), F.S. -- All photographs and videotapes taken during the
course of a protective investigation of alleged abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult are
confidential and exempt from public disclosure as provided in s. 415.107.
Section 415.107(1), F.S. -- All records concerning reports of abuse, neglect or
exploitation of a vulnerable adult, including reports made to the central abuse hotline
and all records generated as a result of such reports are confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) and may not be disclosed except as authorized in ss. 415.101-415.113.
Section 415.107(3)(1), F.S. -- Access to records concerning reports of abuse,
neglect or exploitation of a vulnerable adult shall be granted to any person in the event
of the death of a vulnerable adult determined to be a result of abuse, neglect, or
exploitation. Information identifying the person reporting abuse, neglect or exploitation
shall not be released. Any information otherwise made confidential or exempt by law
shall not be released pursuant to this paragraph.
Section 415.107(6), F.S. -- The identity of any person reporting adult abuse, neglect
or exploitation may not be released without that person's written consent to any person
except as authorized in the subsection. This subsection grants protection only for the
person who reports adult abuse, neglect or exploitation and protects only the fact that
the person is the reporter.
Section 415.111(2), F.S. -- A person who knowingly and willfully makes public or
discloses any confidential information contained in the central abuse hotline, or in other
computer systems, or in the records of any case of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a
vulnerable adult except as provided in ss. 415.101-415.113 commits a second degree
misdemeanor.
Section 427.705(6), F.S. -- The names, addresses, and telephone numbers
provided to the Public Service Commission or administrator of the telecommunications
access system established for the hearing impaired and speech impaired populations,
by applicants for specialized telecommunications devices are confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1). The information may be released to contractors only for the purposes
set forth in the subsection.
Section 430.105, F .S. -- Personal identifying information in a record held by the
Department of Elderly Affairs that relates to an individual's health or eligibility for or
receipt of health-related, elder care, or long-term care services is confidential and
exempt from public disclosure requirements. Such information may be disclosed to
another governmental entity for the purpose of administering the department's programs
for the elderly or if the affected individual or his or her legal representative provides
written consent.
Section 430.207, F.S. -- Information about functionally impaired elderly persons
receiving services under the Community Care for the Elderly Act which is received by
the Department of Elderly Affairs or its authorized employees, or by persons who
provide services to functionally impaired elderly persons as volunteers or pursuant to
contracts with the department is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 430.504, F.S. -- Information about clients of programs created or funded
under s. 430.501 or s. 430.503 (relating to Alzheimer's Disease) which is received by
the Department of Elderly Affairs or its authorized employees, or by persons who
provide services to clients of programs created or funded under these sections as
volunteers or pursuant to contracts with the department is confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 430.608, F.S. -- Identifying information about elderly persons receiving
services under ss. 430.601-430.606 which is collected and held by the Department of
Elderly Affairs or its employees, by volunteers, or by persons who provide services to
elderly persons under ss. 430.601-430.606 through contracts with the department, is
confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 435.09, F.S. -- No criminal or juvenile information obtained under this
section may be used for any other purpose than determining whether persons meet the
minimum standards for employment or for an owner or director of a covered service
provider. The criminal and juvenile records obtained by the department or employer are
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 440.102(8), F.S. -- Except as provided in this subsection, all information,
interviews, reports, statements, memoranda, and drug test results received or produced
as a result of a drug-testing program are confidential and exempt from disclosure, and
may not be used or received in evidence, obtained in discovery, or disclosed in any
public or private proceedings except in accordance with this section or in determining
compensability under the workers' compensation law.
Section 440.108 F .S. -- All investigatory records made or received pursuant to s.
440.107, [relating to enforcement of employer compliance with workers' compensation
coverage requirements], and any records necessary to complete an investigation held
by the Department of Financial Services are confidential and exempt until the
investigation is completed or ceases to be "active" as defined in the exemption. After
the investigation is completed or ceases to be active, information in the records remains
confidential and exempt if it would jeopardize the integrity of another active
investigation; reveal a trade secret, business or personal financial information or
personal identifying information regarding the identity of a confidential informant;
defame or cause unwarranted damage to the good name or reputation of an individual
or jeopardize the safety of an individual, or reveal investigative techniques or
procedures.
Section 440.125, F.S. -- Medical records and reports of an injured employee and
any information identifying an injured employee in medical bills provided to the
Department of Financial Services pursuant to s. 440.13, are confidential and exempt,
except as otherwise provided by this section and Ch. 440.
Section 440.132, F .S. -- Investigatory records of the Agency for Health Care
Administration made or received pursuant to s. 440.134, and any examination records
necessary to complete an investigation are confidential and exempt, until the
investigation is completed or ceases to be "active," as that term is defined in the
subsection, except that medical records which specifically identify patients must remain
confidential and exempt.
Section 440.25(3), F.S. -- Information from the files, reports, case summaries,
mediator's notes, or other communications or materials, oral or written, relating to a
mediation conference under the Workers' Compensation Law obtained by any person
performing mediation duties is privileged and confidential and may not be disclosed
without the written consent of all parties to the conference.
Section 440.3851, F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, claims files of the
Florida Self-Insurers Guaranty Association, Incorporated, and medical records that are
part of a claims file and other information relating to the medical condition or medical
status of a claimant, are confidential and exempt. Portions of meetings of the
Association at which such confidential records are discussed are exempt from open
meetings requirements.
Section 440.39(7), F.S. -- Documents and inspection results produced pursuant to
this subsection relating to investigation and prosecution of claims against third-party
tortfeasors, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 440.515, F .S. -- The Department of Financial Services shall maintain
reports from self-insurers filed pursuant to former s. 440.51 (6) as confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1). The reports shall be released only as authorized in this
section.
Section 443.101(11)(c), F.S. -- Disclosure of drug tests and other information
pertaining to drug testing of individuals who receive compensation under this chapter
(Unemployment Compensation) shall be governed by s. 443.1715.
Section 443.1316(2)(b), F.S. -- Provisions of ss. 213.053, 213.0532 and 213.0535
(which contain provisions for the confidentiality of records) apply to collection of
unemployment contributions and reimbursements by the Department of Revenue
unless prohibited by federal law.
Section 443.171(5), F.S. -- Information revealing the employing unit's or individual's
identity obtained from the employing unit or from any individual through the
administration of Chapter 443 is, except to the extent necessary for the proper
presentation of a claim or upon written authorization of the claimant who has a workers'
compensation claim pending, confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 443.1715(1), F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, information
revealing an employing unit's or individual's identity obtained from an employing unit or
any individual under the administration of Ch. 443 (Unemployment Compensation), is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may be disclosed only as authorized in
the subsection.
Section 443.1715(3)(b), F.S. -- Unless otherwise authorized by law, information
described in the subsection and received by an employer through a drug-testing
program, or obtained by a public employee under this chapter (Unemployment
Compensation) is confidential and exempt until introduced into the public record under a
hearing conducted under s. 443.151 (4).
Section 446.52, F.S. -- Information about displaced homemakers receiving services
under cited statutes which is received by the Department of Education or its authorized
employees, or by persons who provide services to displaced homemakers as volunteers
or pursuant to contracts with the department is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1 ).
Section 447.045, F.S. -- Neither the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation nor any investigator or employee of the department shall divulge the
information obtained pursuant to the processing of applicant fingerprint cards and such
information is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 447.205(10), F .S. -- Deliberations of the Public Employees Relations
Commission in any proceeding before it are exempt from s. 286.011 except any hearing
held or oral argument heard by the commission pursuant to Ch. 120 or Ch. 447 shall be
open to the public. All draft orders developed in preparation for or preliminary to the
issuance of a final written order are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 447.307(2), F.S. -- The petitions and dated statements signed by
employees regarding whether employees desire to be represented in a proposed
bargaining unit are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except that an employee,
employer, or employee organization shall be given an opportunity to verify and
challenge signatures as provided in the subsection.
Section 447.605(1), F.S. -- All discussions between the chief executive officer of a
public employer, or his or her representative, and the legislative body or the public
employer relative to collective bargaining shall be closed and exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 447.605(3), F.S. -- All work products developed by the public employer in
preparation for and during collective bargaining negotiations shall be confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 455.213(9), F .S. -- Disclosure of a license applicant's social security
number obtained by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation pursuant
to this section shall be limited to the purpose of administration of the child support
enforcement program and use by the department, and as otherwise provided by law.
Section 455.217(5), F.S. -- Meetings and records of meetings of any member of the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation or of any board within the
department held for the exclusive purpose of creating or reviewing licensure
examination questions or proposed examination questions are confidential and exempt
from ss. 119.07(1) and 286.011.
Section 455.2235(3), F.S. -- Information relating to the mediation of a case pursuant
to this section shall be subject to the confidentiality provisions of s. 455.225.
Section 455.225(2), F.S. -- For cases dismissed prior to a finding of probable cause,
the report submitted by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation
regarding dismissal of a complaint which the department has previously determined to
be legally sufficient is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 455.225(4), F.S. -- All proceedings of a probable cause panel of a board
within the Department of Business and Professional Regulation are exempt from s.
286.011 until 10 days after the panel finds probable cause or until the subject of the
investigation waives confidentiality.
Section 455.225(10), F .S. -- The complaint and all information obtained pursuant to
an investigation by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), until 10 days after probable cause has been
found or until the regulated professional or subject of the investigation waives
confidentiality, whichever is first. However, this exemption does not apply to actions
against unlicensed persons pursuant to s. 455.228 or the applicable practice act.
Section 455.229(1) and (2), F.S. -- Information required by the Department of
Business and Professional Regulation of an applicant is open to public inspection
pursuant to s. 119.07, except financial information, medical information, school
transcripts, examination questions, answers, papers, grades and grading keys, which
are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be discussed with or made
accessible to anyone except as provided in the subsection. Information supplied to the
department which is exempt or confidential remains exempt or confidential while in the
custody of the department. Examination questions and answers may be considered only
in camera in any Ch. 120 administrative proceeding. Examination questions and
answers provided at the hearing are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) unless
invalidated by the administrative law judge.
Section 455.232(1), F .S. -- No officer, employee or person under contract with the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation or any board therein, or any
subject of an investigation shall convey knowledge or information to any person not
lawfully entitled to such information or knowledge about any meeting or public record,
which at the time such knowledge or information is conveyed, is exempt from ss.
119.01, 119.07(1) or 286.011.
Section 455.32(15), F.S. -- The exemptions set forth in cited provisions of Ch. 455,
relating to records of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, also
apply to records held by the corporation with which the department contracts pursuant
to the Management Privatization Act.
Section 456.013(12), F .S. -- Disclosure of a license applicant's social security
number which is obtained by the Department of Health pursuant to this section is limited
to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 456.014(1) and (2), F.S. -- Information required by the Department of
Health of an applicant is open to public inspection pursuant to s. 119.07, except
financial information, medical information, school transcripts, examination questions,
answers, papers, grades and grading keys, which are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and shall not be discussed with or made accessible to anyone except as
provided in the subsection. Examination questions and answers may be considered
only in camera in any Ch. 120 administrative proceeding. Examination questions and
answers provided at the hearing are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) unless
invalidated by the administrative law judge.
Section 456.017(4), F.S. -- Meetings of any member of the Department of Health or
of any board within the department held for the exclusive purpose of creating or
reviewing licensure examination questions or proposed examination questions are
exempt from open meetings requirements and any public records such as tape
recordings, minutes, or notes, generated during or as a result of such meetings are
confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 456.046, F.S. -- A patient name or other information that identifies a patient
which is in a record obtained by the Department of Health for the purpose of compiling a
practitioner profile pursuant to s. 456.041 is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 456.051 (1), F .S. -- The report of a claim or action for damages for personal
injury which is required to be filed with the Department of Health under cited statutes is
public information except for the name of the claimant or injured person, which remains
confidential.
Section 456.057(7)(a), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the exemption,
patient records generated by health care practitioners may not be furnished to any
person other than the patient, his or her legal representative or other health care
practitioners and providers involved in the patient's care and treatment.
Section 456.057(10), F .S. -- All patient records obtained by the Department of
Health and any other documents maintained by the department which identify the
patient by name are confidential and exempt and shall be used solely for the purpose of
the department and the appropriate board in disciplinary proceedings.
Section 456.073(2), F.S. -- For cases dismissed prior to a finding of probable cause,
the report submitted by the Department of Health regarding dismissal of a complaint
which the department has previously determined to be legally sufficient is confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 456.073(4), F.S. -- All proceedings of a probable cause panel of a board
within the Department of Health are exempt from s. 286.011 until 1 0 days after the
panel finds probable cause or until the subject of the investigation waives confidentiality.
Section 456.073(9)(c), F.S. -- The identity of the expert whose report supported the
Department of Health's recommendation for closure of a complaint, which report is
provided to the complainant in accordance with this paragraph, shall remain
confidential.
Section 456.073(10), F.S. -- Except as provided in this subsection, a complaint and
all information obtained pursuant to an investigation by the Department of Health is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), until 10 days after probable cause has been
found or until the regulated professional or subject of the investigation waives
confidentiality, whichever is first.
Section 456.076(3)(e), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the section, all
information concerning a practitioner obtained from the consultant by the probable
cause panel or the Department of Health as part of an approved treatment program for
impaired practitioners shall remain confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 456.076(5)(a), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the section, all
information obtained by the consultant and the Department of Health from an approved
treatment provider regarding a licensee's impairment and participation in the treatment
program is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 456.078(4), F.S. -- Information relating to the mediation of a case pursuant
to this section shall be subject to the confidentiality provisions of s. 456.073.
Section 456.082, F.S. -- No officer, employee or person under contract with the
Department of Health, or any subject of an investigation shall convey knowledge or
information to any person not lawfully entitled to such information or knowledge about
any meeting or public record, which at the time such knowledge or information is
conveyed, is exempt from ss. 119.01, 119.07(1) or 286.011.
Section 458.3193, F .S. -- All personal identifying information contained in records
provided by physicians licensed under chapter 458 or 459 in response to physician
workforce surveys required as a condition of license renewal and held by the
Department of Health is confidential and exempt, except as otherwise provided in the
subsection. NOTE: Also published as s. 459.0083, F.S.
Section 458.331(1)(s), F.S. --If the Department of Health files a petition for
enforcement against a physician pursuant to this paragraph, the licensee shall not be
named or identified by initials in any public court records or documents, and the
proceedings shall be closed to the public. See also ss. 457.109(1 )(0) (acupuncturist);
459.015(1 )(w) (osteopathic physician); 464.018(1 )U) (nurse); 466.028(1 )(s) (dentist),
and 486.125(1 )(a) 1., F .S. (physical therapist).
Section 458.337(3), F.S. -- Records of a medical organization or hospital taking
disciplinary action against a physician which have been furnished to the Department of
Health for the purpose of disciplinary proceedings shall be confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 458.339(3), F.S. -- Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of physicians which are maintained by the Department of Health pursuant to
this section shall remain confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until probable cause
is found and an administrative complaint is issued.
Section 458.341, F.S. -- Patient medical records obtained during a search of a
physician's office by the Department of Health pursuant to this section are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 459.016(3), F.S. -- Records of a medical organization taking disciplinary
action against an osteopathic physician which have been furnished to the Department of
Health for the purpose of disciplinary proceedings shall be confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 459.017(3), F.S. -- Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of osteopathic physicians which are maintained by the Department of Health
pursuant to this section shall remain confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
probable cause is found and an administrative complaint issued.
Section 459.018, F.S. -- Patient medical records obtained during a search of an
osteopathic physician's office by the Department of Health pursuant to this section are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 464.208, F.S. -- Criminal records or juvenile records relating to vulnerable
adults that are obtained by the Board of Nursing for purposes of determining whether a
person meets the requirements of Part II of Ch. 464, relating to certified nursing
assistants are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 465.017(2), F .S. -- Except as permitted in the enumerated chapters,
records maintained in a pharmacy relating to the filling of prescriptions and the
dispensing of medicinal drugs shall not be furnished to persons other than the patient or
legal representative, or to the department or to the patient's spouse if the patient is
incapacitated and has provided written authorization. Rules adopted by the Board of
Pharmacy relative to disposal of records of prescription drugs shall be consistent with
the duty to preserve the confidentiality of such records in accordance with applicable
state and federal law.
Section 466.022(3), F.S. -- Peer review information regarding dentists obtained by
the Department of Health as background information shall remain confidential and
exempt from ss. 119.07(1) and 286.011 regardless of whether probable cause is found.
Section 466.0275(2), F.S. -- Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of dentists which are maintained by the Department of Health pursuant to this
section shall remain confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until probable cause is
found and an administrative complaint is issued.
Section 466.041(3), F.S. -- Any report of hepatitis B carrier status filed by a licensee
or applicant in compliance with the requirements established by the Board of Dentistry
shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except for the purpose of
investigation or prosecution of an alleged violation of this chapter by the Department of
Health.
Section 471.038(7), F.S. -- The exemptions set forth in ss. 455.217, 455.225, and
455.229, for records of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation apply
to records created or maintained by the Florida Engineers Management Corporation,
except as provided in the subsection.
Section 472.0131 (5), F .S. -- Meetings and records of meetings of any member of
the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or of the Board of Professional
Surveyors and Mappers held for the exclusive purpose of creating or reviewing
licensure examination questions or proposed examination questions are confidential
and exempt; however, the exemption does not affect the right of a person to review an
examination as provided in subsection (3).
Section 472.0201 (1) and (2), F .S. -- All information required by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services of any applicant shall be a public record and open
to public inspection except financial information, medical information, school transcripts,
examination questions, answers, papers, grades, and grading keys, which are
confidential and exempt and shall not be discussed with or made accessible to anyone
except as provided therein. Any information supplied to the department by any other
agency which is exempt from Ch. 119 or is confidential shall remain exempt or
confidential pursuant to applicable law while in the custody of the department.
Examination questions and answers provided by the department to an administrative
law judge in an administrative hearing are confidential and exempt unless invalidated by
the administrative law judge.
Section 472.02011, F.S. -- An officer, employee, or person under contract with the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or the Board of Professional
Surveyors and Mappers, or any subject of an investigation may not convey knowledge
or information to any person who is not lawfully entitled to such knowledge or
information about any public meeting or public record, which at the time such
knowledge or information is conveyed is exempt from disclosure.
Section 472.033(2), (4), and (10), F.S. -- For cases involving a complaint to the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services that are dismissed before a finding
of probable cause, the report of the department is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). All proceedings of the probable cause panel are exempt from s. 286.011 until
10 days after probable cause has been found to exist by the panel or until the subject of
the investigation waives his or her privilege of confidentiality. The complaint and all
information obtained pursuant to the investigation by the department are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until 10 days after probable cause has been found to
exist by the probable cause panel or by the department, or until the regulated
professional or subject of the investigation waives his or her privilege of confidentiality,
whichever occurs first. However, the exemption does not apply to actions against
unlicensed persons pursuant to s. 472.036.
Section 474.214(1)(h), F.S. -- If the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation files a petition for enforcement against a veterinarian pursuant to this
paragraph, the licensee shall not be named or identified by initials in any other public
court records and the enforcement proceedings shall be closed.
Section 474.2185, F.S. -- Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of veterinarians which are maintained by the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation pursuant to this section shall remain confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) until probable cause is found and an administrative complaint is
issued.
Section 481.205(3)(a), F.S. -- Complaints and any information obtained pursuant to
an investigation by the Board of Architecture and Interior Design are confidential and
exempt from disclosure as provided in s. 455.225(2) and (10), F.S.
Section 487.031(5), F.S. -- Information relative to formulas of products acquired by
the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to the registration of
pesticides is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 487.041 (6), F .S. -- Confidential data received from the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services by governmental agencies in providing review and
comment to the department regarding pesticide registration shall be confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 487.0615(2)(c), F.S. -- Confidential data received by the Pesticide Review
Council from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the pesticide registrant shall
be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 493.6121 (5), F .S. -- Criminal justice information submitted to the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to the department's
prescribed duties relating to licensure of private investigative, private security, and
repossession services, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 493.6121 (8), F .S. -- An investigation conducted by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to this chapter relating to private
investigative, private security, and repossession services, is exempt from s. 119.07(1)
until a probable cause determination has been made, the case is closed prior to a
determination of probable cause, or the subject of the investigation waives
confidentiality.
Section 493.6122, F.S. -- The residence telephone number and residence address
of certain licensees maintained by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except that this information may
be provided to law enforcement agencies. When the residence telephone number or
address is or appears to be the business telephone number or address, this information
is public record.
Section 494.00125(1), F.S. -- Except as provided therein, information relating to an
investigation by the Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to the Mortgage Brokerage
and Mortgage Lending Act, including any consumer complaint received by the office or
the Department of Financial Services, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active" as defined in the subsection,
unless disclosure would result in certain enumerated consequences. If the investigation
could endanger the safety of employees or their families, specified information about
such personnel and their families is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 494.00125(2), F.S. -- All audited statements submitted pursuant to this act
(relating to mortgage brokerage and lending) are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1), except that employees of the Office of Financial Regulation shall have
access to such information in the administration and enforcement of the act and
prosecution of violations.
Section 494.00125(3), F.S. -- Credit history information and credit scores held by
the Office of Financial Regulation and related to licensing under ss. 494.001-494.0077
are confidential and exempt except as provided therein.
Section 497.172(1), F.S. -- Portions of meetings of the Board of Funeral, Cemetery,
and Consumer Services at which licensure examination questions or answers are
discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements; however, the closed meetings
must be recorded. Such recordings are exempt from disclosure. Except as provided in
the exemption, financial examination and inspection records are confidential and
exempt until the examination or inspection is completed or ceases to be active.
Information relating to an investigation of a violation is confidential and exempt until the
investigation is completed or ceases to be active or until 10 days after a determination
regarding probable cause is made. Trade secrets are confidential and exempt.
Section 497.172(2), F .S. -- Meetings of the probable cause panel of the Board of
Funeral, Cemetery, and Consumer Services, pursuant to s. 497.153 are exempt from
open meeting requirements although such meetings must be recorded. Records of
exempt meetings of the probable cause panel are exempt from disclosure requirements
until 10 days after a determination regarding probable cause is made.
Section 497.172(3) and (4), F.S. -- Except as provided therein, information held by
the Department of Financial Services pursuant to a financial examination or inspection
under Ch. 497 are confidential and exempt until the examination or inspection is
completed or ceases to be active. Information held by the department relating to an
investigation of a violation of Ch. 497 is confidential and exempt until the investigation is
completed or ceases to be active or until 10 days after a determination regarding
probable cause is made. Trade secrets are confidential and exempt.
Section 499.051 (7), F.S. -- The complaint and all information obtained pursuant to
an investigation by the Department of Health under the Florida Drug and Cosmetic Act
are confidential and exempt from disclosure until the investigation and enforcement
action are completed except for trade secret information as defined in s. 812.081 (1 )(c)
which shall remain confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 500.148(3), F.S. -- Information deemed confidential under cited federal
enactments and which is provided to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services during a joint food safety or food illness investigation, as a requirement for
conducting a federal-state contract or partnership activity, or for regulatory review, is
confidential and exempt and may not be disclosed except as provided in the exemption.
Section 501.2065, F.S. -- Criminal or civil intelligence, investigative information, or
any other information held by any state or federal agency that is obtained by the
Department of Legal Affairs in the course of an investigation under Part II of Ch. 501
and that is confidential or exempt from s. 119.07(1) retains its status as confidential or
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 502.222, F.S. -- Information in the records of the Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services which would reveal a trade secret of a dairy industry business
is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 517.12(14), F .S. -- Currency transaction reports filed with the Office of
Financial Regulation by dealers, investment advisers, and branch offices pursuant to
this subsection are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) except as provided in the
subsection.
Section 517.2015 (securities), s. 517.2106 (examination techniques) and s.
520.9965 (retail installment sales), F.S. --Except as provided in the exemption,
information relating to an investigation by the Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to
the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act, or pursuant to the retail installment
sales laws, including a consumer complaint, is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active" as defined in the
subsection, unless disclosure would result in any of the enumerated consequences. If
the investigation could endanger the safety of employees or their families, specified
information about such personnel and their families is confidential and exempt.
Section 526.311 (2), F.S. -- Any records, documents, or other business material,
regardless of form or characteristics, obtained by the Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services in an investigation of an alleged violation of the Motor Fuel
Marketing Practices Act are confidential and exempt from disclosure, while the
investigation is pending. At the conclusion of the investigation, any matter determined
by the department or by a state or federal judicial or administrative body to be a trade
secret or proprietary confidential business information held by the department pursuant
to such investigation shall be confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 527.0201 (8), F .S. -- Liquefied petroleum gas competency examinations of
the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are confidential and exempt.
Section 527.062(1), F.S. -- Information compiled by the Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services pursuant to an investigation of an accident involving liquefied
petroleum gas or equipment is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the
investigation is completed or ceases to be "active" as defined in the subsection.
Section 539.003, F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, records relating to
pawnbroker transactions delivered to appropriate law enforcement officials are
confidential and exempt.
Section 542.28(9), F.S. -- Notwithstanding s. 119.07(1), it is the duty of the Attorney
General or a state attorney to maintain the secrecy of all evidence, testimony,
documents, work product, or other results of an investigative demand relevant to an
antitrust investigation; however, the Attorney General or state attorney may disclose
such investigative evidence to the agencies enumerated in the section.
Section 548.021 (2), F.S. -- Disclosure of a license applicant's social security
number which is obtained by the State Athletic Commission pursuant to the statute is
limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 550.0251 (9), F.S. -- All information obtained by the Division of Parimutuel
Wagering of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation pursuant to an
investigation for an alleged violation of the chapter or rules of the division is exempt
from disclosure until an administrative complaint is issued or the investigation is closed
or ceases to be active, as defined therein. The division may, however, provide
information to any law enforcement agency or other regulatory agency. With the
exception of active criminal intelligence or criminal investigative information and any
other information that, if disclosed, would jeopardize the safety of an individual, all other
information, records and transcriptions become public when the investigation is closed
or ceases to be active.
Section 550.2415(1)(a), F.S. -- Test results and the identities of racing animals
being tested and of their trainers and owners are confidential and exempt for 10 days
after testing of all samples collected on a particular day has been completed and any
positive test results derived from such samples have been reported to the director of the
Division of Pari-mutuel Wagering or administrative action has been commenced.
Section 556.113, F .S. -- Proprietary confidential business information held by
Sunshine State One-Call of Florida, Inc., for the purpose of describing the extent and
root cause of damage to an underground facility or using the member ticket
management software system is exempt.
Section 560.129, F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the exemption, information
concerning an investigation or examination by the Office of Financial Regulation
pursuant to the Money Transmitter's Code, including any consumer complaint received
by the office or the Department of Financial Services, is confidential and exempt from
disclosure until the investigation or examination ceases to be "active" as that term is
defined in the exemption. Confidentiality is also provided for other records such as trade
secrets and personal financial records. Other records may also remain confidential if
disclosure would result in any of the consequences listed in the exemption. Quarterly
reports submitted by a money transmitter are confidential.
Section 560.4041, F.S. -- Information that identifies a drawer or deferred
presentment provider contained in the database authorized under s. 560.404, is
confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements and may not be released
except as provided in the subsection.
Section 561.19(2)(b), F .S. -- Any portion of the drawing results of a particular county
to determine which applicants are to be considered for beverage licenses which reveals
the rank order of persons not receiving notice of selection is confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), until such time as all of the licenses from that county's drawing have
been issued.
Section 569.215(1), F .S. -- Proprietary confidential business information received by
specified state officials or outside counsel representing the state for the purpose of
negotiation or verification of annual tobacco settlement payments is confidential and
exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 570.48(3), F.S. -- Records of the Division of Fruit and Vegetables of the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are public records; except that trade
secrets as defined in s. 812.081 are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). The
subsection shall not be construed to limit certain enumerated disclosures.
Section 570.544(7), F.S. -- Records of the Division of Consumer Services of the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are public records; however,
customer lists, customer names, and trade secrets are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). Disclosure necessary to enforcement procedures is not violative of this
prohibition.
Section 570.903(6), F.S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to a direct-
support organization established to assist programs of the Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services who desires to remain anonymous and all information
identifying such donor or prospective donor is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 570.953, F.S. -- The identity of a donor to the Florida Agriculture Center and
Horse Park Authority, if requested by the donor in writing, is confidential and exempt
from disclosure.
Section 573.123(2), F.S. -- Information that, if disclosed, would reveal a trade
secret, as defined in s. 812.081, of any person subject to a marketing order issued by
the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) and shall not be disclosed except as provided in the subsection. A person
who receives such confidential information shall maintain its confidentiality.
Section 581.199, F .S. -- It is unlawful for any authorized representative who in an
official capacity obtains under the provisions of this chapter (relating to plant industry)
any information entitled to protection as a trade secret, as defined in s. 812.081, to
reveal that information to any unauthorized person.
Section 601.10(8), F.S. -- Information which consists of a trade secret as defined in
s. 812.081 (1 )(c) which is received by the Department of Citrus from citrus growers and
industry-related persons pursuant to this subsection is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and shall not be disclosed.
Section 601.15(7)(d), F.S. -- Commercial information which constitutes a trade
secret as defined in s. 812.081 and which is required by the Department of Citrus from
participants in noncommodity advertising and promotional programs in order to
determine eligibility for and performance in such programs, is confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 601.152(8)(c), F.S. -- Information relating to marketing orders which is
furnished to the Department of Citrus pursuant to this section and which, if disclosed,
would reveal a trade secret, as defined in s. 812.081, of any person subject to a
marketing order is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 601.76, F.S. -- Citrus fruit coloring product formula information filed with the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services under this section is a trade secret
as defined in s. 812.081, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and shall be
divulged only as provided in the section.
Section 607.0505(6), F.S. -- Information provided to, and records and transcripts
obtained by, the Department of Legal Affairs pursuant to this section relating to
corporations or alien business organizations are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) while the investigation is active. The department shall not disclose
confidential information, records, or transcripts except as authorized by the Attorney
General in the circumstances listed in the subsection. Similar confidentiality provisions
exist relating to information received by the department regarding nonprofit corporations
(s. 617.0503[6]).
Section 624.23, F.S. -- Personal financial and health information as defined therein
held by the Department of Financial Services or the Office of Insurance Regulation
relating to a consumer's complaint or inquiry regarding a matter or activity regulated
under the Florida Insurance Code or s. 440.191 is confidential and exempt.
Section 624.231, F .S. -- If the Department of Financial Services or the Office of
Insurance Regulation determines that any portion of a record requested by a person is
exempt pursuant to Ch. 119, the insurance code, or Ch. 641, the department or office
shall disclose to the person in writing that the requested record will be provided in a
redacted format and that there will be additional fees charged for staff time associated
with researching and redacting the exempt portion of the record. Before the department
or office provides the record, the person must affirm his or her request to receive the
record.
Section 624.310(3)(f), F .S. -- An emergency order entered by the Office of
Insurance Regulation or the Department of Financial Services against a licensee or
affiliated party under this subsection is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
made permanent, unless the department or office finds that the confidentiality will result
in substantial risk of financial loss to the public. Emergency cease and desist orders that
are not made permanent are available for public inspection 1 year from the date the
emergency order expires; however, portions of such order shall remain confidential if
disclosure would result in any of the consequences listed in the paragraph.
Section 624.311 (2), F.S. -- Records of insurance claim negotiations of any state
agency or political subdivision are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
termination of all litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident.
Section 624.319(3), F .S. -- Examination reports of insurers prepared by the Office of
Insurance Regulation or the Department of Financial Services or its examiner pursuant
to this section are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until filed. Investigation
reports are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is
completed or ceases to be "active," as that term is defined in the paragraph. After an
investigation is completed or ceases to be active, portions of such records shall remain
confidential and exempt if disclosure would result in any of the consequences listed in
the paragraph. Work papers held by the Department of Financial Services or the Office
of Insurance Regulation are confidential and exempt from disclosure until the
examination report is filed or until the investigation is complete or no longer active;
however, portions of work papers may remain confidential under the conditions
specified therein. Information received from another governmental entity or the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners, which is confidential or exempt when held by
that entity, for the department's or office's use in the performance of its examination or
investigation duties are confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements. Lists of
insurers or regulated companies are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), if the
conditions set forth in the paragraph apply.
Section 624.40851 (1) and (2), F .S. -- Risk-based capital plans and reports as
described in the exemption that are held by the Office of Insurance Regulation, as well
as specified additional related materials, are confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Hearings relating to the office's actions regarding such risk-based capital records, are
exempt from open meetings requirements, subject to specified conditions.
Section 624.82(1), F .S. -- Orders, records, and other information in the possession
of the Office of Insurance Regulation relating to the supervision of any insurer are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except as otherwise provided in this section.
Proceedings and hearings relating to the office's supervision of any insurer are exempt
from s. 286.011, except as otherwise provided in this section.
Section 624.86, F.S. -- During the period of administrative supervision, the Office of
Insurance Regulation may meet with a supervisor appointed under this part or
representatives of the supervisor, and such meetings are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 625.121(3)(a)10., F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, a
memorandum or other material in support of the actuarial opinion required to be
furnished to the Office of Insurance Regulation under this subsection, is confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.171 (6), F .S. -- Disclosure of a license applicant's social security
number which is obtained by the Department of Financial Services pursuant to this
section is limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 626.511 (3), F.S. -- Any information or record regarding the termination of an
appointment which is furnished to the Office of Insurance Regulation or the Department
of Financial Services under this section is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.521(5), F.S. -- Information contained in credit or character reports
obtained by the Department of Financial Services under this section (licensure
applications) is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.601 (6), F.S. -- The complaint and any information obtained pursuant to
the investigation of a licensee by the Office of Insurance Regulation or the Department
of Financial Services are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), unless the
department takes specified action against the licensee.
Section 626.631 (2), F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, the records or
evidence of the Department of Financial Services relative to a hearing on the
suspension or revocation of a license or appointment are confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) until after the material has been published at the hearing.
Section 626.842(3), F.S. -- Information contained in credit or character reports
furnished to the Department of Financial Services under this section (relating to
applications of title insurance agents) is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.8433(3), F.S. -- Any information or record furnished to the Department
of Financial Services under this section regarding the reasons for termination of the
appointment of a title insurance agent is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.884(2), F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, information
contained in the books and records of an insurance administrator is confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) if the disclosure would reveal a trade secret as defined in s.
688.002.
Section 626.921 (8), F.S. -- Information furnished to the Department of Financial
Services pursuant to pertinent statutes relating to policies and examinations of surplus
lines agents is confidential and exempt if disclosure would reveal information specific to
a particular policy or policy holder. Information furnished to the Florida Surplus Lines
Service Office under the Surplus Lines Law is confidential and exempt if disclosure
would reveal information specific to a particular policy or policy holder.
Section 626.9651, F.S. -- The Department of Financial Services and the Financial
Services Commission shall adopt rules consistent with other provisions of the Florida
Insurance Code to govern the use of a consumer's nonpublic personal financial and
health information.
Section 626.989(5), F.S. -- Records of the Department of Financial Services and the
Office of Insurance Regulation relating to an investigation of insurance fraud under this
section are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is
completed or ceases to be "active," as that term is defined in the subsection, unless
disclosure would result in certain enumerated consequences.
Section 627.0628(3)(f), F.S. -- A trade secret as defined in s. 668.002 that is used in
designing and constructing a hurricane loss model and that is provided pursuant to this
section, by a private company to the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection
Methodology, Office of Insurance Regulation, or the appointed consumer advocate, is
confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements. That portion of a meeting of the
commission or of a rate proceeding on an insurer's rate filing at which a trade secret
made confidential by this exemption is discussed is exempt from open meetings
requirements. Although the closed meeting must be recorded, the recording is exempt
from disclosure.
Section 627.06292(1), F .S. -- Reports of hurricane loss data and associated
exposure data that are specific to a particular insurance company, as reported by an
insurer or a licensed rating organization to the Office of Insurance Regulation or to a
state university center are exempt from disclosure requirements.
Section 627.311 (4)(a), F .S. -- Certain records of the Florida Automobile Joint
Underwriting Association, as described in the exemption, are confidential and exempt
from disclosure as set forth in the subsection.
Section 627.311(4)(b), F.S. -- The Florida Automobile Joint Underwriting
Association must keep portions of meetings during which confidential and exempt
underwriting files or confidential and exempt claims files are discussed exempt from
open meetings requirements, subject to the conditions set forth in the exemption. A
copy of the transcript, less any confidential and exempt information, of any closed
meeting during which confidential and exempt claims files are discussed shall become
public as to individual claims files after settlement of that claim.
Section 627.3121, F .S. -- Certain records held by the Florida Workers'
Compensation Joint Underwriting Association, Inc., as described in the exemption, are
confidential and exempt and may only be released as prescribed therein. That portion of
a meeting of the association's board of governors, or any subcommittee of the
association's board, at which records made confidential and exempt by the section are
discussed is exempt from open meeting requirements; the transcript and minutes of
exempt portions of meetings are confidential and exempt from disclosure. Those
portions of the transcript or the minutes pertaining to a confidential and exempt claims
file are no longer confidential and exempt upon termination of all litigation with regard to
that claim.
Section 627.351 (4)(g), F.S. -- All records, relating to the Medical Malpractice Joint
Underwriting Association or its operation are open for public inspection, except that a
claim file in the possession of the Association is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) during processing of that claim. Information in these files that identifies an
injured person is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 627.351 (6)(x)1., F .S. --Certain records of the Citizens Property Insurance
Corporation, as described in the exemption, are confidential and exempt from
disclosure.
Section 627.351 (6)(x)4., F .S. -- Portions of meetings of the Citizens Property
Insurance Corporation are exempt from open meetings requirements where confidential
underwriting files or confidential open claims files are discussed, subject to the
conditions set forth in the exemption. A copy of the transcript, less any exempt matters,
of any closed meeting where claims are discussed shall become public as to individual
claims after settlement of the claim.
Section 627.6699(8)(c), F.S. -- Information relating to rating and renewal practices
of small employer health insurance carriers which is submitted by the carriers to the
Office of Insurance Regulation pursuant to this subsection constitutes proprietary and
trade secret information and may not be disclosed except as agreed to by the carrier or
pursuant to court order.
Section 627.912(2)(e), F.S. -- The name and address of the injured person that is
contained in reports to the Office of Insurance Regulation regarding professional liability
claims is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and must not be disclosed without
the person's consent, except for disclosure to the Department of Health.
Section 627.9122(2)(e), F.S. -- The name of the injured person contained in a claim
report filed by an insurer providing liability coverage for officers and directors is
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and must not be disclosed by the Office of
Insurance Regulation without the consent of the injured person.
Section 627.9126(3)(a)6., F .S. -- The names of claimants identified in reports filed
by liability insurers with the Office of Insurance Regulation are confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 631.398(1), F .S. -- Reports and recommendations made by specified
persons to the Office of Insurance Regulation or to the Department of Financial
Services relative to the solvency, liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of a member
insurer or germane to the solvency of a company seeking to do insurance business in
this state, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the termination of a
delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.582, F.S. -- Certain records of the Florida Insurance Guaranty
Association such as specified claims, medical records that are part of a claims file,
information relating to the medical condition or medical status of a claimant, and records
pertaining to matters reasonably encompassed in privileged attorney-client
communications of the association, are confidential and exempt.
Section 631.62(2), F.S. -- A request from the board of directors of the Florida
Insurance Guaranty Association that the Office of Insurance Regulation order an
examination of any member insurer is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
the examination report is released to the public.
Section 631.62(3), F.S. -- The reports and recommendations by the board of
directors of the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association on any matter germane to the
solvency, liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of any member insurer are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the termination of a delinquency
proceeding.
Section 631.723(1), F.S. -- The reports and recommendations by the board of
directors of the Florida Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association to the
Department of Financial Services or to the Office of Insurance Regulation on any matter
germane to the solvency, liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of any member
insurer or a company seeking to do insurance business in Florida are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the termination of a delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.723(3), F.S. -- A request by the board of directors of the Florida Life
and Health Insurance Guaranty Association that the Office of Insurance Regulation
order the examination of any member insurer is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the examination report is released to the public.
Section 631.724, F.S. -- Negotiations or meetings of the Florida Life and Health
Insurance Guaranty Association involving discussions of the association's powers and
duties under 631.717 are exempt from s. 286.011. Records of such negotiations or
meetings are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the termination of a
delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.931, F.S. -- The reports and recommendations by the board of directors
of the Florida Workers' Compensation Insurance Guaranty Association under s. 631.917
on any matter germane to the solvency, liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of any
member insurer are confidential and exempt until the termination of a delinquency
proceeding.
Section 631.932, F.S. -- Negotiations between a self-insurance fund and the Florida
Workers' Compensation Insurance Guaranty Association are exempt from s. 286.011.
Documents related to such negotiations that reveal identifiable payroll and loss and
individual claim information are confidential and exempt.
Section 633.111, F.S. -- Records obtained or prepared by the State Fire Marshal
pursuant to his or her investigation of fires are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active" as that term is
defined in the section.
Section 633.175(5), F .S. -- Discussions involving officials of the Department of
Financial Services and an insurance company in accordance with this section (relating
to investigation of fraudulent insurance claims and crimes) are confidential and exempt
from s. 286.011.
Section 633.527(1), F.S. -- Test material relating to applicants for licensure,
certification, or permitting by the State Fire Marshal is made confidential by s.
119.071 (1 )(a). An applicant may waive confidentiality in writing for purposes of
discussion with the State Fire Marshal or his or her staff.
Section 634.045(5), F.S. -- The filings made by a guarantee organization pursuant
to this section relating to guarantee agreements provided by motor vehicle service
agreement companies are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 634.201 (3), F.S. -- The Department of Financial Service's records or
evidence relative to a hearing for the suspension or revocation of the license or
appointment of a salesman of automobile warranties are confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) until such investigation is completed or ceases to be "active," as that term
is defined in the subsection.
Section 634.348, F.S. -- Active examination or investigatory records of the
Department of Financial Services or the Office of Insurance Regulation made or
received pursuant to Part II, Ch. 634 (Home Warranty Associations) are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) until such investigation is completed or ceases to be "active,"
as that term is defined in the section.
Section 634.4065(5), F.S. -- The filings made by a guarantee organization pursuant
to this section relating to guarantee agreements provided by service warranty
associations are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 634.444, F.S. -- Active examination or investigatory records of the
Department of Financial Services or the Office of Insurance Regulation made or
received pursuant to Part III, Ch. 634 (Service Warranty Associations) are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until such investigation is completed or ceases to be
"active," as that term is defined in the section.
Section 636.064(1) and (2), F.S. -- Information pertaining to the diagnosis,
treatment, or health of an enrollee of a prepaid limited health service organization is
confidential and exempt from disclosure, and shall only be available pursuant to specific
written consent of the enrollee or as otherwise provided by law. Any proprietary financial
information contained in contracts entered into with providers by prepaid limited health
service organizations is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 636.064(3), F.S. -- Information obtained or produced by the Department of
Financial Services or the Office of Insurance Regulation pursuant to an investigation or
examination of a prepaid limited health service organization is confidential and exempt
from disclosure until the examination report has been filed pursuant to s. 624.319 or
until the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active," as that term is defined in
the subsection. Except for information specified in the subsection, all information
obtained by the office pursuant to an examination or investigation shall be available
after the examination report has been filed or the investigation is completed or ceases
to be active.
Section 641.515(2), F.S. -- Patient-identifying information contained in reports and
records prepared or obtained under cited statutes (relating to investigation of health
maintenance organizations) by the Agency for Health Care Administration or by an
outside source, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 641.55(5)(c), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, any
identifying information contained in the reports of a health maintenance organization
filed with the Agency for Health Care Administration under this subsection is confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 641.55(6), F.S. -- Incident reports filed with the Agency for Health Care
Administration by a health maintenance organization pursuant to this subsection are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 641.55(8), F.S. -- Identifying information in records of a health maintenance
organization which are obtained by the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant
to this section (internal risk management program) is confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). Identifying information contained in records obtained under s. 456.071 is
exempt to the extent that it is part of the record of disciplinary proceedings made
available to the public by the agency or appropriate board.
Section 641.67, F.S. -- The following information is confidential and exempt and
may not be released except as provided in the exemption: patient records held by a
district managed care ombudsman committee; the name or identity of a complainant
who files a complaint with a committee; and any problem identified by a committee as a
result of an investigation.
Section 641.68, F.S. -- That portion of an ombudsman committee meeting where
patient records and information identifying a complainant are discussed is exempt from
open meetings requirements.
Section 648.26(3), F.S. -- The Department of Financial Services' investigatory
records pertaining to bail bond agents and runners are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active," as that term is
defined in the subsection.
Section 648.34(3), F.S. -- Information in a character and credit report furnished to
the Department of Financial Services as part of an application for licensure as a bail
bond agent is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 648.39(1), F.S. -- Information furnished to the Department of Financial
Services pursuant to this subsection regarding the termination of appointment of a
managing general agent, bail bond agent, or temporary bail bond agent is confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 648.41, F.S. -- Information furnished to the Department of Financial
Services pursuant to this subsection regarding the termination of appointment of
temporary bail bond agents is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 648.46(3), F.S. -- The complaint and all information obtained pursuant to
the investigation of a bail bond agent or runner licensee by the Department of Financial
Services are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is
completed or ceases to be "active," as defined in the subsection.
Section 651.105(3), F .S. -- Reports of the results of such financial examinations or
providers engaged in the execution of care contracts must be kept on file by the Office
of Insurance Regulation. Any investigatory records, reports or documents held by the
office are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed
or ceases to be "active," as that term is defined in the subsection.
Section 651.111 (2), F.S. -- Unless the complainant who has filed a complaint
against a continuing care provider specifically requests otherwise, neither the substance
of the complaint which is provided to the provider nor any copy of the complaint or any
record which is published, released, or otherwise made available to the provider shall
disclose the name of any person mentioned in the complaint except the names of Office
of Insurance Regulation personnel conducting the investigation or inspection pursuant
to this chapter.
Section 651.121 (5)(c), F .S. -- Except for proceedings conducted under s. 651.018
(authorizing the Office of Insurance Regulation to place a facility in administrative
supervision), the books and records of the Continuing Care Advisory Council to the
Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission shall be open to
inspection at all times.
Section 651.134, F .S. -- Any active investigatory record of the Office of Insurance
Regulation made or received under Ch. 651 (Continuing Care Contracts) and any active
examination record necessary to complete an active investigation is confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active,"
as that term is defined in the section.
Section 655.0321, F .S. -- The Office of Financial Regulation shall consider the
public purposes specified in s. 119.14(4)(b) in determining whether the hearings and
proceedings conducted pursuant to s. 655.033 (cease and desist orders) and s.
655.037 (suspension or removal orders) shall be closed and exempt from s. 286.011,
and whether related documents shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.033(6), F.S. -- An emergency order entered by the Office of Financial
Regulation pursuant to this subsection (relating to the issuance of cease and desist
orders to financial institutions in certain circumstances) is confidential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) until the order is made permanent, unless the office finds that such
confidentiality will result in substantial risk of financial loss to the public.
Section 655.057(1), F .S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this section and except
for such portions thereof which are otherwise public record, all records and information
relating to an investigation by the Office of Financial Regulation are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be "active" as
that term is defined in the section. After the investigation is completed or ceases to be
active, portions of the records shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the
extent that disclosure would cause any of the consequences listed in the subsection.
Section 655.057(2), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this section and except
for such portions thereof which are public record, reports of examinations, operations, or
condition, prepared by, or for the use of, the Office of Financial Regulation or other
agency responsible for regulation of banking institutions in this state are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1). Examination, operation, or condition reports of a financial
institution shall be released within 1 year after the appointment of a liquidator, receiver,
or conservator to such financial institution. However, any portion of such reports which
discloses the identities of depositors, bondholders, members, borrowers, or
stockholders, other than directors, officers, or controlling stockholders of the institution,
shall remain confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(3), F.S. -- Any confidential information or records obtained from the
Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to this subsection (authorizing specified
disclosures of records or information) shall be maintained as confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(4)(b), F.S. -- Confidential records and information furnished
pursuant to a legislative subpoena shall be kept confidential by the legislative body
which received the records or information except in a case involving an investigation of
charges against a public official subject to impeachment in which case the legislative
body shall determine the extent of disclosure.
Section 655.057(5), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the list
of members of a credit union or mutual association which is submitted to the Office of
Financial Regulation is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(6), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, any
portion of the list of shareholders of a bank, trust company, and stock association which
is submitted to the Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to this subsection and which
reveals the identities of the shareholders is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(7), F.S. -- Confidential documents supplied to the Office of
Financial Regulation or to employees of a financial institution by other governmental
agencies or by the Florida Credit Union Guaranty Corporation Inc., shall be confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may be made public only with the consent of such
agency or corporation.
Section 655.50(7), F.S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, all reports and
records filed with the Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to this section (Florida
Control of Money Laundering in Financial Institutions Act) are confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 681.1097(4), F.S. -- A mediation conference conducted pursuant to the RV
Mediation and Arbitration Program shall be confidential.
Section 687.144(6), F .S. -- The material compiled by the Office of Financial
Regulation in an investigation or examination under this act (relating to loan brokers) is
confidential until the investigation or examination is complete.
Section 688.006, F.S. -- In an action under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, a court
shall preserve the secrecy of an alleged trade secret by reasonable means as described
in the section.
Section 717.117(8), F .S. -- Social security numbers and property identifiers
contained in reports to the Department of Financial Services concerning abandoned and
unclaimed property are confidential and exempt and may not be released except social
security numbers may be released to the entities specified in the exemption for the
limited purpose of locating owners of abandoned or unclaimed property.
Section 717.1301 (5), F .S. -- Material compiled by the Department of Financial
Services in an investigation under the Disposition of Unclaimed Property Act is
confidential until the investigation is complete; provided that such material remains
confidential if it is submitted to another agency for investigation or prosecution and such
investigation has not been completed or become inactive.
Section 721.071, F.S. -- If a developer or other person filing material with the
Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums, and Mobile Homes of the Department of
Business and Professional Regulation pursuant to chapter 721 relating to time-share
plans expects the division to keep the material confidential on grounds that the material
constitutes a trade secret as defined in s. 812.081, that person shall file the material
together with an affidavit of confidentiality as provided in the section. If the division is
satisfied as to the facial validity of the claim of confidentiality, it shall keep the affidavit
and supporting documentation confidential and shall not disclose such information
except upon administrative or court order.
Section 723.006(3), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in the subsection, mobile
home park financial records, as defined in the subsection, which are acquired by the
Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums, and Mobile Homes of the Department of
Business and Professional Regulation pursuant to an investigation under this section
are confidential and exempt.
Section 733.604(1)(b), F.S. -- Any inventory of an estate filed with the clerk of court
in conjunction with the administration of an estate or of an elective estate filed with the
clerk of the court in conjunction with an election made in accordance with Part II, Ch.
732, whether initial, amended, or supplementary, is confidential and exempt. Any
accounting, whether interim, final, amended, or supplementary, filed in an estate
proceeding is confidential and exempt.
Section 741.04(1), F.S. -- Disclosure of a social security number required in a
marriage license certificate filed with clerk of court pursuant to this section is limited to
child support enforcement purposes.
Section 741.29(2), F.S. -- A law enforcement agency shall, without charge, send a
copy of the initial police report of domestic violence, as well as any subsequent,
supplemental, or related report, which excludes victim/witness statements or other
materials that are part of an active criminal investigation and are exempt from disclosure
under Ch. 119 to the nearest locally certified domestic violence center within 24 hours
after the agency's receipt of the report.
Section 741.30(3)(b), F.S. -- A petitioner seeking an injunction for protection against
domestic violence may furnish his or her address to the court in a separate confidential
filing for safety reasons if the petitioner requires the location of his or her current
residence to be confidential.
Section 741.313(7), F.S. -- Personal identifying information contained in records
documenting an act of domestic violence that is submitted to an agency by an agency
employee seeking to take leave as provided therein as provided therein is confidential
and exempt. A written request for leave submitted by an agency employee and any
agency time sheet reflecting such request are confidential and exempt until 1 year after
the leave has been taken.
Section 741.3165, F.S. -- Information that is confidential or exempt and that is
obtained by a domestic violence fatality review team conducting activities as described
in s. 741.316 shall retain its confidential or exempt status when held by the team.
I nformation contained in a record created by a team pu rsuant to s. 741.316 that reveals
the identity of a victim of domestic violence or the identity of the victim's children is
confidential and exempt. Portions of meetings of the team regarding domestic violence
fatalities and their prevention, during which confidential or exempt information, the
identity of the victim, or the identity of the victim's children are discussed, are exempt
from s. 286.011, F.S.
Section 741.406, F.S. -- The name, address, and telephone number of a participant
in the Address Confidentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence may not be
included in any list of registered voters available to the public.
Section 741.465, F.S. -- The addresses, corresponding telephone numbers, and
social security numbers of program participants in the Address Confidentiality Program
for Victims of Domestic Violence held by the Office of the Attorney General are exempt
from disclosure, except that the information may be disclosed under the following
circumstances: to a law enforcement agency for purposes of assisting in the execution
of a valid arrest warrant; if directed by court order, to a person identified in the order; or
if the certification has been canceled. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers
of participants contained in voter registration and voting records are exempt, except the
information may be disclosed under the following circumstances: to a law enforcement
agency for purposes of assisting in the execution of an arrest warrant or, if directed by
court order, to a person identified in the order.
Section 742.031 (3), F.S. -- Disclosure of a social security number obtained as part
of adjudication of paternity proceedings and as required by pertinent federal law is
limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 742.032(3), F.S. -- Disclosure of the social security number required to be
filed with the tribunal in a paternity or child support proceeding pursuant to s. 742.032(1)
is limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 742.09, F.S. -- It is unlawful for the owner, publisher, manager, or operator
of any newspaper, magazine, radio station, or any other publication, to publish the
name of any parties to any court proceeding to determine paternity except for the
purpose of serving process by publication as provided under s. 49.011 (15).
Section 742.091, F.S. -- Records of any proceeding under the determination of
paternity statute which was subsequently dismissed when the mother of the illegitimate
child and reputed father marry thereby making the child legitimate are sealed against
public inspection.
Section 742.10(2), F .S. -- Disclosure of the social security number of parties to a
proceeding to determine paternity for children born out of wedlock which is obtained
pursuant to this section shall be limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 742.16(9), F.S. -- All papers and records pertaining to the affirmation of
parental status for gestational surrogacy, including the original birth certificate, are
confidential and exempt and subject to inspection only upon court order.
Section 744.1076, F.S. -- A court order appointing a court monitor is confidential
and exempt from public disclosure requirements. Reports of a court monitor relating to
the medical condition, financial affairs, or mental health of the ward are confidential and
exempt. The reports may be subject to inspection as determined by the court or upon a
showing of good cause. Court determinations relating to a finding of no probable cause
and court orders finding no probable cause are confidential; however, such
determinations and findings may be subject to inspection as determined by the court or
upon a showing of good cause.
Section 744.3701, F.S. -- Unless otherwise ordered by the court, any initial, annual,
or final guardianship report or amendment thereto is subject to inspection only by the
individuals specified in the section.
Section 744.708(2), F.S. -- No report or disclosure of the personal or medical
records of a ward of a public guardian shall be made, except as authorized by law.
Section 744.7081, F.S. -- All records held by the Statewide Public Guardianship
Office relating to the medical, financial, or mental health of vulnerable citizens, persons
with a developmental disability, or persons with a mental illness, are confidential and
exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 744.7082(6), F.S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor of funds or
property to the direct-support organization of the Statewide Public Guardianship Office
who wishes to remain anonymous and all information identifying the donor or
prospective donor is confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements, and that
anonymity must be maintained in any publication concerning the direct-support
organization.
Section 760.11(12), F.S. -- Complaints filed with the Commission on Human
Relations and all records in the commission's custody which relate to and identify a
particular person, including, but not limited to, the entities specified in the subsection are
confidential and may not be disclosed except to the parties or in the course of a hearing
or proceeding under this section. This restriction does not apply to any record which is
part of the record of a hearing or court proceeding.
Section 760.34(1), F .S. -- Nothing said or done in the course of informal endeavors
by the Commission on Human Relations to resolve complaints about discriminatory
housing practices may be made public or used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding
under ss. 760.20-760.37 without the written consent of the persons concerned.
Section 760.36, F.S. -- A conciliation agreement arising out of a complaint filed
under the Fair Housing Act shall be made public unless the complainant and the
respondent otherwise agree and the Commission on Human Relations determines that
disclosure is not required to further the purposes of the Act.
Section 760.40(2)(a), F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, DNA analysis
results information held by a public entity is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 760.50(5), F.S. -- Employers shall maintain the confidentiality of information
relating to the medical condition or status of any person covered by health or life
insurance benefits provided or administered by the employer. Such information in the
possession of a public employer is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 765.51551, F .S. -- Donor-identifying information maintained in the
anatomical gifts donor registry is exempt from the Public Records Law except as
provided therein.
Section 766.101(7)(c), F.S. -- Proceedings of medical review committees are
exempt from s. 286.011 and any advisory reports provided to the Department of Health
are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), regardless of whether probable cause is
found.
Section 766.105(3)(e)2., F .S. -- A claim file in the possession of the Patient's
Compensation Fund is confidential and exempt until termination of litigation or
settlement of the claim, although medical records and other portions of the claim file
may remain confidential and exempt as otherwise provided by law.
Section 766.106(6)(b)3., F.S. -- An examination report on an injured claimant which
is made pursuant to this section relating to medical malpractice claims is available only
to the parties and their attorneys and may be used only for the purpose of presuit
screening. Otherwise, such report is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 766.1115(4)(c), F.S. -- All patient medical records and any identifying
information contained in adverse incident reports and treatment outcomes which are
obtained by governmental entities contracting with health care providers under this
paragraph, are confidential and exempt.
Section 766.305(3), F.S. -- Information furnished by a person seeking compensation
under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan pursuant to this
subsection shall remain confidential and exempt under the provisions of s.
766.315(5)(b), F.S.
Section 766.314(8), F.S. -- Information obtained by the Florida Birth-Related
Neurological Injury Compensation Association to determine the actual cost of
maintaining the fund on an actuarially sound basis shall be utilized solely for the
purpose of assisting the association. Such information shall otherwise be confidential
and exempt
.Section 766.315(5)(b), F.S. -- A claim file in the possession of the Florida Birth-
Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association or its representative is
confidential and exempt until termination of litigation or settlement of the claim, although
medical records and other portions of the claim file may remain confidential and exempt
as otherwise provided by law.
Section 768.28(16)(b), F.S. -- Claims files maintained by any risk management
program administered by the state, its agencies and subdivisions are confidential and
exempt until termination of all litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the
same incident, although portions of the claims files may remain exempt, as otherwise
provided by law. Claims files records may be released to other governmental agencies
as provided in the paragraph; such records held by the receiving agency remain
confidential as provided in the paragraph.
Section 768.28(16)(c), F.S. -- Portions of meetings and proceedings conducted
pursuant to a risk management program administered by the state, its agencies or
subdivisions relating solely to the evaluation of claims or relating solely to offers of
compromise of claims filed with the program are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 768.28(16)(d), F.S. -- Minutes of the meetings and proceedings of a risk
management program administered by the state, its agencies or its subdivisions relating
solely to the evaluation of claims or relating solely to offers of compromise of claims
filed with such risk management programs are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
termination of all litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident.
Section 787.03(6)(c)1., F.S. -- The current address and telephone number of the
person taking a child or incompetent person when fleeing from domestic violence or to
preserve the minor or incompetent person from danger and the current address and
telephone number of the minor or incompetent person which are contained in the report
made to a sheriff or state attorney under s. 787.03(6)(b) by the person who takes such
child or incompetent person, are confidential and exempt from public disclosure
requirements.
Section 790.0601, F.S. -- Personal identifying information of an individual who has
applied for or received a license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm pursuant to s.
790.06 held by the Division of Licensing of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services is confidential and exempt from disclosure requirements. Information made
confidential and exempt shall be disclosed with express written consent of the applicant
or licensee, by court order, or upon request by a law enforcement agency in connection
with the performance of lawful duties.
Section 790.065(2)(a)4.d., F.S. -- Hearing on petition by person who has been
adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution for relief from the
firearm disabilities imposed by such adjudication or commitment may be open or closed
as the petitioner may choose.
Section 790.065(4), F.S. -- Any records containing information specified in this
section relating to a buyer or transferee of a firearm who is not prohibited under state or
federal law from receipt or transfer of a firearm shall be confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and may not be disclosed by the Department of Law Enforcement to any
other person or agency.
Section 790.335(2), F.S. -- Subject to specified exceptions, no governmental
agency or any other person, public or private, shall knowingly and willfully keep or
cause to be kept any list, record or registry of privately owned firearms or any list,
record, or registry of the owners of those firearms.
Section 794.024, F.S. -- A public employee or officer having access to the
photograph, name or address of a person alleged to be a victim of an offense described
in this chapter (sexual battery), chapter 800 (lewdness, indecent exposure), s. 827.03
(aggravated child abuse), s. 827.04 (child abuse), or s. 827.071 (sexual performance by
a child) may not willfully and knowingly disclose it to a person not assisting in the
investigation or prosecution of the alleged offense or to any person other than the
defendant, the defendant's attorney, a person specified in a court order entered by the
court having jurisdiction over the alleged offense, to organizations authorized to receive
such information made exempt by s. 119.071 (2)(h), or to a rape crisis center or sexual
assault counselor who will be offering services to the victim.
Section 794.03, F.S. -- It is unlawful to print, publish, or broadcast or cause or allow
to be printed, published or broadcast in any instrument of mass communication the
name, address or other identifying fact or information of the victim of any sexual
offense. Such identifying information is confidential and exempt.
Section 815.04(3)(a), F .S. -- Data, programs or supporting information which is a
trade secret as defined in s. 812.081 which is part of a computer system held by an
agency as defined in Ch. 119 is confidential and exempt.
Section 815.045, F .S. -- It is a public necessity that trade secret information as
defined in s. 812.081, and as provided for in s. 815.04(3), be expressly made
confidential and exempt from the public records law because it is a felony to disclose
such records.
Section 828.30(5), F.S. -- An animal owner's name, street address, phone number,
and animal tag number contained in a rabies vaccination certificate provided to the
animal control authority is confidential and exempt from disclosure except as provided in
the exemption.
Section 877.19(3), F .S. -- Certain information on hate crimes which is reported to
the Florida Department of Law Enforcement pursuant to this statute is confidential and
exempt. Data required pursuant to this section shall be used only for research or
statistical purposes and shall not include any information that may reveal the identity of
a crime victim.
Section 893.0551 (2), F.S. -- Certain identification and location information of a
patient or patient's agent, a health care practitioner, a dispenser, an employee of the
practitioner who is acting on behalf of and at the direction of the practitioner; a
pharmacist, or a pharmacy, that is contained in Department of Health records under the
electronic prescription drug monitoring program for monitoring the prescribing and
dispensing of controlled substances is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 896.102(2), F.S. -- Information and documents filed with the Department of
Revenue regarding certain currency transactions are confidential and exempt; however,
the information may be released as provided in the subsection.
Section 905.17(1), F .S. -- Stenographic records, notes and transcriptions made by a
court reporter during a grand jury session are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and shall be filed with the clerk who shall keep them in a sealed container not subject to
public inspection.
Section 905.24, F.S. -- Grand jury proceedings are secret and a grand juror or
interpreter appointed pursuant to s. 90.6063(2) shall not disclose the nature or
substance of the deliberations or vote of the grand jury.
Section 905.26, F.S. -- Unless ordered by the court, a grand juror, reporter,
stenographer, interpreter, or officer of the court may not disclose the finding of an
indictment against a person not in custody or under recognizance, except by issuing or
executing process on the indictment, until the person has been arrested.
Section 905.27(1) and (2), F .S. -- A grand juror, state attorney, assistant state
attorney, reporter, stenographer, interpreter, or any other person appearing before the
grand jury may not disclose evidence received by it except when required by a court. It
is unlawful for any person knowingly to publish, disclose or cause to be published or
disclosed any witness's testimony before a grand jury unless such testimony is or has
been disclosed in a court proceeding.
Section 905.28(1), F .S. -- A report or presentment of a grand jury relating to an
individual which is not accompanied by a true bill or indictment is confidential and
exempt and shall not be made public until the individual concerned has been furnished
a copy and given 15 days to file a motion to repress or expunge the report.
Section 905.395, F.S. -- Unless pursuant to court order, it is unlawful for any person
knowingly to publish, broadcast, disclose, divulge, or communicate or cause or permit
such publication or communication to any person outside the statewide grand jury room,
any of the proceedings or identity of persons referred to or being investigated by the
statewide grand jury.
Section 914.27, F.S. -- Information held by a law enforcement agency, prosecutorial
agency, or the Victim and Witness Protection Review Committee which discloses the
identity or location of a victim or witness who has been identified or certified for
protective or relocation services is confidential and exempt from disclosure. Identity and
location of immediate family members of such victims or witnesses are also protected
as are relocation sites, techniques or procedures utilized or developed as a result of the
victim and witness protective services.
Section 916.107(8), F.S. -- Except as provided in the subsection, a forensic client's
clinical record is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 918.16(1), F .S. -- Except as provided in s. 918.16(2), in any civil or criminal
trial, when any person under 16 or any person with mental retardation as defined in
cited statute is testifying concerning any sex offense, the court shall clear the courtroom
of all persons except parties to the cause and their immediate families or guardians,
attorneys and their secretaries, officers of the court, jurors, newspaper reporters or
broadcasters and court reporters, and at the request of the victim, victim or witness
advocates designated by the state attorney's office.
Section 918.16(2), F .S. -- When the victim of a sex offense is testifying concerning
that offense in any civil or criminal trial, the court shall clear the courtroom of all persons
upon the request of the victim, regardless of the victim's age or mental capacity, except
that parties to the cause and their immediate families or guardians, attorneys and their
secretaries, officers of the court, jurors, newspaper reporters or broadcasters and court
reporters, and at the request of the victim, victim or witness advocates designated by
the state attorney may remain in the courtroom.
Section 925.055(2), F.S. -- The names of confidential informants that may be
revealed to auditors of law enforcement investigative funds are confidential and exempt.
Section 934.08(1)(b), F.S. -- A state or federal law enforcement official who
receives intelligence information as described in the paragraph is subject to any
limitations on the unauthorized disclosure of such information.
Section 934.09(8)(c), F.S. -- Applications made and orders granted authorizing
interception of wire, oral or electronic communications pursuant to cited statutes shall
be sealed by the judge and shall be disclosed only upon a showing of good cause
before a judge.
Section 934.33(7), F.S. -- The record maintained by an investigative or law
enforcement agency which contains specified identifying information regarding the
installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device must be provided under
seal to the court.
Section 937.028(1), F .S. -- When fingerprints are taken for the purpose of
identifying a child, should that child become missing, the state agency, public or private
organization, or other person taking such fingerprints shall not release the fingerprints to
any law enforcement agency or other person for any purpose other than the
identification of a missing child. Such records and data are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 943.03(2), F .S. -- Records related to a Florida Department of Law
Enforcement investigation requested by the Governor concerning official misconduct of
public officials and employees, are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the
investigation is completed or is no longer "active" as defined in the subsection.
Section 943.031 (9)(c) and (d), F.S. -- The Florida Violent Crime and Drug Control
Council may close portions of meetings during which the council will hear or discuss
active criminal investigative information or active criminal intelligence information and
such portions of meetings are exempt from open meetings requirements, provided that
the conditions set forth in the subsection are met. A tape recording of, and any minutes
and notes generated during, the closed portion of a meeting are confidential and
exempt until the criminal investigative or intelligence information ceases to be active.
Section 943.0314, F.S. -- That portion of a meeting of the Domestic Security
Oversight Council at which the council will hear or discuss active criminal investigative
information or active criminal intelligence information is exempt from open meetings
requirements provided that the conditions set forth in the exemption are complied with.
An audio or video recording of, and any minutes and notes generated during, a closed
meeting are exempt from public disclosure requirements until such time as the criminal
investigative information or criminal intelligence information heard or discussed therein
ceases to be active.
Section 943.0321 (4), F.S. -- Information that is exempt from public disclosure under
Ch. 119 when in the possession of the Florida Domestic Security and Counter-
Terrorism Intelligence Center retains its exemption from public disclosure after such
information is revealed to a law enforcement agency or prosecutor, except as otherwise
provided by law. Exempt information obtained by the center from a law enforcement
agency or prosecutor retains its exemption from public disclosure, except as otherwise
provided by law.
Section 943.046(1), F.S. -- Any state or local law enforcement agency may release
to the public any criminal history information and other information regarding a criminal
offender, including, but not limited to, public notification by the agency of the
information, unless the information is confidential and exempt from disclosure. However,
this section does not contravene any provision of s. 943.053 which relates to the
method by which an agency or individual may obtain a copy of an offender's criminal
history record.
Section 943.053(5), (8), (9), and (10), F .S. -- Sealed records received by a court for
the purpose of assisting judges in their case-related responsibilities, or by a private
entity under contract to operate a juvenile offender facility, county detention facility or
state correctional facility pursuant to cited laws remain confidential and exempt from
disclosure.
Section 943.057, F.S. -- This section (providing for access to criminal justice
information in the Department of Law Enforcement for research or statistical purposes)
does not require release of confidential information or require the department to
accommodate requests that would disrupt ongoing operations beyond the extent
required by s. 119.07.
Section 943.0585, F.S. -- Notwithstanding any contrary provision of law, a criminal
justice agency may comply with laws, court orders and official requests of other
jurisdictions relating to expunction, correction or confidential handling of criminal history
records or information derived therefrom.
Section 943.0585(4), F.S. -- A criminal history record ordered expunged that is
retained by the Department of Law Enforcement pursuant to this section is confidential
and exempt and is not available to any person or entity except upon court order.
Section 943.0585(4)(c), F.S. -- Information relating to the existence of an expunged
criminal history record which is provided in accordance with paragraph (a), is
confidential and exempt, except that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement shall
disclose the existence of an expunged record to the agencies set forth in the paragraph
for their respective licensing and employment purposes and to criminal justice agencies
for their respective criminal justice purposes. It is unlawful for any employee of an entity
identified in the paragraph to disclose such information except to the person to whom
the record relates or to persons having direct responsibility for employment or licensure
decisions.
Section 943.059, F.S. -- Notwithstanding any contrary provision of law, a criminal
justice agency may comply with laws, court orders, and official requests of other
jurisdictions relating to sealing, correction, or confidential handling of criminal history
records or information derived therefrom.
Section 943.059(4), F.S. -- A criminal history record of a minor or an adult which is
ordered sealed by a court pursuant to this section is confidential and exempt and
available only to the person and entities identified in the subsection.
Section 943.059(4)(c), F.S. -- Information relating to the existence of such record
that is provided in accordance with paragraph (a) is confidential and exempt, except that
the Florida Department of Law Enforcement shall disclose a sealed record to the
agencies set forth in the paragraph for their respective licensing and employment
purposes. It is unlawful for any employee of an entity identified in the paragraph to
disclose such information except to the person to whom the record relates or to persons
having direct responsibility for employment or licensure decisions.
Section 943.1395(6)(b), F.S. -- The report of misconduct and all records or
information provided to or developed by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training
Commission during the course of an investigation conducted by the commission are
exempt from s. 119.07(1) and, except as otherwise provided by law, such information
shall be subject to public disclosure only after a determination as to probable cause has
been made or until the investigation becomes inactive. However, the officer being
investigated or the officer's attorney may review records as authorized in the exemption.
Section 943.173(3), F .S. -- Examinations, assessments, and instruments and
examination results, other than test scores on officer certification examinations,
including developmental materials and workpapers, administered pursuant to s.
943.13(9) or (10) and s. 943.17 are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 943.325(14), F.S. -- The results of a DNA analysis and the comparison of
analytic results submitted to the Department of Law Enforcement under this section
shall be released only to criminal justice agencies as defined in s. 943.045(10), at the
request of the agency. Otherwise, such information is confidential and exempt.
Section 944.606(3)(d), F.S. -- Sexual offender information received from the
Department of Corrections by the Department of Law Enforcement, the sheriff, or the
chief of police shall be provided to a person who requests it and such information may
be released to the public in any manner deemed appropriate, unless the information so
received is confidential or exempt from disclosure.
Section 945.10(1), F .S. -- Records of the Department of Corrections relating to
inmates, as set forth in the exemption, are confidential and exempt and may not be
released except as provided in the exemption.
Section 945.602(7)(b), F.S. -- Neither the provisions of this section nor those of Ch.
119 or s. 154.207(7) shall apply to any health care provider under contract with the
Department of Corrections except to the extent such provisions would apply to any
similar entity not under contract with the department.
Section 945.6032(3), F.S. -- The findings and recommendations of a medical review
committee created by the Correctional Medical Authority or the Department of
Corrections pursuant to s. 766.101 are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and
any proceedings of the committee are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 946.517, F.S. -- Proprietary confidential business information, as defined in
the statute, of the corporation created to operate correctional work programs is
confidential and exempt.
Section 951.27(2), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, serologic
blood test results for infectious disease which are obtained pursuant to s. 951.27(1) on
inmates in county and municipal detention facilities are confidential and exempt.
Section 958.07, F.S. -- The defendant, his attorney, and the state shall be entitled to
inspect all factual material contained in the comprehensive presentence report or
diagnostic reports prepared or received by the Department of Corrections. The victim
may review the report as provided in s. 960.001 (1 )(g)2. The court may withhold from
disclosure to the defendant and his attorney sources of information which have been
obtained through a promise of confidentiality.
Section 960.001 (1 )(g)2., F .S. -- Any person who views a presentence investigation
report pursuant to this paragraph must maintain the confidentiality of the report and
shall not disclose its contents to any person except statements made to the state
attorney or the court.
Section 960.001 (8), F.S. -- Information gained by a crime victim pursuant to this
chapter (providing guidelines for fair treatment of victims in the criminal and juvenile
justice systems), regarding any case handled in juvenile court, must not be revealed to
any outside party, except as is reasonably necessary in pursuit of legal remedies.
Section 960.003(3), F.S. -- Results of human immunodeficiency virus tests
performed pursuant to this section on persons charged with or alleged by delinquency
petition with certain offenses are confidential and exempt and may not be disclosed to
any person other than the individuals and entities identified in the subsection.
Section 960.15, F .S. -- Any record or report obtained by the Department of Legal
Affairs or a hearing officer, pursuant to a claim for crime victim compensation, that is
confidential or exempt from s. 119.07(1) shall retain that status and shall not be subject
to public disclosure.
Section 960.28(4), F.S. -- Information received or maintained by the Department of
Legal Affairs identifying an alleged victim who seeks payment of medical expenses
under this section is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 984.06(3) and (4), F.S. -- All information obtained pursuant to Ch. 984
(families in need of services and children in need of services) in the discharge of official
duty by the officials specified in the subsection shall not be disclosed to anyone other
than persons and agencies entitled under the chapter to receive this information or upon
court order. Court records required by Ch. 984 are not open to public inspection.
Section 985.036, F.S. -- Nothing in this chapter prohibits the victim of the offense or
a minor victim's parent or guardian from the right to be informed of, and to be present
during, all crucial stages of the proceedings involving the juvenile offender. However,
such person may not reveal to any outside party any confidential information obtained
under this subsection regarding the case, except as is reasonably necessary to pursue
legal remedies. A law enforcement agency may release a copy of the juvenile offense
report to the victim of the offense; however, information gained by the victim under this
chapter, including the next of kin of a homicide victim, regarding any case handled in
juvenile court must not be revealed to any outside party, except as is reasonably
necessary in pursuit of legal remedies.
Section 985.04(1), F.S. -- Except as otherwise provided in this section, all
information obtained under this chapter (relating to juvenile justice) in the discharge of
official duty by any of the entities set forth in the subsection is confidential and may be
disclosed only to the entities specified in the subsection or upon court order. Agencies
entering into an agreement to share information about juvenile offenders as authorized
by this subsection must comply with s. 943.0525 and must maintain the confidentiality of
information otherwise exempt from s. 119.07(1), as provided by law.
Section 985.04(6), F.S. -- Records maintained by the Department of Juvenile
Justice pertaining to a child found to have committed a delinquent act which, if
committed by an adult, would be a crime specified in cited statutes may not be
destroyed for a period of 25 years after the youth's final referral to the department,
except in cases of the child's death. However, such record shall be sealed by the court
and may be released only to meet screening requirements for personnel in s. 402.3055
and the other mentioned statutes or department rules although sexual offender and
predator registration information is a public record.
Section 985.04(7)(a), F.S. -- Records in the custody of the Department of Juvenile
Justice regarding children are not open to public inspection and may be inspected only
upon order of the Secretary of the department or the secretary's authorized agent as
provided therein.
Section 985.045(2), F.S. -- The clerk of court shall keep all official records required
by this section (delinquency) separate from other records of the circuit court, except
those records pertaining to motor vehicle violations, which shall be forwarded to the
Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Except as provided in ss. 943.053,
and 985.04(6)(b) and (7), official records required by this chapter are not open to
inspection by the public, but may be inspected only by persons and entities specified in
the subsection or deemed by the court to have a proper interest therein. The court may
permit authorized representatives of recognized organizations compiling statistics for
proper purposes to inspect, and make abstracts from, official records under whatever
conditions upon the use and disposition of such records the court may deem proper and
may punish by contempt proceedings any violation of those conditions.
Section 985.047(2)(a), F.S. -- Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary,
confidentiality of records information does not apply to juveniles who have been
arrested for an offense that would be a crime if committed by an adult, regarding the
sharing of information on such juveniles with the law enforcement agency or county as
well as other specified agencies and individuals. Neither these records provided to the
law enforcement agency or county nor the records developed from these records for
serious habitual juvenile offenders nor the records provided or developed from records
provided to the law enforcement agency or county on juveniles at risk of becoming
serious habitual juveniles offenders shall be available for public disclosure under s.
119.07.
Section 985.11, F.S. -- Except as provided in cited statutes, fingerprints and
photographs of juveniles are not available for public disclosure and inspection under s.
119.07(1 ),except as provided in ss. 943.053 and 985.04(2), but are available to
specified entities or to any other person authorized by the court to have access to such
records. The records may, in the discretion of the court, be open to inspection by
anyone upon a showing of cause.
Section 985.47(11), F.S. -- Results of blood and urine tests obtained pursuant to
this subsection on serious or habitual juvenile offenders are exempt from disclosure and
may be released only to those persons authorized under the section. The assessment
and treatment records of such offenders are confidential and exempt from disclosure
and may be released only as provided in the subsection. The principles of confidentiality
of records as provided in s. 985.04 apply to the assessment and treatment records of
serious or habitual juvenile offenders.
Section 985.483(11), F .S. -- Serologic blood test and urinalysis results obtained on
children who are eligible for the intensive residential treatment program provided in this
section for offenders less than 13 years old are confidential and may not be disclosed
except as authorized in the section. Assessment and treatment records of such children
are confidential and exempt from disclosure and no part of such records may be
released except as authorized in the section. The principles of confidentiality of records
as provided in s. 985.04 apply to the assessment and treatment records of children who
are eligible for an intensive residential treatment program for offenders less than 13
years of age.
Section 985.534(4) and (5), F.S. -- The original order of the appellate court in a
case affecting a party to a case involving a child under this chapter (delinquency) and all
papers filed in the case on appeal shall remain in the office of the clerk of the court,
sealed and not open to inspection except by order of the appellate court. The case on
appeal shall be docketed, and any papers filed in the appellate court shall be entitled
with the initials but not the name of the child.
Section 1001.24(4), F.S. -- The identity of donors to a Department of Education
direct-support organization, and all information identifying donors and prospective
donors, is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and that anonymity shall be
maintained in the auditor's report. All records of the organization other than the auditor's
report, management letter, and any supplemental data requested by the Auditor
General and the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability shall
be confidential and exempt.
Section 1001.453(4), F .S. -- The identity of donors and all information identifying
donors and prospective donors are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and that
anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report of a district school board direct-
support organization.
Section 1002.22(2), F .S. -- The rights of students and their parents with respect to
education records created, maintained, or used by public educational institutions and
agencies shall be protected in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, the implementing regulations, and this section.
Students and their parents have a right of privacy with respect to their education records
and to access such records or challenge the content of such records to ensure that the
records are not inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise a violation of privacy or other
rights.
Section 1002.221, F.S. -- Education records, as defined in the Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, and the federal regulations, are confidential
and exempt. An agency, as defined in s. 1002.22(1 )(a), or a public school, center,
institution, or other entity that is part of Florida's education system under s. 1000.04(1),
(3), or (4), may not release a student's education records without the written consent of
the student or parent except as provided therein or as permitted by the federal act.
Section 1002.225, F.S. -- All public postsecondary educational institutions shall
comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, with
respect to the education records of students. A public postsecondary educational
institution may charge fees for furnishing copies of education records that are requested
under this section but may not exceed the actual cost incurred by the institution for
producing such copies and may not include the costs of searching for or retrieving the
education records.
Section 1002.36(7)(d), F.S. -- The criminal records, private investigator findings,
and information from reference checks obtained by the Florida School for the Deaf and
the Blind for determining the moral character of employees of the school are confidential
and exempt from disclosure.
Section 1002.395(6)(n), F .S. -- Any and all information and documentation provided
to the Department of Education and the Auditor General relating to the identity of a
taxpayer that provides an eligible contribution under this section (Florida Tax Credit
Scholarship Program) shall remain confidential at all times in accordance with s.
213.053.
Section 1002.72, F .S. -- Except as provided in the exemption, the records of
children enrolled in the Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Program are confidential.
Section 1003.25(1), F .S. -- The cumulative record of a public school pupil that is
required by this section is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and is open to
inspection only as provided in Ch. 1002.
Section 1003.53(6), F.S. -- School districts and other agencies receiving information
contained in student records and juvenile justice records shall use such information only
for official purposes connected with the certification of students for admission to and for
the administration of the dropout prevention and academic intervention program, and
such agencies shall maintain the confidentiality of such information unless otherwise
provided by law or rule. Such information is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 1003.57(1)(b), F.S. -- Hearings on exceptional student placement or denial
of placement in special education programs are exempt from s. 286.011, except to the
extent that the State Board of Education adopts rules establishing other procedures,
and any records created as a result of such hearings are confidential and exempt.
Section 1004.22(2), F .S. -- Materials relating to methods of manufacture or
production, potential or actual trade secrets, potentially patentable material, business
transactions, or proprietary information received, generated, ascertained or discovered
during the course of research conducted within state universities are confidential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1), except that a division of sponsored research shall make
available, upon request, title and description of a research project, name of the
researcher, and amount and source of funding for the project.
Section 1004.24(4), F .S. -- The claims files of a self-insurance program adopted by
the Board of Governors, or the board's designee, pursuant to this section are
confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and are only for the use of the program in
fulfilling its duties.
Section 1004.226 -- Materials held by the Florida Technology, Research, and
Scholarship Board that relate to manufacture or production methods, trade secrets,
patentable material, or proprietary information received or discovered through state
university research projects submitted for funding under the State University Research
Commercialization Assistance Grant Program; information identifying an investor in
projects reviewed by the Board wishing to remain anonymous; or information received
from a person, state, nation or Federal Government which is otherwise confidential or
exempt under the laws of that state, nation or federal law is confidential and exempt.
That portion of a meeting of the Board at which confidential and exempt information is
discussed is exempt and any records generated during the exempt meeting are
confidential and exempt.
Section 1004.28(5), F.S. -- Records of a university direct-support organization other
than the auditor's report, management letter, and any supplemental data requested by
the Board of Governors, the university board of trustees, the Auditor General, and the
Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability shall be confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1). The identity of donors who desire to remain anonymous
shall be protected, and that anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 1004.30, F .S. -- Certain records of university health services support
organizations are made confidential; however, some records become public records at
a specified time in the future. Any portion of a governing board or peer review panel or
committee meeting during which a confidential and exempt contract, document, record,
marketing plan, or trade secret is discussed is exempt from s. 286.011, as well as any
records generated during the closed portion of a governing board or peer review panel
or committee meeting which contain information relating to contracts, documents,
records, marketing plans, or trade secrets which are made confidential and exempt by
this section. A person may petition a court for release of certain documents upon a
finding of compelling public interest for release. The organization may petition a court
for continued confidentiality upon a showing of good cause.
Section 1004.43(8), F.S. -- Proprietary confidential business information, as defined
in the subsection, of the not-for-profit corporation organized pursuant to this section for
the purpose of operating the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, and
the corporation's subsidiaries, is confidential and exempt from disclosure, except that
the Auditor General, Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability,
and the Board of Governors must be given access and must maintain the confidentiality
of the information so received.
Section 1004.43(9), F .S. -- Meetings of the governing body of the not-for-profit
corporation operating the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, or its
subsidiaries are exempt from open meeting requirements except that meetings at which
expenditures of dollars appropriated to the corporation by the state are discussed must
remain open to the public.
Section 1004.4472, F .S. -- Specified materials held by the Florida I nstitute for
Human and Machine Cognition, Inc., or its subsidiary, including certain donor
information, as well as trade secrets, patentable material, proprietary information
received or generated from research, and exempt information received from other
states or the federal government, are confidential and exempt from disclosure
requirements. Portions of meetings where confidential information is discussed are
exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 1004.45(2)(h), F.S. -- Information that, if released, would identify donors
who desire to remain anonymous, is confidential and exempt. Information which, if
released, would identify prospective donors to the museum is confidential and exempt
unless the direct-support organization has obtained the name from another source.
Identities of such donors and prospective donors shall not be revealed in the auditor's
report.
Section 1004.70(6), F.S. -- Records of community college direct-support
organizations other than the auditor's report, any information necessary for the auditor's
report, any information related to the expenditure of funds, and any supplemental data
requested by the board of trustees, the Auditor General, and the Office of Program
Policy Analysis and Government Accountability are confidential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). The identity of donors who desire to remain anonymous shall be protected,
and that anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor's report.
Section 1004.71 (6), F .S. -- The identity of a donor or prospective donor to a
statewide community college direct-support organization who desires to remain
anonymous, and all information identifying such donor or prospective donor are
confidential and exempt from disclosure. Such anonymity shall be maintained in the
auditor's report.
Section 1004.78(2), F .S. -- Materials relating to methods of manufacture or
production, potential or actual trade secrets, potentially patentable material, business
transactions, or proprietary information received, generated, ascertained or discovered
during the course of activities conducted within a community college are confidential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) provided that a community college shall make available,
upon request, the title and description of a project, the name of the investigator and the
amount and source of the funding provided for the project.
Section 1005.36(3), F .S. -- Confidentiality of student records of closed nonpublic
postsecondary institutions which are furnished to the Commission for Independent
Education in accordance with this section shall be maintained, to the extent required by
law.
Section 1005.38(6), F.S. -- Investigatory records held by the Commission for
Independent Education are exempt from public disclosure requirements for a period not
to exceed 10 days after the panel makes a determination regarding probable cause.
Those portions of meetings of the probable cause panel at which exempt records are
discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements but must be recorded. The
recording of a closed portion of a meeting and the minutes and findings of such meeting
are exempt from disclosure for a period not to exceed 10 days after the panel makes a
determination regarding probable cause.
Section 1006.07(1 )(a), F .S. -- Student expulsion hearings are exempt from s.
286.011. However, the student's parent must be given notice of the Sunshine Law and
may elect to have the hearing held in compliance with that section.
Section 1006.52(1), F.S. -- Each public postsecondary educational institution may
prescribe the content and custody of records which the university may maintain on its
students. A student's education records, as defined in the Family Educational Rights
and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, and the federal regulations, and applicant records
as defined by this section are confidential and exempt.
Section 1006.52(2), F.S. -- A public postsecondary educational institution may not
release a student's education records without the written consent of the student to any
individual, agency, or organization, except as permitted by the Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, or to the Auditor General or the Office of
Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, which are necessary for such
agencies to perform their official duties and responsibilities as provided in the statute.
Section 1008.23, F.S. -- All examination and assessment instruments, including
developmental materials and workpapers directly related thereto, which are prepared,
prescribed or administered pursuant to cited statutes, shall be confidential and exempt
from s. 119.07, and from s. 1001.52.
Section 1008.24(3)(b), F.S. -- The identity of a school or postsecondary
educational institution, the personally identifiable information of any personnel of any
school district or postsecondary educational institution, or any specific allegations of
misconduct obtained or reported pursuant to an investigation conducted by the
Department of Education of a testing impropriety are confidential and exempt until the
conclusion of the investigation or until such time as the investigation ceases to be
active.
Section 1008.345(7)(h), F.S. -- Tests and related documents developed to measure
and diagnose student achievement of college- level communication and mathematics
skills are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 1008.39(3), F .S. -- The Florida Education and Training Placement
Information Program must not make public any information that could identify an
individual or the individual's employer.
Section 1008.41(1)(b), F.S. -- Uniform management information systems for
workforce education coordinated by the Commissioner of Education pursuant to this
section must provide for compliance with state and federal confidentiality requirements
except that the department shall have access to certain unemployment reports to collect
and report placement data about former students. Such placement reports must not
disclose the individual identities of former students.
Section 1009.98(6), F.S. -- Information that identifies the purchasers or beneficiaries
of a prepaid college plan and their advance payment account activities is exempt from
s. 119.07(1). Information which is authorized to be released to postsecondary
institutions shall be maintained as exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 1009.981(6), F.S. -- Information that identifies the benefactors or the
designated beneficiary of any account initiated pursuant to the Florida College Savings
Program is confidential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. However, the
board is authorized to release such information to a community college, college, or
university in which a designated beneficiary may enroll or is enrolled. The receiving
institution shall maintain the confidentiality of such information.
Section 1009.983(4), F .S. -- The identity of donors who desire to remain
anonymous shall be confidential and exempt from disclosure, and such anonymity shall
be maintained in the auditor's report of the direct-support organization of the Florida
Prepaid College Program. Information received by the direct-support organization that is
otherwise confidential or exempt shall retain such status and any sensitive, personal
information regarding contract beneficiaries, including their identities, is exempt from
disclosure.
Section 1012.31 (3), F .S. -- Public school system employee personnel files are
subject to the provisions of s. 119.07(1) except that any complaint and material relating
to the investigation of a complaint against an employee is confidential and exempt until
the conclusion of the preliminary investigation or until the preliminary investigation
ceases to be active; employee evaluations are confidential until the end of the school
year immediately following the school year during which the evaluation was made, but
no evaluations made prior to July 1, 1983, shall be made public; payroll deduction
records of the employee and medical records are confidential and exempt. However, an
employee's personnel file shall be open at all times to the officials designated in the
subsection.
Section 1012.56(1), F .S. -- Disclosure of the social security number of an applicant
for certification which is submitted to the Department of Education is limited to child
support enforcement purposes.
Section 1012.56(9)(e), F.S. -- For any examination developed by this state, the
Department of Education and the State Board of Education shall maintain confidentiality
of the examination, developmental materials, and workpapers, which are exempt from s.
119.07(1 ).
Section 1012.56(9)(g), F.S. -- Examination instruments, including developmental
materials and workpapers directly related thereto, which are prepared, prescribed, or
administered pursuant to this section are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and
from s. 1001.52. Provisions governing access to, maintenance of, and destruction of
such instruments and related materials shall be prescribed by rules of the State Board
of Education.
Section 1012.796(4), F .S. -- The complaint against a teacher or administrator and
all information obtained pursuant to the investigation by the Department of Education
shall be confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the conclusion of the preliminary
investigation, until such time as the preliminary investigation ceases to be active, or until
such time as otherwise provided by s. 1012.798(6). However, the complaint and all
material assembled during the investigation may be inspected and copied by the
certificate holder or the certificate holder's designee, after the investigation is concluded,
but prior to the determination of probable cause.
Section 1012.798(9), F.S. -- Information obtained by the recovery network program
(established within the Department of Education to assist impaired educators) from a
treatment provider which relates to a person's impairment and participation in the
program is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 1012.798(11), F.S. -- Medical records released pursuant to paragraph (8)(e)
of this section relating to the impaired educators recovery network program may be
disclosed only to the entities specified only as required for purposes of this section, or
as otherwise authorized by law. The medical records are confidential and exempt from
disclosure.
Section 1012.81, F.S. -- Rules of the State Board of Education shall prescribe the
content and custody of limited-access records which a community college may maintain
on its employees. Such records are limited to information reflecting evaluations of
employee performance and are open to inspection only by the employee and officials of
the college responsible for supervising the employee. Such limited access employee
records are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). The custodian of limited access
employee records may release information from such records only as authorized in the
section.
Section 1012.91, F .S. -- Each university board of trustees shall adopt rules
prescribing the content and custody of limited-access records maintained on its
employees. Such limited-access records are limited to the records described in the
section. Limited access records are confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may
not be released except as authorized in the section. For more information, please see
the discussion on university personnel records found at Part II section 1.2.b. The page
number may be found in the Table of Contents.
Section 1013.14(1)(a), F.S. -- In any case where a board, pursuant to the provisions
of Ch. 1013, seeks to purchase real property for educational purposes, all appraisals,
offers, or counteroffers are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed
or, if no option contract is executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for
purchase is considered for approval by the board. If a contract or agreement for
purchase is not submitted to the board for approval, then the exemption from s.
119.07(1) expires 30 days after the negotiations end.
E. RULE 2.420, PUBLIC ACCESS TO JUDICIAL BRANCH RECORDS, FLA. RULES
OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION
(a) Scope and Purpose. Subject to the rulemaking power of the Florida Supreme
Court provided by article V, section 2, Florida Constitution, the following rule shall
govern public access to the records of the judicial branch of government. The public
shall have access to all records of the judicial branch of government, except as provided
below.
(b) Definitions.
(1) "Records of the judicial branch" are all records, regardless of physical form,
characteristics, or means of transmission, made or received in connection with the
transaction of official business by any judicial branch entity and consist of:
(A) "court records," which are the contents of the court file, including the progress
docket and other similar records generated to document activity in a case, transcripts
filed with the clerk, documentary exhibits in the custody of the clerk, and electronic
records, videotapes, or stenographic tapes of depositions or other proceedings filed with
the clerk, and electronic records, videotapes, or stenographic tapes of court
proceedings; and
(B) "administrative records," which are all other records made or received pursuant
to court rule, law, or ordinance, or in connection with the transaction of official business
by any judicial branch entity.
(2) "Judicial branch" means the judicial branch of government, which includes the
state courts system, the clerk of court when acting as an arm of the court, The Florida
Bar, the Florida Board of Bar Examiners, the Judicial Qualifications Commission, and all
other entities established by or operating under the authority of the supreme court or the
chief justice.
(3) "Custodian." The custodian of all administrative records of any court is the chief
justice or chief judge of that court, except that each judge is the custodian of all records
that are solely within the possession and control of that judge. As to all other records,
the custodian is the official charged with the responsibility of maintaining the office
having the care, keeping, and supervision of such records. All references to "custodian"
mean the custodian or the custodian's designee.
(4) "Confidential," as applied to information contained within a record of the judicial
branch, means that such information is exempt from the public right of access under
article I, section 24(c) of the Florida Constitution and may be released only to the
persons or organizations designated by law, statute, or court order. As applied to
information contained within a court record, the term "exempt" means that such
information is confidential. Confidential information includes information that is
confidential under this rule or under a court order entered pursuant to this rule. To the
extent reasonable practicable, restriction of access to confidential information shall be
implemented in a manner that does not restrict access to any portion of the record that
is not confidential.
(5) "Affected non-party" means any non-party identified by name in a court record
that contains confidential information pertaining to that non-party.
(c) Confidential and Exempt Records. The following records of the judicial branch
shall be confidential:
(1) Trial and appellate court memoranda, drafts of opinions and orders, court
conference records, notes, and other written materials of a similar nature prepared by
judges or court staff acting on behalf of or at the direction of the court as part of the
court's judicial decision-making process utilized in disposing of cases and controversies
before Florida courts unless filed as a part of the court record;
(2) Memoranda or advisory opinions that relate to the administration of the court and
that require confidentiality to protect a compelling governmental interest, including, but
not limited to, maintaining court security, facilitating a criminal investigation, or
protecting public safety, which cannot be adequately protected by less restrictive
measures. The degree, duration, and manner of confidentiality imposed shall be no
broader than necessary to protect the compelling governmental interest involved, and a
finding shall be made that no less restrictive measures are available to protect this
interest. The decision that confidentiality is required with respect to such administrative
memorandum or written advisory opinion shall be made by the chief judge;
(3) (A) Complaints alleging misconduct ag ainst judges unt il pr obable cause i s
established;
(B) Complaints alleging misconduct against other entities or individuals I icensed or
regulated by t he courts, until a finding of probable cause or n 0 pr obable cause i s
established, unless otherwise provided. Such finding should be made within the time
limit s et by I aw or rule. If not ime limit is set, t he finding should be made within a
reasonable period of time;
(4) Periodic evaluations implemented solely t 0 as sist judges i n improving their
performance, all information gathered to form t he bases for t he evaluations, an d t he
results generated therefrom;
(5) 0 nly t he n ames a nd qualifications 0 f persons ap plying to serve or serving as
unpaid volunteers t 0 assist t he court, at t he court's request an d di rection, shall b e
accessible tot he pu blic. A II ot her information contained i n t he applications by and
evaluations of persons appl ying t 0 serve or serving as unpai d volunteers s hall be
confidential unless made public by court order based upon a showing of materiality in a
pending court proceeding or upon a showing of good cause;
(6) Copies of ar rest and search warrants and supporting a ffidavits retained by
judges, clerks, or ot her court per sonnel until ex ecution 0 f s aid warrants or unt il a
determination is made by law enforcement authorities that execution cannot be made;
(7) All records made confidential under the Florida and United States Constitutions
and Florida and federal law;
(8) All records presently deemed to be confidential by court rule, including the Rules
for Admission to the Bar, by Florida Statutes, by prior case law of the State of Florida,
and by the rules of the Judicial Qualifications Commission;
(9) Any court record determined to be confidential incase decision or court rule on
the grounds that
(A) confidentiality is required to
(i) pr event a serious and imminent threat tot he fair, impartial, and orderly
administration of justice;
(ii) protect trade secrets;
(iii) protect a compelling governmental interest;
(iv) obtain evidence to determine legal issues in a case;
(v) avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties;
(vi) a void substantial injury t 0 a par ty b Y di sclosure 0 f matters pr otected by a
common I aw or privacy right not generally inherent in the specific type of proceeding
sought to be closed;
(vii) comply wit h established public pol icy set forth in the Florida or United States
Constitution or statutes or Florida rules or case law;
(B) the degree, duration, and manner of confidentiality ordered by the court shall be
no broader than necessary to protect the interests set forth in subdivision (A) and
(C) no less restrictive measures are available to protect the interests set forth in
subdivision (A).
(10) The names and any identifying information of judges mentioned in an advisory
opinion of the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee.
(d) Procedures for Determining Confidentiality of Court Records.
(1) The clerk 0 f the court s hall des ignate a nd maintain t he confidentiality of any
information contained within a court record that is described in subdivision (d)(1)(A) or
(d)(1 )(B) of this rule. The following information shall be maintained as confidential:
(A) information described by any of subdivisions (c)(1) through (c)(6) of this rule; and
(B) except as pr ovided by court or der, information subject to subdivision (c)(7) or
(c)(8) of this rule that is currently confidential or exempt from section 119.07, Florida
Statutes, a nd ar ticle I, section 2 4(a) 0 f t he Florida Constitution under any 0 f t he
following statutes or as they may be amended or renumbered:
(i) Chapter 39 records relating to dependency matters, termination of parental rights,
guardians ad litem, child abuse, neglect, and abandonment. s. 39.0132(3), Fla. Stat.
(ii) Adoption records. s. 63.162, Fla. Stat.
(iii) Social Security, bank account, charge, debit, and credit card numbers in court
records. s. 119.07(1 )(i)-U), (2)(a)-(e), Fla. Stat. (Unless redaction is requested pursuant
to 119.0714(2), this information is exempt only as of January 1, 2011.
(iv) HIVtest results and pat ient identity within those test results. s. 381.004(3)(e),
Fla. Stat.
(v) Sexually transmitted di seases - test results and identity within the test results
when pr ovided by t he Department 0 f Health or the de partment's au thorized
representative. s. 384.29, Fla. Stat.
(vi) Birth and death certificates, including court-issued delayed birth certificates and
fetal death certificates. ss. 382.008(6), 382.025(1 )(a), Fla. Stat.
(vii) Identifying information in a petition by a minor for waiver of parental notice when
seeking to terminate pregnancy. s. 390.01116, Fla. Stat.
(viii) Identifying information in clinical mental health records under the Baker Act. s.
3394.4615(7), Fla. Stat.
(ix) Records 0 f substance abuse service providers which per tain tot he identity,
diagnosis, and prognosis of a nd service pr ovision t 0 individuals who haver eceived
services from substance abuse service providers. s. 397.501 (7), Fla. Stat.
(x) Identifying information in clinical records of det ained criminal de fendants found
incompetent to proceed or acquitted by reason of insanity. s. 916.107(8), Fla. Stat.
(xi) Estate inventories and accountings. s. 733.604(1), Fla. Stat.
(xii) T he v ictim's ad dress in a domestic v iolence action on petitioner's request. s.
7 41.30(3)(b), Fla. Stat.
(xiii) Information identifying victims of sexual offenses, including child sexual abuse.
ss. 119.071 (2)(h), 119.0714(1 )(h), Fla. Stat.
(xiv) Gestational surrogacy records. s. 742.16(9), Fla. Stat.
(xv) Guardianship reports and or ders app ointing court monitors i n guardianship
cases. ss. 744.1076, 744.3701, Fla. Stat.
(xvi) Grand jury records. Ch. 905, Fla. Stat.
(xvii) Information acquired by courts and I aw enforcement regarding family services
for children. s. 948.06(3)-(4), Fla. Stat.
(xviii) Juvenile delinquency records. ss. 985.04(1), 985.045(2), Fla. Stat.
(xix) Information di sclosing t he identity of persons subject tot uberculosis
proceedings and records of the Department of Health in suspected tuberculosis cases.
ss. 392.545, 392.65, Fla. Stat.
(2) Any person filing any document containing confidential information shall, at the
time of filing, file with the clerk a "Notice of Confidential Information within Court Filing"
in order to: (A) indicate that confidential information described in subdivision (d)(1)(B) of
this rule i s included within t he doc ument bei ng filed; ( B) identify t he pr ovision 0 f
subdivision (d)(1 )(B) of this rule that applies to the identified information; and (C) identify
the precise location of the confidential information within t he document being filed. A
form No tice 0 f Co nfidential Information within Court Filing ac companies this rule. The
clerk of court shall review filings identified by filers as containing confidential information
to de termine whether t he purported confidential information i s facially subject t 0
confidentiality un der the identified pr ovision ins ubdivision ( d)(1 )(B). If th e clerk
determines that filed information i s no t subject t 0 confidentiality und er t he identified
provision, the clerk shall notify the person who filed the document within 5 days of the
filing and thereafter shall maintain the information as confidential for 10 days from the
day such not ice is served. The information shall not be held as confidential for more
than 10 days, unless the filer has filed a motion pursuant to subdivision (d)(3).
(3) Any per son filing a doc ument with t he court s hall as certain whether a ny
information contained within the document may be confidential under subdivision (c) of
this rule notwithstanding that such information is not itemized at subdivision (d)(1) of this
rule. A person filing information that he or she believes in good faith to be confidential
but that i s n ot described ins ubdivision ( d)(1) of this rule shall request that t he
information be maintained as confidential by filing a "Motion to Determine Confidentiality
of Court Records" under the procedures set forth in subdivision (e), (f), or (g), under (A)
the person filing the information is the only individual whose confidential information is
included in the document to be filed or is the attorney representing all such individuals;
and (B) a knowing waiver of the confidential status of that information is intended by the
person filing the information. Any interested person may request that information within
a court file be maintained as confidential by filing amotion as provided in subdivision
(e), (f), or (g).
(4) If a notice of confidential information is filed pursuant to subdivision (d)(2) or a
motion i s filed pursuant t 0 subdivision ( e)(1) seeking t 0 det ermine that information
contained i n c ou rt records is confidential, or pu r suant to s ubd ivision (e)( 5) seeking to
vacate an order that has determined that information in a court record is confidential or
seeking to unseal information designated as confidential by the clerk of court, then the
person filing t he not ice or motion shall give not ice 0 f such filing to any affected n on-
party. Notice pursuant to this provision must:
(A) be filed with the court;
(B) identify the case by docket number;
(C) describe the confidential information with as much specificity as possible without
revealing t he confidential information, including specifying t he pr ecise location 0 f the
information within the court record; and
(D) include:
(i) in t he case 0 far eq uest to dee m materials confidential, a statement that if the
motion is denied then the subject material will not be treated as confidential by the clerk;
and
(ii) in the case of a motion to unseal confidential records or a motion to vacate an
order deeming records confidential, a statement that if the motion is granted the subject
material will no longer be treated as confidential by the clerk.
Any notice described herein must be served together with the motion that gave rise
to t he notice in accordance with subdivision (e)(5) or (g)(6). When serving t he not ice
and motion des cribed i n this subdivision on a no n-party, t he serves s hall us e
reasonable efforts to locate the non-party and may serve such non-party by any method
set forth in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080(b).
(e) Request t 0 Determine Confidentiality of Trial Court Records inN oncriminal
Cases.
(1) A request to determine t he confidentiality of t rial court records in nonc riminal
cases under subdivision (c) must be made in t he form 0 f a written motion captioned
"Motion t 0 Determine Confidentiality of Court Records." A motion made un der this
subdivision must:
(A) identify the particular court records or a portion of a record that the movant seeks
to have de termined as confidential with as much specificity as pos sible without
revealing the information subject to the confidentiality determination; and
(B) specify the bases for determining that such court records are confidential-:-; and
(C) s et forth t he specific I egal aut hority and any appl icable legal standards f or
determining such court records to be confidential.
Any motion made un der this subdivision must include a signed certification by the
party or the attorney for the party making the request that the motion is made in good
faith and is supported by a sound factual and legal basis. Information that is subject to
such a motion must be treated as confidential by the clerk pending the court's ruling on
the motion. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the court may not determine that the
case number, docket number, or other number used by the clerk's office to identify the
case file is confidential.
(2) Except when amotion filed under subdivision (e)(1) represents t hat all parties
agree to all of the relief requested, the court must, as soon as practicable but no later
than 30 days after t he filing of amotion under this subdivision, hol d a hear ing before
ruling on the motion. Whether or not any motion filed under subdivision (e)(1) is agreed
to by t he parties, t he court may in its di scretion hold a he aring on such motion. Any
hearing held under this subdivision must be an open proceeding, except that any f3afty
person may request that the court conduct all or part of the hearing in camera to protect
the interests s et forth ins ubdivision ( c). A ny per son may request ex pedited
consideration of a nd ruling 0 n t he motion. The moving party s hall be responsible for
ensuring t hat a complete record 0 f a ny hear ing hel d pur suant to this subdivision be
created, either by use of a court reporter or by any recording device that is provided as
a matter of right by the court. The court may in its discretion require prior public notice of
the he aring on such amotion in ac cordance with t he pr ocedure for pr oviding publ ic
notice of court orders set forth ins ubdivision (e)(4) or by providing such other publ ic
notice as the court deems a ppropriate. The court must issue a ruling on t he motion
within 30 days of the hearing.
(3) Any order granting in whole or in part a motion filed under subdivision (e) must
state the following with as much specificity as possible without revealing the information
subject to the confidentiality determination:
(A) The type of case in which the order is being entered;
(B) The particular grounds under subdivision (c) for determining the information
confidential;
(C) Whether any party's name is determined to be confidential and, if so, the
particular pseudonym or other term to be substituted for the party's name;
(D) Whether the progress docket or similar records generated to document activity in
the case are determined to be confidential;
(E) The particular information that is determined to be confidential;
(F) Identification of persons who are permitted to view the confidential information;
(G) That the court finds that:
(i) the degree, duration, and manner of confidentiality ordered by the court are no
broader than necessary to protect the interests set forth in subdivision (c); and
(ii) no less restrictive measures are available to protect the interests set forth in
subdivision (c); and
(H) That the clerk of the court is directed to publish the order in accordance with
subdivision (e)(4).
(4) Except as provided by law or court rule, notice must be given of any order
granting in whole or in part a motion made under subdivision (e)(1) as follows. Within 10
days following the entry of the order, the clerk of court must post a copy of the order on
the clerk's website and in a prominent, public location in the courthouse. The order must
remain posted in both locations for no less than 30 days. This subdivision shall not
apply to orders determining that court records are confidential under subdivision (c)(7)
or (c)(8).
(5) If a nonparty requests that the court vacate all or part of an order issued under
subdivision (e), or requests that the court order the unsealing of records designated as
confidential under subdivision (d), the request must be made by a written motion, filed in
that court, that states with as much specificity as possible the bases for the request. The
motion must set forth the specific legal authority and any applicable legal standards
supporting the request. The movant must serve all parties and all affected non-parties
with a copy of the motion. If the subject order determines that the names or addresses
of one or more parties are confidential, the movant must state prominently in the caption
of the motion "Confidential Party -- Court Service Requested." When a motion so
designated is filed, the court shall be responsible for providing a copy of the motion to
all parties and all affected non-parties in such a way as not to reveal the confidential
information to the movant. Except when a motion filed under this subdivision represents
that all parties agree to all of the relief requested, the court must, as soon as practicable
but not later than 30 days after the filing of a motion under this subdivision, hold a
hearing on the motion. Regardless of whether any motion filed under this subdivision is
agreed to by the parties, the court may in its discretion hold a hearing on such motion.
Any person may request expedited consideration of and ruling on the motion. Any
hearing held under this subdivision must be an open proceeding, except that any
person may request that the court conduct all or part of the hearing in camera to protect
the interests set forth in subdivision (c). The court must issue a ruling on the motion
within 30 days of the hearing. The movant shall be responsible for ensuring that a
complete record of any hearing held under this subdivision be created, either by use of
a court reporter or by any recording device that is provided as a matter of right by the
court. This subdivision shall not apply to orders determining that court records are
confidential under subdivision (c)(7) of (c)(8).
(6) After notice and an opportunity to respond, the court may impose sanctions
against any party or non-party and/or their attorney if:
(A) the court determines that a designation made under subdivision (d) or a motion
made under subdivision (d)(3) or (e) was not made in good faith and was not supported
by a sound legal or factual basis, or
(B) a document is filed in violation of subdivision (d)(2) or (d)(3).
(f) Request to Determine Confidentiality of Court Records in Criminal Cases.
(1) Subdivision (e) shall apply to any motion by the state or a defendant to determine
the confidentiality 0 f trial court records under subdivision ( c), ex cept as pr ovided in
subdivision (f)(3). As to any motion filed in the t rial court un der subdivision (f)(3), the
following procedure shall apply:
(A) Unless the motion represents that both the movant and any other party subject to
the motion agree to all of the relief requested, as evidenced by all such parties signing
the motion, the court shall hold a hearing on a motion filed under this subdivision within
15 days of the filing of the motion. Any hearing held under this subdivision must be an
open proceeding, except that any person may request that the court conduct all or part
of the hearing in camera to protect the interests set forth in subdivision (c)(9)(A).
(B) The court shall issue a written ruling on amotion filed within this subdivision
within 10 days of the hearing on a contested motion or within 10 days of the filing of an
agreed motion.
(2) Subdivision ( g) shall appl y t 0 a ny motion t 0 determine the confidentiality 0 f
appellate court records under subdivision (c), except as provided ins ubdivision (f)(3).
As t 0 any motion filed i n t he a ppellate court un der subdivision ( f)(3), t he following
procedure shall apply:
(A) T he motion m ay be made with respect t 0 a record that w as pr esented 0 r
presentable t 0 a lower tribunal, but no determination concerning confidentiality was
made by the lower tribunal, or a record presented to an appellate court in an original
proceeding.
(B) A response to a motion filed under this subdivision may be served within 10 days
of service of the motion.
(C) The court shall issue a written ruling on a motion filed under t his subdivision
within 10 days of the filing of a response on a contested motion or within 10 days of the
filing of an uncontested motion.
(3) Any motion t 0 determine whether a court record that pertains t 0 a plea
agreement, substantial as sistance ag reement, 0 r other court records that reveals t he
identity 0 f a confidential informant or ac tive criminal investigative information i s
confidential under subdivision (c )(9)(A)(i), (c )(9)(A)(iii), (c )(9)(A)(v), 0 r (c )(9)(A)(viii) 0 f
this rule may be made in the form of a written motion captioned "Motion to Determine
Confidentiality of Court Records." Any motion made pursuant to this subdivision must be
treated as confidential and indicated on the docket by generic title only, pending a ruling
on t he motion or further 0 rder 0 f t he court. As t 0 a ny motion made un der this
subdivision, the following procedures shall apply:
(A) Information that is the subject of such motion must be treated as confidential by
the clerk pending the court's ruling on the motion. Filings containing the information
must be indicated on the docket in a manner that does not reveal the confidential nature
of the information.
(B) The provisions 0 f subdivisions ( e)(3)(A)-(G), ( e)(6), and ( g)(7) shall ap ply t 0
motions made un der this subdivision. The provisions of subdivisions ( e)(1), ( e)(2),
(e)(3)(H), (e)(4), and (e)(5) shall not apply to motions made under this subdivision.
(C) No order entered under this subdivision may authorize or approve the sealing of
court records for any per iod longer than necessary t 0 ac hieve t he 0 bjective 0 f t he
motion, and in no event longer than 120 days. Extensions of an order issued hereunder
may be g ranted for 60-day periods, but each such extension may be ordered only upon
the filing 0 f a nother motion i n ac cordance with t he pr ocedures s et forth un der this
subdivision. In the event of an appeal or review of a matter in which an order is entered
under this subdivision, the lower tribunal shall retain jurisdiction to consider motions to
extend orders issued hereunder during the course of the appeal or review proceeding.
(D) The clerk of the court shall not publish any order of the court issued hereunder in
accordance with subdivision (e)(4) or (g)(4) unless di rected by the court. The do cket
shall indicate only the entry of the order.
(4) This subdivision does not authorize the falsification of court records or progress
dockets.
(g) Request to Determine Confidentiality of Appellate Court Records in Noncriminal
Cases.
(1) A motion to determine the confidentiality of appellate court records in noncriminal
cases un der subdivision ( c) must b e filed i n t he ap pellate court and must be i n
compliance with the gui delines set forth ins ubdivision (e)(1). Such amotion m ay be
made with respect to a record that was presented or presentable to a lower tribunal, but
no determination concerning confidentiality was made by the lower tribunal, or a record
presented to an appellate court in an original proceeding.
(2) A response to a motion filed un der subdivision (g)(1) may be served within 10
days of service of the motion.
(3) Any order granting in whole or in part a motion filed under subdivision (g)(1) must
be in compliance with the guidelines set forth ins ubdivisions (e)(3)(A)-(H). Any 0 rder
requiring the sealing 0 f an appellate court record op erates to al so make those same
records confidential i n t he lower tribunal dur ing t he pendency of t he appellate
proceeding.
(4) Except as provided by law, within 10 days following the entry of an order granting
a motion under subdivision (g)(1), the clerk of the appellate court must post a copy of
the order on the clerk's website and must provide a copy of the order to the clerk of the
lower tribunal, with directions that the clerk is to seal the records identified in the order.
The order must remain posted for no less than 30 days.
(5) If a nonparty requests that the court vacate all or part of an order issued under
subdivision (g)(3), or requests that the court order the unsealing of records designated
as confidential under subdivision (d), the request must be made by a written motion,
filed i n that court, that states with as much specificity as pos sible t he bases for t he
request. The motion must set forth the specific legal authority and any applicable legal
standards s upporting the request. The movant must serve all parties and all affected
non-parties with a copy of the motion. If the subject order determines that the names or
addresses of one or more parties are confidential, the movant must state prominently in
the caption of the motion "Confidential Party -- Court Service Request." When a motion
so designated is filed, the court shall be responsible for providing a copy of the motion
to all parties and all affected non-parties in such a way as not to reveal the confidential
information to the movant. A response to a motion may be served within 10 day s of
service of the motion.
(6) The party seeking to have an appellate record sealed under this subdivision has
the responsibility to ensure that the clerk of the lower tribunal is alerted to the issuance
of the order sealing the records and to ensure that the clerk takes appropriate steps to
seal the records in the lower tribunal.
(7) Upon conclusion of t he appellate pr oceeding, t he lower tribunal may, upon
appropriate motion showing changed circumstances, revisit the appellate court's order
directing that the records be sealed.
(8) If the court determines that a designation made under subdivision (d) or a motion
made under subdivision (g)(1) was not made in good faith and was not supported by a
sound legal or factual basis, the court may impose sanctions on the movant after notice
and an opportunity to respond.
(9) Records of a lower tribunal determined to be confidential by that tribunal must be
treated as confidential during any review proceedings. In any case where information
has been determined to be confidential under this rule, the clerk of t he lower tribunal
shall so indicate in the index transmitted to the ap pellate court. If the information was
determined to be confidential in an order, the clerk's index must identify such order by
date or docket number. This subdivision does not preclude review by an appellate court,
under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1 OO(d), or affect the standard of review by
an appellate court, of an order by a lower tribunal de termining a record t 0 b e
confidential.
(h) Denial of Access Request f or Administrative Records. Expedited review of
denials 0 f ac cess t 0 adm inistrative records of the judicial branch shall be pr ovided
through an action for mandamus or other appropriate relief in the following manner:
(1) Where a judge who has denied a request for access to records is the custodian,
the action shall be filed in the court having appellate jurisdiction to review the decisions
of t he judge denying ac cess. Upon or der issued by t he ap pellate court, t he judge
denying ac cess to records s hall file a sealed copy 0 f the requested records with the
appellate court.
(2) All other actions under this rule shall be filed in the circuit court of the circuit in
which such denial of access occurs.
(i) Procedure. Requests and responses to requests for access to records under this
rule shall be made in a reasonable manner.
(1) Requests for access to records shall be in writing and s hall be directed to the
custodian. The request shall pr ovide sufficient specificity to ena ble t he custodian to
identify t he requested records. T he reason f or the request i s not required t 0 be
disclosed.
(2) The custodian shall be solely responsible for providing access to records of the
custodian's entity. T he custodian shall det ermine whether t he requested record i s
subject to this rule and, if so, whether the record or portions of the record are exempt
from disclosure. The custodian shall determine the form in which the record is provided.
If the request is denied, the custodian shall state in writing the basis for the denial.
(3) Fees for copies of records in all entities in the judicial branch of government,
except for copies of court records, shall be the same as those provided in section
119.07, Florida Statutes (2001).
F. SECTION 11.0431, FLORIDA STATUTES - LEGISLATIVE RECORDS;
EXEMPTIONS FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
11.0431 Legislative records; intent of legislation; exemption from public
disclosure.--
(1) It is the policy of the Legislature that every person has the right to inspect and
copy records of the Senate and the House of Representatives received in connection
with the official business of the Legislature as provided for by the constitution of this
state. To that end, public records shall be open to personal inspection and copying at
reasonable times except when specific public necessity justifies that public records be
exempt from such inspection and copying.
(2) The following public records are exempt from inspection and copying:
(a) Records, or information contained therein, held by the legislative branch of
government which, if held by an agency as defined in s. 119.011, or any other unit of
government, would be confidential or exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), or
otherwise exempt from public disclosure, and records or information of the same type
held by the Legislature.
(b) A formal complaint about a member or officer of the Legislature or about a
lobbyist and the records relating to the complaint, until the complaint is dismissed, a
determination as to probable cause has been made, a determination that there are
sufficient grounds for review has been made and no probable cause panel is to be
appointed, or the respondent has requested in writing that the President of the Senate
or the Speaker of the House of Representatives make public the complaint or other
records relating to the complaint, whichever occurs first.
(c) A legislatively produced draft, and a legislative request for a draft, of a bill,
resolution, memorial, or legislative rule, and an amendment thereto, which is not
provided to any person other than the member or members who requested the draft, an
employee of the Legislature, a member of the Legislature who is a supervisor of the
legislative employee, a contract employee or consultant retained by the Legislature, or
an officer of the Legislature.
(d) A draft of a bill analysis or fiscal note until the bill analysis or fiscal note is
provided to a person other than an employee of the Legislature, a contract employee or
consultant retained by the Legislature, or an officer of the Legislature.
(e) A draft, and a request for a draft, of a reapportionment plan or redistricting plan
and an amendment thereto. Any supporting documents associated with such plan or
amendment until a bill implementing the plan, or the amendment, is filed.
(f) Records prepared for or used in executive sessions of the Senate until 10 years
after the date on which the executive session was held.
(g) Portions of records of former legislative investigating committees whose records
are sealed or confidential as of June 30, 1993, which may reveal the identity of any
witness, any person who was a subject of the inquiry, or any person referred to in
testimony, documents, or evidence retained in the committee's records; however, this
exemption does not apply to a member of the committee, its staff, or any public official
who was not a subject of the inquiry.
(h) Requests by members for an advisory opinion concerning the application of the
rules of either house pertaining to ethics, unless the member requesting the opinion
authorizes in writing the release of such information. All advisory opinions shall be open
to inspection except that the identity of the member shall not be disclosed in the opinion
unless the member requesting the opinion authorizes in writing the release of such
information.
(i) Portions of correspondence held by the legislative branch which, if disclosed,
would reveal: information otherwise exempt from disclosure by law; an individual's
medical treatment, history, or condition; the identity or location of an individual if there is
a substantial likelihood that releasing such information would jeopardize the health or
safety of that individual; or information regarding physical abuse, child abuse, spouse
abuse, or abuse of the elderly.
(3) Any record created prior to July 1, 1993, which was not available to the public
from the house, commission, committee, or office of the legislative branch that created
the record, is exempt from inspection and copying until July 1, 1993. Prior to July 1,
1993, the presiding officer of each house shall determine which records held by that
house should remain exempt from inspection and copying. The presiding officers of
both houses shall jointly determine which records held by joint committees should
remain exempt from inspection and copying. No later than July 1, 1993, the presiding
officers shall publish a list of records that remain exempt from inspection and copying.
(4) For purposes of this section, "public record" means all documents, papers,
letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, or other material,
regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or
ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by the legislative
branch.
(5) Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the authority of each house of the
Legislature to adopt rules pursuant to Art. I, s. 24 of the State Constitution.
G. TABLE OF CASES (GOVERNMENT- IN-THE-SUNSHINE LAW AND THE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT)
(s) denotes case cited in Part I, Sunshine Law
(pr) denotes case cited in Part II, Public Records Act
Alexis v. State, 732 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (pr)
Alice P. v. Miami Daily News, Inc., 440 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 467 So. 2d 697
(Fla. 1985) (pr)
Allstate Floridian Ins. Co. v. Office of Ins. Regulation, 981 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review denied,
987 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2008) (pr)
Alston v. City of Riviera Beach, 882 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Alterra Healthcare Corporation v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
Alvarez v. Reno, 587 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (pr)
Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 723 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 1998) (s),(pr)
Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 853 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
Arbelaez v. State, 775 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Areizaga v. Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough County, 935 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006),
review denied, 958 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 2007) (pr)
Askew v. City of Ocala, 348 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1977) (5)
Atkins v. State, 663 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1995) (pr)
Atwell v. Sacred Heart Hospital of Pensacola, 520 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 1988) (pr)
B & S Utilities, Inc. v. Baskerville-Donovan, Inc. 988 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review denied, 4 So.
3d 1220 (Fla. 2009), review denied, 4 So. 3d 1220 (Fla. 2009) (pr)
B.B. v. Department of Children and Family Services, 731 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (pr)
Baker v. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 937 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 4th DCA
2006), review denied, 954 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2007) (5)
Baker v. Eckerd Corporation, 697 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (pr)
Baker County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, Inc., 870 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (5),
(pr)
B.M.Z. Corporation v. City of Oakland Park, 415 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (5)
Barfield v. City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department, 639 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied,
649 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 1994) (pr)
Barfield v. City of West Palm Beach, No. 94-2141-AC (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. May 6,1994) (5)
Barfield v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, No. 93-1701 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. May 19, 1994) (pr)
Barfield v. Orange County, No. C192-5913 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. August 4, 1992) (pr)
Barfield v. Town of Eatonville, 675 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (pr)
Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, 531 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 1988) (5), (pr)
Bay County School Board v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 382 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA
1980) (pr)
Baynard v. City of Chief/and, Florida, No. 38-2002-CA-00078 (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. July 8, 2003) (5)
BDO Seidman v. Banco Espirito Santo International, Ltd., 34 F.L.W. D739 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (5)
Bennett v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (5)
Bent v. State, No. 4D1 0-2726 (Fla. 4th DCA filed September 29, 2010) (pr)
Bevan v. Wanicka, 505 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
Bigelow v. Howze, 291 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (5)
Bill of Rights, Inc. v. City of New Smyrna Beach, No. 2009-20218-CINS (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. April 8, 2010)
(pr)
Blackford v. School Board of Orange County, 375 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979) (5)
Bland v. Jackson County, 514 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (5)
Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.
2d 67 (Fla. 1986) (pr)
Board of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (pr)
Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County v. D.B., 784 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (pr)
Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County v. Webber, 658 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (5)
Board of Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1969) (5)
Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 3d DCA
1998), review denied, 729 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Borreca v. Fasi, 369 F. Supp. 906 (D. Hawaii 1974) (5)
Boyles v. Mid-Florida Television Corp., 431 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), approved, 467 So. 2d 282
(Fla. 1985) (pr)
Brayshaw v. City of Tallahassee, Fla., 709 F. Supp. 2d 1244 (N. D. Fla. 2010) (pr)
Broward County v. Conner, 660 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), review denied, 669 So. 2d 250 (Fla.
1996) (5)
Brown v. City of Lauderhill, 654 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (5)
Browning v. Walton, 351 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (pr)
Bruckner v. City of Dania Beach, 823 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (5)
Brunson v. Dade County School Board, 525 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (pr)
Bryan v. State, 753 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Buchanan v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 206 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), modified, 230 So.
2d 9 (Fla. 1969) (pr)
Bundy v. State, 455 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1984), cert. denied, 106 S. Ct. 1958 (1986) (5)
Butterworth v. Smith, 110 S.Ct. 1376 (1990) (5), (pr)
Buxton v. City of Plant City, Florida, 871 F.2d 1037 (11 th Cir. 1989) (pr)
Campus Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), review denied, 848 So.
2d 1153 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973) (5), (pr)
Cannon v. City of West Palm Beach, 250 F. 3d 1299 (11 th Cir. 2001) (pr)
Cantanese v. Ceros-Livingston, 599 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), review denied, 613 So. 2d 2 (Fla.
1992) (pr)
Cape Coral Medical Center, Inc. v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 390 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 2d DCA
1980) (5)
Cape Publications, Inc. v. City of Palm Bay, 473 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (5)
Cape Publications, Inc. v. Hitchner, 549 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 1989), appeal dismissed, 110 S.Ct. 296 (1989)
(pr)
Carden v. Chief of Police, 696 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (pr)
Caswell v. Manhattan Fire & Marine Insurance Company, 399 F.2d 417 (5th Cir. 1968) (pr)
Cebrian By and Through Cebrian v. Klein, 614 SO.2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (pr)
Chandler v. School Board of Polk County, No. 2008CA-004389 (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. October 9, 2008) (pr)
Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, 698 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (pr)
Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27,
1997) (pr)
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company v. General Electric Company, 854 F.2d 900 (6th Cir. 1988), cert.
denied, 109 S. Ct. 1171 (1989) (5)
Citizens for a Better Royal Palm Beach, Inc. v. Village of Royal Palm Beach, No. CL 91-14417 AA (Fla.
15th Cir. Ct. May 14, 1992) (5)
City of Delray Beach v. Barfield, 579 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (pr)
City of Dunnellon v. Aran, 662 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (5)
City of Fort Myers v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 514 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (5)
City of Gainesville v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Company, No. 96-3425-CA (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. October 28,
1996) (pr)
City of Gainesville v. State ex reI. International Association of Fire Fighters Local No. 2157, 298 So. 2d
478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (pr)
City of Hallandale v. Rayel Corporation, 313 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cause dismissed sua
sponte, 322 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1975) (5)
City of Hollywood v. Hakanson, 866 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (5)
City of Miami v. Post-Newsweek Stations Florida, Inc., 837 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), review
dismissed, 863 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
City of Miami v. Metropolitan Dade County, 745 F. Supp. 683 (S. D. Fla. 1990) (pr)
City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971) (5)
City of Miami Beach v. DeLapp, 472 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (pr)
City of Miami Beach v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 937 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (pr)
City of North Miami v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 468 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 493 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 1986) (pr)
City of Pinellas Park v. Times Publishing Company, No. 00-008234CI-19 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 3,
2001) (pr)
City of Riviera Beach v. Barfield, 642 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192
(Fla. 1995) (pr)
City of Sf. Petersburg v. Romine ex reI. Dillinger, 719 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (pr)
City of Sf. Petersburg v. Sf. Petersburg Junior College, No. 93-000421 0-CI-13 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 3,
1994) (pr)
City of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (5)
City of Tarpon Springs v. Garrigan, 510 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
Clein v. State, 52 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 1951) (5)
Coconut Grove Playhouse, Inc. v. Knight-Ridder, Inc., 935 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (pr)
Coleman v. Austin, 521 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (pr)
Cone & Graham Inc. v. State of Florida, No. 97-4047 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. October 7, 1997) (pr)
Cooper v. Dillon, 403 F. 3d 1208 (11 th Cir. 2005) (pr)
County of Volusia v. Emergency Communications Network, Inc., No. 5D09-3417 (Fla. 5th DCA July 23,
2010) (pr)
Coventry First, LLC v. Office of Insurance Regulation, 30 So. 3d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (pr)
Cox Broadcasting Corporation v. Cohn, 95 S.Ct. 1029 (1975) (pr)
Critical Intervention Services, Inc. v. City of Clearwater, 908 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Cruger v. Love, 599 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. v. Miami-Dade County, 899 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (pr)
Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (pr)
Dade Aviation Consultants v. Knight Ridder, Inc., 800 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (pr)
Daniels v. Bryson, 548 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (pr)
Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 877 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (5)
Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 988 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), review denied, 6 So. 3d 51 (Fla.
2009) (5)
Davis v. Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 480 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 488
So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1986), appeal after remand, 519 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (pr)
Deerfield Beach Publishing, Inc. v. Robb, 530 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (5)
Department of Children and Family Services v. Florida Statewide Advocacy Council, 884 So. 2d 1162
(Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (pr)
Department of Health v. Grinberg, 795 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (pr)
Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Company, 582 So. 2d 725
(Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (pr)
Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Martin, 574 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (pr)
Department of Professional Regulation v. Spiva, 478 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (pr)
Dickerson v. Hayes, 543 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (pr)
Doe v. State, 901 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (pr)
Donner v. Edelstein, 415 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (pr)
Dore v. Sliger, No. 90-1850 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. July 11, 1990) (5)
Douglas v. Michel, 410 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982),questions answered and approved, 464 So. 2d
545 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Downs v. Austin, 522 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (pr)
Downs v. Austin, 559 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 574 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1990) (pr)
Edelstein v. Donner, 450 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), approved, 471 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Evergreen the Tree Treasurers of Charlotte County, Inc. v. Charlotte County Board of County
Commissioners, 810 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (5)
Fadjo v. Coon, 633 F.2d 1172 (5th Cir. 1981) (pr)
Finch v. Seminole County School Board, 995 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (5)
Florida Bar v. Committee, 916 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 2005) (5) (pr)
Florida Board of Bar Examiners Re: Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida Relating
to Admissions to the Bar, 676 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1996) (pr)
Florida Department of Children and Families v. Sun-Sentinel, Inc., 865 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2004) (pr)
Florida Department of Corrections v. Abril, 969 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2007) (pr)
Florida Department of Education v. Cooper, 858 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Florida Department of Education v. NYT Management Services, Inc., 895 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA
2005) (pr)
Florida Department of Revenue v. WHI Limited Partnership, 754 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (pr)
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (pr)
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, 520 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1988) (pr)
Florida Hospital Waterman v. Buster, 984 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2008) (pr)
Florida Institutional Legal Services v. Florida Department of Corrections, 579 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1st DCA
1991), review denied, 592 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 1991) (pr)
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority v. Board of County Commissioners, Monroe County, Florida, No. CA-K-
00-1170 (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. May 16, 2001) (5)
Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. Baranko, 407 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (5)
Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. Thomas, 364 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (5)
Florida Power & Light Company v. Public Service Commission, 31 So. 3d 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (pr)
Florida Publishing Company v. State, 706 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), review dismissed, 717 So. 2d
531 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Florida Society of Newspaper Editors, Inc. v. Florida Public Service Commission, 543 So. 2d 1262 (Fla.
1st DCA), review denied, 551 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1989) (5) (pr)
Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, No. 91-2108 (Fla.
2d Cir. Ct. September 20, 1991), per curiam affirmed, 606 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (pr)
Florida SugarCane League, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, No. 91-4218 (Fla.
2d Cir. Ct. June 5, 1992) (pr)
Forehand v. School Board of Gulf County, Florida, 600 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (5)
Forsberg v. Housing Authority of City of Miami Beach, 455 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1984) (pr)
Fox v. News-Press Publishing Co., Inc., 545 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (5) (pr)
Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance Company v. Magaha, 769 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 2000) (5)
Fraternal Order of Police, Consolidated Lodge 5-30, Inc. v. The Consolidated City of Jacksonville, No.
2000-4718-CA (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. December 21, 2001) (pr)
Freeman v. Times Publishing Company, 696 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (5)
Friend v. Friend, 866 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (pr)
Friedberg v. Town of Longboat Key, 504 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
Fuller v. State ex reI. O'Donnell, 17 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 1944) (pr)
Gadd v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 412 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 419 So. 2d
1197 (Fla. 1982) (pr)
Gannett Co., Inc. v. Goldtrap, 302 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (pr)
Garcia v. Walder Electronics, Inc., 563 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So. 2d 287 (Fla.
1990) (pr)
Garner v. Florida Commission on Ethics, 415 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), review denied, 424 So. 2d
761 (Fla. 1983) (pr)
Garrison v. Bailey, 4 So. 3d 683 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (pr)
Gateway Southeast Properties, Inc. v. Town of Medley, 14 F.L.W. Supp. 20a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. October
24, 2006) (5)
Gay v. State, 697 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (pr)
Gilliam v. State, 996 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (pr)
Gillum v. Times Publishing Company, No. 91-2689-CA (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. July 10, 1991) (pr)
Goosby v. State, Case No. GF05-(001122-001130,001135)-BA (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. December 22, 2006),
cert. denied, Case No. 2D07-281 (Fla. 2d DCA May 25, 2007) (5)
Grace v. Jenne, 855 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (pr)
Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 201 O),appeal pending, No. SC10-798 (5) (pr)
Grapski v. Machen, Case No. 01-2005-CA-4005 J (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. May 9, 2006), affirmed per curiam,
949 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (pr)
Greater Orlando Aviation Authority v. Nejame, 4 So. 3d 41 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)
Greenbarg v. Metropolitan Dade County Board of County Commissioners, 618 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 3d DCA
1993) (5)
Halifax Hospital Medical Center v. News-Journal Corporation, 724 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1999) (5) (pr)
Hall v. Liebling, 890 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (pr)
Harold v. Orange County, 668 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (pr)
Henderson v. Perez, 835 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (pr)
Henderson v. State, 745 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9, 1998) (pr)
Hill v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 701 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), review denied,
717 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Hillier v. City of Plantation, 935 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (pr)
Hillsborough County v. Buccaneers Stadium Limited Partnership, No. 99-0321 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. February
5, 1999), affirmed per curiam, 758 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (pr)
Hillsborough County v. Morris, 730 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (pr)
Hillsborough County A viation Authority v. Azzarelli Construction Company, 436 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 2d DCA
1983) (pr)
Homestead-Miami Speedway, LLC. v. City of Miami, 828 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (5)
Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (5)
Housing Authority of the City of Daytona Beach v. Gomillion, 639 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (pr)
IDS Properties, Inc. v. Town of Palm Beach, 279 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), certified question
answered sub nom., Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974) (5)
Indian River County Hospital District v. Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., 766 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA
2000) (5) (pr)
In re Adoption of H. Y. T., 458 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 1984) (5)
In re Advisory Opinion of the Governor, 334 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1976) (5)
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.420 and the Florida Rules of Appellate
Procedure, 31 So. 3d 756 (Fla. 2010) (pr)
In re Amendments to Fla. R. Jud. Admin., Public Access to Judicial Records, 608 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 1992)
(pr)
In re Amendments to Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.051, Public Access to Judicial Records, 651 So. 2d 1185 (Fla.
1995) (pr)
In re Grand Jury, Fall Term 1986, 528 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (5) (pr)
In re Grand Jury Investigation Spring Term 1988, 543 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 547 So.
2d 1210 (Fla. 1989) (pr)
In re: Guardianship of Cosio, 841 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (pr)
In re Interest of D.P., No. 97-4001 (Fla. 18th Cir. Ct. November 6, 1997) (pr)
In re Getty, 427 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (5)
In re Records of the Children's Advocacy Center of Southwest Florida Relating to Michele Fontanez, No.
06-DR-001850 (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. June 16, 2006) (pr)
In re Records of the Department of Children and Family Services, 873 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (pr)
In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
In re Subpoena to Testify Before Grand Jury Directed to Custodian of Records, 864 F.2d 1559 (11 th Cir.
1989) (5) (pr)
In the Interest of Gay, No. 94-8481 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. Juv. Div. December 30, 1994) (pr)
Jacksonville Television, Inc. v. Shorstein, 608 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (pr)
James, Hoyer, Newcomer, Smiljanich, & Yanchunis, P.A., v. Rodale, Inc., 41 SO.3d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA
2010) (pr)
James v. Loxahatchee Groves Water Control District, 820 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (pr)
Jennings v. Dade County, 589 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), review denied, 598 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1992)
(5)
Jennings v. State, 626 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
J.I. v. Department of Children and Families, 922 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (5)
Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Johnson v. Deluz, 875 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Johnson v. State, 769 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Jones v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 871 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), review denied, 886 So.
2d 227 (Fla. 2004) (pr)
Jones v. Heyman, 888 F.2d 1328 (11th Cir. 1989) (5)
Jordan v. Jenne, 938 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (5)
Jordan v. School Board of Broward County, 531 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (pr)
Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (5) (pr)
Keesler v. Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc., 32 So. 3d 659 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), appeal
pending, No. SC10-910 (Fla. May 14, 2010) (5)
Kever v. Gilliam, 886 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (pr)
Kight v. Dugger, 574 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1990) (pr)
Killearn Properties, Inc. v. City of Tallahassee, 366 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 378 So.
2d 343 (Fla. 1979) (5)
King v. State, 840 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
Knight Ridder, Inc. v. Dade A viation Consultants, 808 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (pr)
Knox v. District School Board of Brevard, 821 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (5)
Kovaleski v. State, 854 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), cause dismissed, 860 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
Krause v. Reno, 366 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (5)
Krischer v. D'Amato, 674 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
L.R. v. Department of State, Division of Archives, History and Records Management, 488 So. 2d 122 (Fla.
3d DCA 1986) (pr)
Lakeland Ledger Publishing Corporation v. School Board of Polk County, No. GC-G-91-3803 (Fla. 10th
Cir. Ct. November 21, 1991) (pr)
Lang v. Reedy Creek Improvement District, No. CJ-5546 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. October 2, 1995), affirmed per
curiam, 675 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (pr)
Langlois v. City of Deerfield Beach, Florida, 370 F. Supp. 2d 1233 (S.D. Fla. 2005) (pr)
Law and Information Services, Inc. v. City of Riviera Beach, 670 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (5)
Layton v. Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 676 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA
1996) (pr)
Leach-Wells v. City of Bradenton, 734 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (5)
Lee County v. Pierpont, 693 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), affirmed, 710 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 1998) (5)
Lee County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 634 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
(pr)
Lewis v. Schreiber, No. 92-8005(03) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. June 12, 1992), per curiam affirmed, 611 So. 2d
531 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (pr)
Lewis v. State, 958 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Lightbourne v. McCollum, 969 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 2007), cert. denied, 553 U.S. 1059 (2008) (pr)
Locke v. Hawkes, 595 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Lopez v. Singletary, 634 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Los Angeles Police Department v. United Reporting Publishing Corporation, 120 S.Ct. 483 (1999) (pr)
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 995 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (pr)
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, No. 502007CA007552XXXXMBAN (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. June 9, 2009),
appeal pending, No. 4D09-2703 (Fla. 4th DCA July 8, 2009) (5)
Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (5)
Mae Volen Senior Center, Inc. v. Area Agency on Aging, 978 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), review
denied, 1 So. 3d 172 (Fla. 2009) (pr) (5)
Malone v. City of Satellite Beach, No 94-1 0557-CA-D (Fla. 18th Cir. Ct. December 15, 1995), per curiam
affirmed, 687 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (pr)
Maraia v. State, 685 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (pr)
Mathis v. State, 722 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (pr)
Maxwell v. Pine Gas Corporation, 195 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967) (pr)
Mayer v. State, 523 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 529 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1988) (5)
Mazer v. Orange County, 811 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (pr)
McCoy Restaurants, Inc. v. City of Orlando, 392 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1980) (5)
McDougall v. Culver, 3 So. 3d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (5)
Media General Convergence, Inc. v. Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 840 So. 2d 1008 (Fla.
2003) (pr)
Media General Operation, Inc. v. Feeney, 849 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Media General Operations, Inc. v. State, 933 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (pr)
Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999) (5) (pr)
Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 784 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2001) (pr)
Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 927 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
(5) (pr)
Metropolitan Dade County v. San Pedro, 632 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (pr)
MHM Correctional Services, Inc. v. State, Department of Corrections, No. 2009 CA 2105 (Fla. 2d Jud. Cir.
June 10, 2009) (pr)
Miami-Dade County v. Professional Law Enforcement Association, 997 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
(pr)
Miami Herald Media Co. v. Sarnoff, 971 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (pr)
Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Gridley, 510 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S.Ct.1224
(1988) (5) (pr)
Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982) (5) (pr)
Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Micro de cision s, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review denied, 902 So. 2d 791 (Fla.
2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 746 (2005) (pr)
Mills v. Doyle, 407 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (pr)
Mills v. State, 684 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 1996) (pr)
Minasian v. State, 967 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (pr)
Mintus v. City of West Palm Beach, 711 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (pr)
Mitchell v. School Board of Leon County, 335 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976) (5)
Molina v. City of Miami, 837 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (5)
Mobile Press Register, Inc. v. Witt, 24 Med. L. Rptr. 2336, No. 95-06324 CACE (13) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct.
May 21, 2006) (pr)
Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (5)
Morris Communications Company, LLC v. State, 844 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 13 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (pr)
Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. Thomason, No. 16-2005-CA-7052-XXXX-MA (Fla. 4th Cir Ct. October
14, 2005) (pr)
Morris v. Whitehead, 588 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (pr)
Multimedia Holdings Corporation Inc. v CRSPE, Inc., No. 03-CA-3474-G (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. December 3,
2003) (pr)
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. The Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009),
review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (pr)
Natural Parents of J.B. v. Florida Department of Children and Family Services, 780 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2001)
(5)
Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985) (5)
Neumann v. Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association, 763 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
(pr)
New Times, Inc. v. Ross, No. 92-5795 CIV 25 (Fla. 11 th Cir. Ct. March 17, 1992) (pr)
New York Times Company v. PHH Mental Health Services, Inc., 616 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1993) (5), (pr)
New York Times Company v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, No. 03-46-CA (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct.
March 20, 2003) (pr)
News-Journal Corporation v. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc., 695 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997),
approved, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999) (5) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (5)
News-Press Publishing Company v. D'Alessandro, No. 96-2743-CA-RWP (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. April 24,
1996) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Gadd, 388 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Kaune, 511 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Lee County, Florida, 570 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (5)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. McDougall, No. 92-1193CA-WCM (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. February
26, 1992) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Sapp, 464 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 1977) (pr), (5)
News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Cox, 702 F. Supp. 891 (S.D. Fla. 1988) (5)
News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Palm Beach County, 517 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (pr)
News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029
(Fla. 1992) (5) (pr)
Nicolai v. Baldwin, 715 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (pr)
Nolan v. Integrated Real Estate Processing, LP, No. 3:08-cv-642-J-34HTS, 2009 WL 635799 (M.D. Fla.
March 11, 2009) (pr)
NYT Management Services, Inc. v. Florida Department of Revenue, Case No. 2006-CA-0896 (Fla. 2d Cir.
Ct. April 25, 2006) (pr)
Ocala Star Banner Corp. v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (pr)
Ocala Star-Banner v. State, 697 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (pr)
Occidental Chemical Company v. Mayo, 351 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1977) (5)
Office of the State Attorney for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida v. Gonzalez, 953 So. 2d 759 (Fla.
2d DCA 2007) (pr)
Orange County v. Florida Land Company, 450 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review denied, 458 So.
2d 273 (Fla. 1984) (pr)
Palm Beach Community College Foundation, Inc. v. WFTV, 611 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (pr)
Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher's Association v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 411 So.
2d 1375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (5)
Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v. Neumann, 796 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
(pr)
Palm Beach Daily News v. Terlizzese, No. CL-91-3954-AF (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. April 5, 1991) (pr)
Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Burk, 504 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S.Ct. 346 (1987) (5),
(pr)
Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., v. Doe, 460 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (5)
Parole Commission v. Lockett, 620 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 429 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (pr)
Patton v. State, 784 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Pinellas County School Board v. Suncam, Inc., 829 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (5)
Potts v. State, 869 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (pr)
Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen's Association, Local 1922-1, 652 So. 2d 1169
(Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (5)
Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. State, 510 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1987) (5)
Prison Health Services, Inc. v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 718 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2d DCA
1998), review denied, 727 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Pritchett v. State, 566 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 570 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1990) (5)
PuIs v. City of Port Sf. Lucie, 678 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
Putnam County Humane Society v. Woodward, 740 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (pr)
Quad-City Community News Service, Inc. v. Jebens, 334 F. Supp 8 (S.D. Iowa 1971) (5)
Rackleffv. Bishop, No. 89-235 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. March 5, 1990) (5)
Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (pr)
Ramese's, Inc. v. Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation, 954 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Rea v. Sansbury, 504 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1987) (pr)
Rechler v. Town of Manalapan, No. CL 94-2724 AD (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. November 21, 1994), affirmed, 674
So. 2d 789 (4th DCA), review denied, 684 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 1996) (pr)
Remia v. City of Sf. Petersburg Police Pension Board of Trustees, 14 F.L.W. Supp. 854a (Fla. 6th Jud.
Cir. July 17, 2007, cert denied, 996 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (pr)
Rhea v. City of Gainesville, 574 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (5)
Rhea v. School Board of Alachua County, 636 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (5)
Rine v. Imagitas, Inc., 590 F.3d 1215 (11th Cir. 2009) (pr)
Roberts v. Butterworth, 668 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1996) (pr))
Roberts v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 409 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 418
So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 1982) (pr)
Roberts v. Singletary, No. 96-603 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. July 28, 1997) (pr)
Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Rogers v. Hood, 906 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), review denied, 919 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 2005) (pr)
Roscow v. Abreu, No. 03-CA-1833 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. August 6, 2004) (5)
Rose v. D'Alessandro, 380 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1980) (pr)
Rowe v. City of Cocoa, Florida, 358 F.3d 800 (11th Cir. 2004) (5)
Rowe v. Pinellas Sports Authority, 461 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1984) (5)
Ruffv. School Board of Collier County, 426 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (5)
Salcines v. Tampa Television, 454 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (pr)
Salvador v. Fennelly, 593 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (pr)
Salvadore v. City of Stuart, No. 91-812 CA (Fla. 19th Cir. Ct. December 17, 1991) (pr)
Sarasota Herald- Tribune Company v. Community Health Corporation, Inc., 582 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA
1991) (pr)
Sarasota Herald- Tribune v. Florida Department of Children and Families, No. 2001-CA-002445 (Fla. 2d
Cir. Ct. April 8, 2002) (pr)
Sarasota Herald- Tribune Co. v. Sarasota County Sheriff's Office, No. 96-1026-CA-01 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct.
March 13, 1996) (pr)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune Company, Inc. v. Schaub, No. CA87-2949 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. July 20, 1988),
affirmed per curiam, 539 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (pr)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune v. State, 916 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Sarasota Herald- Tribune v. State, 924 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), review denied, 918 So. 2d 293 (Fla.
2005), pet. for cert. dismissed, 126 S. Ct. 1139 (2006) (pr)
Satz v. Blankenship, 407 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), review denied, 413 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 1982) (pr)
Satz v. Gore Newspapers Company, 395 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (pr)
School Board of Alachua County v. Rhea, 661 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), review denied, 670 So. 2d
939 (Fla. 1996) (5)
School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (5)
Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire Department, 352 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert.
denied, 358 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1978) (pr)
SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (5)
Scott v. Butterworth, 734 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Seigle v. Barry, 422 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), review denied, 431 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1983) (pr)
Seminole County, Florida v. Wood, 512 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586
(Fla. 1988) (pr)
Sentinel Communications Company v. School Board of Osceola County, No. C192-0045 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct.
April 3, 1992), Order Modifying Final Injunction (May 13, 1992) (5)
Sepro Corporation v. Department of Environmental Protection, 839 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003),
review denied sub nom., Crist v. Department of Environmental Protection, 911 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 2005) (pr)
Seta Corporation of Boca, Inc. v. Office of the Attorney General, 756 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
(pr)
Shea v. Cochran, 680 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaffer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980) (pr)
Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA
1997) (5)
Sipkema v. Reedy Creek Improvement District, No. C196-114 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. May 29, 1996), per curiam
affirmed, 697 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review dismissed, 699 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Sireci v. State, 587 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1500 (1992) (5)
Skeen v. D'Alessandro, 681 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (pr)
Smith v. State, 696 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (pr)
Smith & Williams, P.A. v. West Coast Regional Water Authority, 640 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (pr)
Smithwick v. Television 12 of Jacksonville, Inc., 730 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (pr)
Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company v. Beard, 597 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (pr)
Southern Coatings, Inc. v. City of Tamarac, 916 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (pr)
Southwestern Newspapers Corporation v. Curtis, 584 S.W.2d 362 (Texas App. 1979) (5)
Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc. v. Centrust Savings Bank, 535 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (5)
Stanfield v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 698 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (5)
Stanfield v. Salvation Army, 695 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (5), (pr)
State v. Adams, No. 91-175-CC (Fla. Sumter Co. Ct. July 15, 1992) (5)
State v. Allen, 14 F.L.W. Supp. 172a (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. November 2,2006) (pr)
State v. American Tobacco Company, No. CL 95-1466-AH (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. July 28, 1997) (pr)
State v. Bartholomew, No. 08-5656CF10A (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. August 7,2009) (pr)
State v. Bee Line Entertainment Partners Ltd., No. CIO 00-5358,28 Med.L.Rptr. 2592 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct.
October 25, 2000) (pr)
State v. Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
State v. Childers, No. 02-21939-MMC; 02-21940-MMB (Escambia Co. Ct. June 5, 2003), per curiam
affirmed, 886 SO.2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (5)
State v. City of Clearwater, 863 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
State v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Miami, Inc., 582 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (pr)
State v. Colby, No. MM96-317 A-XX (Fla. Highlands Co. Ct. May 23, 1996) (pr)
State v. Foster, 12 F.L.W. Supp. 1194a (Fla. Broward Co. Ct. September 26,2005) (5)
State v. Foster, 13 F.L.W. Supp. 385a (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. January 25,2006) (5)
State v. Globe Communications Corporation, 648 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1994) (pr)
State v. Gudinas, No. CR 94-7132 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. June 1, 1999) (pr)
State v. Johnson, 814 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
State v. Knight, 661 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (pr)
State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 1990) (pr)
State v. Natson, 661 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (pr)
State v. Spalding, 13 F. L.W. Supp. 627 (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. February 28, 2006) (pr)
State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (pr)
State v. Wright, 803 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377 (Fla.
1st DCA 1994) (pr)
State, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Krejci Company, Inc., 570 So. 2d 1322 (Fla.
2d DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1991) (pr)
State, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Kropf(, 445 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
(pr)
State, Department of Management Services v. Lewis, 653 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (5)
State ex reI. Christian v. Rudd, 302 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (5)
State ex reI. Clayton v. Board of Regents, 635 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 1994) (pr)
State ex reI. Cummer v. Pace, 159 So. 679 (Fla. 1935) (pr)
State ex reI. Davidson v. Couch, 156 So. 297 (Fla. 1934) (pr)
State ex reI. Davidson v. Couch, 158 So. 103 (Fla. 1934) (pr)
State ex reI. Davis v. McMillan, 38 So. 666 (Fla. 1905) (pr)
State ex reI. Miami Herald Publishing Company v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 1977) (5) (pr)
State ex reI. Veale v. City of Boca Raton, 353 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 360 So. 2d
1247 (Fla. 1978) (pr)
Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v.Austin, 605
So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Sullivan v. City of New Port Richey, No. 86-1129 CA (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. May 22, 1987), affirmed, 529 So. 2d
1124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (pr)
Suncam, Inc. v. Worrall, No. C197-3385 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. May 9, 1997) (5)
Sun-Sentinel Company v. City of Hallandale, No. 95-13528(05) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. October 11, 1995) (pr)
Sun-Sentinel, Inc. v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 815 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
(pr)
Tal-Mason v. Satz, 614 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 624 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Tallahassee Democrat, Inc. v. Florida Board of Regents, 314 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (pr)
Tampa Television, Inc. v. Dugger, 559 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (pr)
Tedesco v. State, 807 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (pr)
The Florida Bar, In re Advisory Opinion Concerning the Applicability of Ch. 119, F. S., 398 So. 2d 446
(Fla. 1981) (pr)
The Justice Coalition v. The First District Court of Appeal Judicial Nominating Commission, 823 So. 2d
185 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Acton, No. 99-8304 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. November 5, 1999) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Ake, 660 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1995) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. A.J., 626 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. City of Sf. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Corrections Corporation of America, No. 91-429 CA 01 (5th Cir. Ct. December 4,
1991), per curiam affirmed, 611 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Patterson, 451 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. State, 827 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Tampa General Hospital, No. 93-03362 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. May 27, 1993) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. State, 903 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Williams, 222 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969) (5)
Timoney v. City of Miami Civilian Investigative Panel, 917 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (pr)
Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied sub nom., Metropolitan Dade
County Transit Agency v. Sanchez, 426 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1983) (pr)
Tolar v. School Board of Liberty County, 398 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1981) (5)
Town of Manalapan v. Rechler, 674 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), review denied, 684 So. 2d 1353
(Fla. 1996) (pr)
Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974) (5) (pr)
Trepal v. State, 704 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Tribune Company v. Cannella, 438 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), reversed on other grounds, 458 So.
2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985)
(pr)
Tribune Company v. Hardee Memorial Hospital, No. CA-91-370 (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. August 19, 1991) (pr)
Tribune Company v. Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), pet. for rev. denied sub nom.,
Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987) (pr)
TSI Southeast, Inc. v. Royals, 588 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (5)
Turner v. Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), affirmed and remanded, 389 So. 2d 1181 (Fla.
1980) (5) (pr)
United Teachers of Dade v. Dade County School Board, No. 92-17803 (01) (Fla. 11 th Cir. Ct. November
30, 1992) (pr)
Valle v. State, 705 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 94 S.Ct. 1564 (1974) (pr)
Villarreal v. State, 687 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), review denied, 694 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 1997), cert.
denied, 118 S.Ct. 316 (1997) (pr)
Wagner v. Orange County, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979) (pr)
Wallace v. Guzman, 687 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (pr)
Walton v. Dugger, 634 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Weekly Planet v. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, 829 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (pr)
Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (pr)
Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (pr)
Weeks v. Golden, 846 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Wells v. Aramark Food Service Corporation, 888 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Wells v. Sarasota Herald Tribune Company, Inc., 546 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. Robbins, 625 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. School Board of Palm Beach County, No. CL 94-8549-AD (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. March 29,
1995), per curiam affirmed, 675 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. School Board of Seminole County, Florida, 874 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), review
denied, 892 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2004) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. Wilken, 675 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
White v. City of Fort Lauderdale, Case No. 08-60771-CIV, 2009 WL 1298353 (S.D. Fla. May 8,2009) (pr)
Wille v. McDaniel, 18 Med. L. Rptr. 2144, No. CL-91-154-AE (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. February 18, 1991) (pr)
Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla.
1991), appeal after remand, 619 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (pr)
Williams v. State, 741 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Winter v. Playa del Sol Inc. , 353 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (pr)
Wisner v. City of Tampa, 601 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (pr)
Wolfson v. State, 344 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977) (5)
Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983) (5)
Woodard v. State, 885 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Woodfaulk v. State, 935 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (pr)
Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), review denied, 786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2001) (pr)
Wootton v. Cook, 590 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (pr)
Yanke v. State, 588 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), review denied, 595 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1992), cert.
denied, 112 S.Ct. 1592 (1992) (pr)
Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (5)
Yeste v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 451 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 461 So. 2d
115 (Fla. 1984) (pr)
Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 735 So. 2d 1284 (Fla.
1999) (5)