Doolan v. Board of Cooperative Educational Services, 48 N.Y.2d 341 (1979)
The Freedom of Information Law mandates the disclosure of salary and fringe benefit data compiled by one government agency for another, unless a specific statutory exception applies.
Summary
This case concerns a request under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) for salary data compiled by the Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES). The petitioner, Doolan, sought access to a BOCES report detailing salary and fringe benefits for teachers and administrators. BOCES denied the request, arguing the report was a subscription service for member school districts only. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s decision, holding that FOIL requires disclosure of the requested data, as no specific exemption applied and the purpose of FOIL is to ensure governmental transparency.
Facts
The Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) annually prepares a “Negotiation Information Services Salary Study for Administrators,” compiling salary and fringe benefit data for educational personnel in Suffolk County. This report is part of a subscription service provided to member school districts. Doolan, a resident of Suffolk County and president-elect of a school administrators association, requested copies of the report for several years. BOCES denied the request, stating it was exclusively available to subscribing member districts.
Procedural History
Doolan appealed the denial pursuant to the Public Officers Law. After failing to receive a timely response, Doolan initiated an Article 78 proceeding. Special Term ruled in favor of Doolan, ordering disclosure upon payment of transcription costs. The Appellate Division reversed, holding that a subscription-based report falls outside FOIL’s purview. The New York Court of Appeals then reversed the Appellate Division’s decision.
Issue(s)
Whether the Freedom of Information Law excepts from its disclosure requirements salary and fringe benefit data compiled by one agency for the use and information of another, when the agency provides such data on a subscription basis to specific members.
Holding
No, because the Freedom of Information Law mandates broad access to government records, and none of the enumerated exceptions applied to the requested salary data.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals emphasized that the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) establishes a broad right of public access to government records. The court stated: “The legislature therefore declares that government is the public’s business and that the public, individually and collectively and represented by a free press, should have access to the records of government in accordance with the provisions of this article.” The Court reasoned that nothing in FOIL limits its application to agencies directly involved in policy decisions or determinations. The statute’s language, particularly the reference to “statistical or factual tabulations or data” in the exception for inter-agency materials, demonstrates an intent to include data collected by one agency for another. The Court rejected BOCES’ argument that the Education Law restricted access to the report to only those school districts that paid for the service. The Court noted that Doolan was not a school district attempting to circumvent the Education Law’s restrictions. BOCES failed to demonstrate that disclosing the salary data would impair present or imminent collective bargaining negotiations, as required to fall under an exception to FOIL. The Court found that BOCES’ public policy argument, that disclosure would constitute an unlawful contribution of public funds, was without merit, arguing that meeting the public’s right to access to information is fulfillment of a government obligation, not a waste of public funds. The Court further explained that “[t]he public policy concerning governmental disclosure is fixed by the Freedom of Information Law; the common-law interest privilege cannot protect from disclosure materials which that law requires to be disclosed”.