Você está na página 1de 5

Nov 24, 2013 (via email) RE: Freedom of Information Request 202-13 Dear Donna, I have received your

email of Nov 22, stating that SD68 has been granted a deadline extension to Dec 17, 2013. It is both confusing and disappointing. First, this news comes only one business day prior to expecting fulfillment. Secondly, my initial request was made on Aug 1st and with this extension, it will have taken over 4.5 months to complete wow. It took three weeks for SD68 to even acknowledge my FOI request. It took a month to say the scope was too broad. I then followed your suggestions to narrow the scope (including date ranges, subject matter and defining correspondence to include electronic mail). Then, less than two weeks before the Sep 16th deadline, I received a letter stating that my request would cost an estimated $522.50. Why? Other requests were granted without charge and the correspondence requested is a matter of public record. I took this as an arbitrary stall tactic and if that was intended, it achieved its goal, since it took us until October 1st, to obtain the funds (which then pushed the deadline to Nov 25th). It is beyond disappointing that it takes 4.5 months to conduct a simple email search and then copy the results to a DVD. This is something that should take two or three days at most. (Maybe this request includes snail-mail letters, hand-written notes or other correspondence that take time to track down, I dont know. But Im betting 90% or more of this request involves easily searchable and saved email). I am confused because the extension letter mentions saving copy charges (which are set at an arbitrary and expensive $0.25 per page). Page copying isnt necessary with email. Email should stay in its native, electronic form (as we are living in the 21st century, this should be tacitly understood, though we also requested this, upon payment). Printing email onto paper is wasteful, unnecessary, time-consuming and not what we expect or want. We should all strive to save energy and paper. Releasing the records in stages is a condition of the extension youve been granted and that condition says nothing about reviewing documents. That doesnt work for me. Instead, just let me know when the first batch of FOI data is ready for pick up. For clarification, I have attached a copy of the final, narrowed version of my FOI request. Thanks for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, Scott Kimler

Attachments: (a) Final, narrowed FOI request; (b) SD68 Nov 22nd correspondence.

M A I L

S C O T T @ S a v e C e d a r S c h o o l s . O R G

FOIPOP-202-13
1) Any and all correspondence** between Dave Hutchinson and Doug Player related to the Enhanced Facilities for Learning Plan during the period December 1, 2012 to present. 2) Any and all correspondence** between senior administrative staff and Doug Player related to the Enhanced Facilities for Learning Plan during the period December 1, 2012 to present. 3) Any and all correspondence** between trustees and Doug Player related to the Enhanced Facilities for Learning Plan during the period December 1, 2012 to present. ** "all correspondence" includes, but is not limited to, electronic mail (email), letters sent via Canada Post (snail mail), registered letters, materials sent by overnight delivery, facsimiles (FAXs), hand-written notes, post-it notes, computer file attachments, maps, taped messages, video or any other messages corresponded by any modern methods of communication.

M A I L

S C O T T @ S a v e C e d a r S c h o o l s . O R G

From the Communications and the Information and Privacy Office

November 22, 2013 Scott Kimler Via email RE: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST: 202-13 Dear Mr. Kimler: I am writing to advise you that the district has requested and received a time extension from the Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner for your freedom of information request. This extension was granted yesterday, and has been extended until December 17, 2013. The reason for requesting a time extension fell under 10(1)(b) Volume of Records under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA). For your request and the two related requests, we were required to search almost 500,000 emails. Due to the volume of documents requested, it became clear that I would not be able to process this request and carry out my regular duties as Communications Director. Therefore, in order to complete this request, the district hired a consultant to review the more than 5,000 pages of responsive records. Your request alone is expected to be about 1,500 pages. The records have been located and we are in the process of reviewing and processing them. Our consultant is working on this project full time. So as not to delay any longer than necessary, we propose to release the records in stages. Also, to reduce the copying cost to you, we would like to suggest that once the records are ready, you come to our office to review the records and mark the ones you wish to have copied. I will be back in touch with you soon to discuss this process. The decision letter from the Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner is attached. Sincerely,

Donna Reimer Director of Communications/ Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator Attachment

395 Wakesiah Avenue, Nanaimo, BC V9R 3K6 | Phone 250 741 5219 | Fax 250 741 5292 | communications@sd68.bc.ca | www.sd68.bc.ca

OFFICE OF THE

INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER


for British Columbia

Protecting privacy. Promoting transparency.

BY E-MAIL: Donna.Reimer@sd68.bc.ca November 21, 2013 Donna Reimer Information & Privacy Coordinator School District 68 (Nanaimo Ladysmith) 395 Wakesiah Avenue NANAIMO BC V9R 3K6 Dear Donna Reimer: Re: Request Time Extension (s.10) School District 68 (Nanaimo-Ladysmith) Files 200-13, 201-13, 202-13; OIPC Files F13-55414, F13-55415, F13-55416 This letter responds to a Time Extension Application Form submitted to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (this office) in which School District 68 (SD 68) requests permission for a time extension in order to respond to three requests made under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA). The requests are as follows:
200-13 Correspondence among trustees, senior administrative staff and architects regarding the Enhanced Facilities for Learning Plan December 1, 2013 to June 26, 2013 or July 31, 2013 201-13 Correspondence among senior administration, trustees, senior administrative staff, Ministry of Education, Snuneymuxw First Nation and Nanaimo Regional District regarding the Enhanced Facilities for Learning Plan December 1, 2012 to July 31, 2013 202-13 Correspondence among the Superintendent, outside consultant, senior administration and trustees regarding the Enhanced Facilities for Learning Plan December 1, 2012 to July 31, 2013

Under section 49 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the Commissioner has delegated to me her authority to make a decision under section 10(2). I have reviewed the chronology provided by SD 68 and I find that SD 68s current due date is November 26, 2013. SD 68 is now requesting permission to take a 15-day time extension on the basis of section 10(1)(b) of FIPPA. The relevant sections of FIPPA provide:
10(1) The Head of a public body may extend the time for responding to a request for up to 30 days if one or more of the following apply: ...
Mail: PO Box 9038, Stn Prov Govt, Victoria BC V8W 9A4 Location: 4th Floor, 947 Fort Street, Victoria BC T. 250 387 5629 F. 250 387 1696 Toll free through Enquiry BC 800 663 7867 or 604 660 2421 (Vancouver) W. www.oipc.bc.ca

Page 2 of 2

(b) a large number of records are requested or must be searched and meeting the time limit would unreasonably interfere with the operations of the public body; 10(2) In addition to the authority under subsection (1), with the permission of the commissioner, the head of a public body may extend the time for responding to a request as follows: (a) if one or more of the circumstances described in subsection (1)(a) to (d) apply, for a period of longer than the 30 days permitted under that subsection

Upon careful review of the information provided, I find that SD 68 has provided sufficient evidence to grant a 15-day time extension on the basis of section 10(1)(b) of FIPPA. The new deadline of December 17, 2013 is approved with the following terms: 1. SD 68 must immediately notify the applicant of this time extension, provide reasons for the extension, and tell the applicant when a response can be expected. We recommend that a copy of this decision letter be sent to the applicant. SD 68 must respond to the applicant as soon as possible with the responsive records. SD 68 should release reviewed records to the applicant in stages as the review progresses. SD 68 should not delay releasing records merely to permit a "bulk release" unless it is absolutely necessary for a global consideration of the disclosure package.

2. 3.

If you have any questions about this letter, please call me at (250) 356-7899.

Sincerely,

Morag Ross Intake Officer