NJ Seal
State of NJ - Government Records Council Email Grc

2004-167

- Final Decision
- Findings and Recommendations of the Executive Director

Final Decision

Mr. Chaka Kwanzaa
   Complainant
      v.
Department of Corrections
   Custodian of Record

Complaint No. 2004-167

 

At its March 10, 2005 public meeting, the Government Records Council (“Council”) considered the March 1, 2005 Findings and Recommendations of the Executive Director and all related documentation submitted by the parties. The Council voted unanimously to adopt the entirety of said findings and recommendations with the provision that the Council does not have jurisdiction over the accuracy of the documents content.  The Council, therefore, dismisses the case on the basis of:

  1. The requested records have been disclosed and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-7(b) the Council does not have jurisdiction over the accuracy of the documents content.
  2. While the Custodian did violate N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) by not promptly complying with the records request, the Custodian’s actions does not rise to a level of a knowing and willful violation of OPRA under the totality of the circumstances.

This is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey within forty-five (45) days. Information about the appeals process can be obtained from the Appellate Division Clerk’s Office, Hughes Justice Complex, 25 W. Market St., PO Box 006, Trenton, NJ 08625-0006.

Final Decision Rendered by the
Government Records Council
On The 10th Day of March, 2005

Vincent P. Maltese, Chairman
Government Records Council

I attest the foregoing is a true and accurate record of the Government Records Council.

Diane Schonyers
Government Records Council

Return to Top

Findings and Recommendations of the Executive Director

Chaka Kwanzaa                                               GRC Complaint No. 2004-167
Complainant
v.
Department of Corrections
Custodian of Records

Records Requested:A copy of my NJ State term to include - work credits, minimum credits, commutation credit, lost commutation credits, restored commutation credits and jail credits.
Request Made:   September 3, 2004
Response Made: September 8, 2004
Custodian:   Kathleen Wiechnik
GRC Complaint filed: October 21, 2004

Background

September 3, 2004

Written Open Public Records Act (OPRA) Request Complainant seeks a copy of his NJ State term.

September 8, 2004

Custodian’s letter to the Complainant, requesting that the Complainant sign the form and return it for processing.

October 13, 2004

Request form signed and resubmitted by the Complainant.

October 21, 2004

Denial of Access Complaint Form submitted by Complainant that stated he did not receive a response from his October 13, 2004 request for records.

October 26, 2004

Offer of mediation sent to the Complainant and the Custodian      

November 16, 2004

Request for Statement of Information sent to the Custodian

November 23, 2004

Statement of Information submitted by Custodian’s counsel with a certification from the Custodian.

The Custodian certified that, “On October 21, 2004, Kwanzaa was provided with a copy of the first age of his fact sheet, which indicates his work credits, minimum credits, commutation credits, lost commutation credits, restored commutation credits and jail credits.”

December 3, 2004

Rebuttal to Statement of Information submitted by Complainant stating that he does not believe the information in the report that was given to him is factual.

Analysis

Whether the Government Records Council has jurisdiction over content of records disclosed pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-7(b):

“The Government Records Council shall…receive, hear, review and adjudicate a complaint filed by any person concerning a denial of access to a government record by a records custodian…”

The Complainant has stated that he does not consider the records to be factual. However the council does not oversee the content of documentation. The Council does oversee the disclosure and non-disclosure of documents. In this case, the Complainant has received the requested document and the Custodian has certified that the requested record has been released.

The document requested has been disclosed to the Complainant. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-7(b), the content of the document is not in the Council’s jurisdiction. Since the requested record has been disclosed, this portion of the complaint should be dismissed.

WHETHER the Custodian violated N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) by not promptly complying with the records request:

A custodian shall promptly comply with a request to inspect, examine, copy, or provide a copy of a government record.

The Custodian’s original response to the Complainant was that he needed to sign the OPRA request form and then his request would be processed. However, OPRA provides that a request may be made anonymously. By requesting that the Complainant supply a signature, the Custodian delayed the request and therefore violated N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g).

While the Custodian did violate N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g), by delaying the processing of the request, it does not rise to a level of a knowing and willful violation of N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq. under the totality of the circumstances. Therefore, this matter should be dismissed.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The Executive Director respectfully recommends that the Council dismiss this case on the basis that:

The requested records have been disclosed and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-7(b) the Council does not have jurisdiction over the content of the document.

  1. While the Custodian did violate N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) by not promptly complying with the records request, the Custodian’s actions does not rise to a level of a knowing and willful violation of OPRA under the totality of the circumstances.

Prepared By: 

Approved By:
Paul F. Dice
Executive Director
Government Records Council

March 1, 2005

Return to Top