The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutPRR 15-1796From: Chris O'Hare [mailto: chrisoharegulfstream @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 3:29 PM To: Bill Thrasher Subject: Second request for these records - Fwd: GS #454, #455, #456, #457, #458, #459, #460, #461, #462,#463,#464 Dear Custodian of Records, Forwarded herein for your reference is your long delayed response to 11 separate and individual requests I made to you over 13 months ago. I object to the length of time you have waited to respond to my requests. I also object to you ignoring the terms in which I made the original requests by ganging all 11 separate requests together for the purpose of providing a single response, something I specifically asked you not to do.. You previously responded separately to each of these 11 public record requests on December 26, 2013, the same day I made each request. Your response was always the same. Each time you stated, "Our staff will review your request within the next three business days, and we will promptly send you the appropriate response or an estimated cost to respond. " You again responded to these and other record requests by me on January 23, 2014. At that time you stated, "The Town will not proceed with further estimates to provide documents responsive to any of your outstanding requests until you pay a deposit of $792.54. " Now, over a year later, you have disregarded the terms of my original requests and provided a ganged response, apparently intended to overcharge me for the production of these records. I remind you that in each of my original request for these electronic records, I stated that: In order to be completely responsive to this Public Record Request, all electronic email records must be 'forwarded" to my email address in order to preserve all electronic meta data and other less obvious Public Record portions of the email record typically lost using "copy and paste" reproduction methods. This is a singular and separate Public Record Request. Please respond individually to this request. Please do not include your response to this Public Record Request into any collective response you may make to other Public Record Requests. You will please note that in my original requests I also asked you to: Please be sure to itemize any estimates so as to indicate the total number ofpages and/or records, as well as to distinguish the cost of labor and materials. But rather than itemizing your estimate so as to indicate the total number of records, you instead provide a PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST ESTIMATE WORKSHEET for each request that claims Ms. Avery spent 10 minutes reviewing the documents and needs 45 minutes to produce them. I note that each single request was examined individually by Ms. Kelley Avery. Ms. Avery recorded her examination results in a PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST ESTIMATE WORKSHEET. On this document Ms. Avery claims that in order to determine the estimate, she, "Looked through digital files to find responsive documents." Then Ms. Avery claims she spent 10 minutes reviewing those documents. From her review of the digital documents, Ms. Avery estimated she would need 45 minutes to produce these records. Coincidentally, each of the 11 separate requests require the same 10 minutes to review and the same 45 minutes to produce the records. Based on Ms. Avery's individual analysis of these 11 separate requests you require that I pay for 8.25 hours of administrative support in order to receive these records. I am troubled by all this for the following reasons: 1. Did the email accounts for each person contain the same quantity of records, otherwise how could the same amount of time be required for the production of an unequal number of records? Are these estimates therefore not accurate? 2. If Ms. Avery located the responsive records in 10 minutes, why will it require 45 minutes more to reproduce these digital records? Surely, once located, all that is required is a few key strokes to forward these email records to me as I originally requested. 3. By ganging my requests together you are requiring I pay for that portion of your production time which the legislature and courts have determined to be free. 4. You have previously made me believe that these records and others would not be provided to me until I paid you a deposit $792.54 for the first 10 minutes of production time for each outstanding request. Have you now changed that decision? Please answer my questions so I may better understand your estimate in order to decide how to proceed. Please provide the records I originally requested as I originally requested them. Please provide the record of your public record policy which was in effect on December 26, 2013, the day you received my original requests for these public records. Sincerely, chrisoharegulfstream @ gmail.com TOWN OF GULF STREAM PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Delivered via e-mail February 25, 2015 Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisoharegulfstream @gmail.com] Re: GS #1796 (Second request for these records - Fwd: GS #454, #455, #456, #457, #458, #459,#460,#461,#462,#463,#464) 1. Did the email accounts for each person contain the same quantity of records, otherwise how could the same amount of time be required for the production of an unequal number of records? Are these estimates therefore not accurate? 2. If Ms. Avery located the responsive records in 10 minutes, why will it require 45 minutes more to reproduce these digital records? Surely, once located, all that is required is a few key strokes to forward these email records to me as I originally requested. 3. By ganging my requests together you are requiring I pay for that portion of your production time which the legislature and courts have determined to be free. 4. You have previously made me believe that these records and others would not be provided to me until I paid you a deposit $792.54 for the first 10 minutes of production time for each outstanding request. Have you now changed that decision? 5. Please answer my questions so I may better understand your estimate in order to decide how to proceed. 6. Please provide the records I originally requested as I originally requested them. 7. Please provide the record of your public record policy which was in effect on December 26, 2013, the day you received my original requests for these public records. Dear Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisohare¢ulfstreamna gtnail.coml, The Town of Gulf Stream has received your public records requests dated February 5, 2015. If your request was received in writing, then the requests can be found at the following link http://www2.gulf-stream.org/WebLink8/0/doc/39220/Pagel.asvx. If your request was verbal, then the description of your public records request is set forth in the italics above. Please refer to the referenced number above with any future correspondence. For items 1 -5, pursuant to the public records laws, the duty of the Town of Gulf Stream is to provide access to or copies of public records at a reasonable time in reasonable conditions but only after receiving required payments. The Town of Gulf Stream is not required to give out information from these records nor give information about these records. For item 6, please see the previous letters at the following links: http://www2.gulf- stream. ore /WebLink8 /0 /doc/17938/PageLaspx, http://www2.gulf- stream. ore /WebLink8 /0 /doc /17943/Page1.aspx, http://www2.gulf- stream.org/WebLink8 /0 /doc /17945/Pagel.aspx, htty://www2.gulf- stream.org/WebLink8 /0 /doc /17948/PageLaspx, htty://www2.gulf- stream.org/WebLink8 /0 /doc /17939/Pagel.aspx, httv://www2.gulf- stream. org/ WebLink8 /0 /doc/l7946/Pagel.aspx, httv://www2.gulf- stream.org/WebLink8 /0 /doc /17942/Pagel.aspx, http://www2.gulf- stream. org /WebLink8 /0 /doc/l7944/Pagel.aspxx http://www2.gulf- stream.org/WebLink8 /0 /doc /17940/Pagel.aspx, http://www2.gulf- stream.org(WebLink8 stream.org/WebLink8 /0 /doc /17941/Pagel.asyx /0 /doc /17947/Pagel.aspx. and httv://www2.gulf- For item 7, no such record exists. We consider this matter closed. Sincerely, Town Clerk Custodian of the Records