MCPS Charging Parental Rights Group $18K to Fulfill Public Information Request

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support the MCPS position on curriculum, but they shouldn’t be using MPIA’s cost recovery provisions to deny access to public records by apparently coming up with the least efficient way to search for records. I can only assume they’re printing out every email from the listed individuals and having an 80-year-old with poor eyesight search through them manually. That’s the only way you could get 3 months of work from this.

They do this to everyone.

That doesn’t make it better.

It also doesn't make it worse. Are they specifically targeting this group that is afraid of books? No, they do it to everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow… MCPS sucks. In govt, we usually charge about $15 to $20.

That’s not true. We charge for time. We give an estimate. We work with people to narrow their requests. We give away a couple of free hours but after that you pay. And you pay in advance of the work being done.

You do, we don’t.

[Anonymous]

Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Absurd in that it covers their costs which seems fair to us taxpayers. I mean why should we shoulder the burden for these wacky requests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Private companies don't get FOIA'ed. What a stupid comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Private companies are subject to requests for records under state and federal open records laws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

The "parents coalition" isn't asking for a specific phrase that would be easy to search, though. It's asking for a very general phrase routinely used to refer to everything from lunch plans to PE requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

The "parents coalition" isn't asking for a specific phrase that would be easy to search, though. It's asking for a very general phrase routinely used to refer to everything from lunch plans to PE requirements.

I don't think it's her. She's been around the block a bunch of times with MCPS and the Maryland Public Information Act. I think it's a different group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Absurd in that it covers their costs which seems fair to us taxpayers. I mean why should we shoulder the burden for these wacky requests.

If you’ve ever gone through a search like this, you’d know there’s justification for it requiring 3 months of effort. The request is pretty limited in scope.

[Anonymous]

FOIA only applies to records held by the government and public agencies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Absurd in that it covers their costs which seems fair to us taxpayers. I mean why should we shoulder the burden for these wacky requests.

If you’ve ever gone through a search like this, you’d know there’s justification for it requiring 3 months of effort. The request is pretty limited in scope.

Definitely and they should cover the costs, not the taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Private companies don't get FOIA'ed. What a stupid comment.

It’s called discovery. In litigation, uses the same types of search parameters as a FOIA. I’ve done both.

Again, the charges are excessive. Unless they are using tech from 1990.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Absurd in that it covers their costs which seems fair to us taxpayers. I mean why should we shoulder the burden for these wacky requests.

If you’ve ever gone through a search like this, you’d know there’s justification for it requiring 3 months of effort. The request is pretty limited in scope.

Definitely and they should cover the costs, not the taxpayers.

Pp, I forgot the “not” word in my last post. Sure, make them pay for the search, but there’s no rational justification for making this 3 months worth of work. This should take 10 minutes to run and search, and 1-2 minutes per email returned to process them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Private companies don't get FOIA'ed. What a stupid comment.

It’s called discovery. In litigation, uses the same types of search parameters as a FOIA. I’ve done both.

Again, the charges are excessive. Unless they are using tech from 1990.

Is there any legal recourse if an organization chooses to make the search process artificially slow and expensive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the records say. The price is absurd given how much tech is used for these types of searches. As a former GC, I can tell you private companies charge less for larger searches over longer periods of time.

Private companies don't get FOIA'ed. What a stupid comment.

It’s called discovery. In litigation, uses the same types of search parameters as a FOIA. I’ve done both.

Again, the charges are excessive. Unless they are using tech from 1990.

Is there any legal recourse if an organization chooses to make the search process artificially slow and expensive?

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/opengov%20documents/pia_manual_printable.pdf