Customer Name:
Peter Watson
| I am requesting the following information in accordance with the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for the time period of May 4| 2021 through the present day. 1. All communications that board members Waters| James and Levinthal have exchanged with each other. This includes emails sent to or from their district and personal accounts (along with any attachments)| text messages| social media posts and written documents. These communications can exclude any that were sent or copied to any or all of the other four board members (Walker| Hanson| Held or Hirsman). 2. All communications that board members Waters| James and/or Levinthal have exchanged with the following individuals: Yvonne Mayer| Kim Notaro| Richard Morton| Linda Burke| Kari Galassi| Meeta Patel| Mridu Garg| Polly Ascher| Michelle Ptak| Kara Kuo| David Giuliani| Lisa Fernandez or Scott Hamp. This includes emails sent to or from Mr. Waters| Ms. James and/or Ms. Levinthal via their district and personal accounts (along with any attachments)| text messages| social media posts and written documents. These communications can exclude any that were sent or copied to any or all of the other four board members (Walker| Hanson| Held or Hirsman). Key words or phrases that can be used to help narrow the number of records that might be responsive to this portion of the request include: science| math| curriculum or curriculum alignment| equity| grading| homecoming| Freedom of Information Act or FOIA| Superintendent Tammy Prentiss/Superintendent Prentiss/Tammy Prentiss| Dr. Chris Covino/Dr. Covino/Chris Covino| contracts| HLERK or Hodges| Loizzi| Eisenhammer| Rodick & Kohn| Saxman| Anew| Panorama or District 181. I realize this part of the request may present a gray area where members Waters| James and/or Levinthal will assert that they exchanged communications (primarily those via personal email| text or social media) with these individuals as private citizens| which means the records would be viewed as exempt or non-responsive. However| I would argue that these individuals have talked about and/or made decisions regarding these topics extensively in their roles as board members. I would further argue that the district’s legal counsel (not personal legal counsel or someone outside the district with a legal background) should be given all documents that fall under this request so that they can determine what is and is not responsive. I can confirm that this request is not commercial in nature. I understand that the district has the right| under the law| to extend the amount of time to respond to this request by an additional five days. I am also happy to narrow the request further or submit more than one request if that will aid in issuing a response versus denying the request as unduly burdensome or voluminous in nature. I look forward to receiving the district’s response. |
Response:
| Enclosed are the records responsive to your request. Please note that we have not included emails from private citizens who communicated personal opinions| pursuant to Section 7(1)(c) of FOIA. 5 ILCS 140/7(1)(c); see Chicago Alliance for Neighborhood Safety v. City of Chicago| 348 Ill. App. 3d 188| 209| 211 (1st Dist. 2004) (“[T]he core purpose of the FOIA is to expose what the government is doing| not what its private citizens are up to.”). Additionally| one email was withheld under FOIA’s exemption for preliminary drafts| notes| recommendations| memoranda and other records in which opinions are expressed| or policies or actions are formulated pursuant to Section 7(1) (f); this includes “predecisional and deliberative material” which the Attorney General has repeatedly stated falls within the Section 7(1)(f) exemption. Harwood v. McDonough| 344 Ill. App. 3d 242| 247 (1st Dist. 2003). |