Mr. Michael B. Milstein, Secretary
Pound Ridge Lions Ambulance Corps
PO Box 237
Pound Ridge, NY 10576
The staff of the Committee on Open Government is authorized to issue advisory opinions. The ensuing staff advisory opinion is based solely upon the information presented in your correspondence.
Dear Mr. Milstein:
I have received your letter of December 20, which reached this office on December 27. In your capacity as Secretary of the Pound Ridge Lions Ambulance Corps, you sought clarification concerning "the reporting of [y]our financial statements to non-members of [y]our organization." You added that the Ambulance Corps receives no funds from any government agency and that it is "an all-volunteer organization."
The issue, in my view, is whether the organization is an "agency" required to comply with the Freedom of Information Law. If the Freedom of Information Law is applicable, its financial records would be available to any member of the public; on the other hand, if the Freedom of Information Law does not apply, I do not believe that the organization would be obliged to make such disclosures.
In this regard, the Freedom of Information Law pertains to agency records, and §86(3) of the Law defines the term "agency" to mean:
"any state or municipal department, board, bureau, division, commission, committee, public authority, public corporation, council, office or other governmental entity performing a governmental or proprietary function for the state or any one or more municipalities thereof, except the judiciary or the state legislature."
As such, the Freedom of Information Law generally pertains to records maintained by entities of state and local governments.
However,in Westchester-Rockland Newspapers v. Kimball [50 NYS 2d 575 (1980)], a case involving access to records relating to a lottery conducted by a volunteer fire company, the Court of Appeals, found that volunteer fire companies, despite their status as not-for-profit corporations, are "agencies" subject to the Freedom of Information Law. In so holding, the Court stated that:
"We begin by rejecting respondent's contention that, in applying the Freedom of Information Law, a distinction is to be made between a volunteer organization on which a local government relies for performance of an essential public service, as is true of the fire department here, and on the other hand, an organic arm of government, when that is the channel through which such services are delivered. Key is the Legislature's own unmistakably broad declaration that, '[a]s state and local government services increase and public problems become more sophisticated and complex and therefore harder to solve, and with the resultant increase in revenues and expenditures, it is incumbent upon the state and its localities to extend public accountability wherever and whenever feasible' (emphasis added; Public Officers Law, §84).
"True, the Legislature, in separately delineating the powers and duties of volunteer fire departments, for example, has nowhere included an obligation comparable to that spelled out in the Freedom of Information statute (see Village Law, art 10; see, also, 39 NY Jur, Municipal Corporations, §§560-588). But, absent a provision exempting volunteer fire departments from the reach of article 6-and there is none-we attach no significance to the fact that these or other particular agencies, regular or volunteer, are not expressly included. For the successful implementation of the policies motivating the enactment of the Freedom of Information Law centers on goals as broad as the achievement of a more informed electorate and a more responsible and responsive officialdom. By their very nature such objections cannot hope to be attained unless the measures taken to bring them about permeate the body politic to a point where they become the rule rather than the exception. The phrase 'public accountability wherever and whenever feasible' therefore merely punctuates with explicitness what in any event is implicit" (id. at 579].
Moreover, although it was contended that documents concerning the lottery were not subject to the Freedom of Information Law because they did not pertain to the performance of the company's fire fighting duties, the Court held that the documents constituted "records" subject to the Freedom of Information Law [see §86(4)].
Second, §1402 of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, which pertains to volunteer fire corporations, states in part that:
"(d) Any fire, hose, protective or hook and ladder corporation heretofore organized under any general law with the consent of the town board in the territory served by such corporation is hereby legalized and confirmed, notwithstanding the omission of any town board to appoint or confirm the members of such corporations as town firemen. Any such corporation shall hereafter be subject to the provisions of this section.
(e)(1) A fire, hose, protective or hook and ladder corporation heretofore incorporated under any general law or a fire corporation hereafter incorporated under this section shall be under the control of the city, village, fire district or town authorities having, by law, control over the prevention or extinguishment of fires therein. Such authorities may adopt rules and regulations for the government and control of such corporation...
(3) The emergency relief squad of a fire corporation incorporated under this section or subject to the provisions thereof shall have power to furnish general ambulance service when duly authorized under the provisions of section two hundred nine-b of the general municipal law."
In turn, section 209-b(2)(a) of the General Municipal Law states that:
"General ambulance service. A. The governing board of any city, town which has a fire department, village or fire district which has in its fire department an emergency rescue and first aid squad composed mainly of volunteer firefighters, by resolution, may authorize any such squad to furnish general ambulance service for the purpose of (1) transporting any sick, injured or disabled resident or person found within city, town, village or fire district to a hospital, clinic, sanatorium or other place for treatment and care and returning any such person therefrom if still sick, injured or disabled and (2) transporting any sick, injured or disabled resident of the city, town, village or fire district from a hospital, clinic, sanatorium or other place where such person has received treatment and care to any other place for treatment and care or to such person's home..."
As such, it appears that a volunteer fire company that includes an ambulance corps consisting "mainly of volunteer firemen" would be treated by law in a manner similar to a volunteer fire company and would, therefore, be subject to the Freedom of Information Law.
Further, in a decision in which it was held that several volunteer fire companies are subject to the Freedom of Information Law, it was stated that:
"These fire companies are formed by consent of the Colonie Town Board. The Town has control over the membership of the companies, as well as many other aspects of their structure, organization and operation (section 1402). The plaintiffs' contention that their relationship with the Town of Colonie is solely contractual is a mischaracterization. The municipality clearly has by law, control over these volunteer organizations which reprovide a public function" (S.W. Pitts Hose Company et al. v. Capital Newspapers, Supreme Court, Albany County, January 25, 1988)."
If the relationship between the Pound Ridge Lions Ambulance Corps and the Town of Pound Ridge is based upon the statutes described above, I believe that the Corps is an "agency" required to comply with the Freedom of Information Law. On the other hand, if there is no such relationship, and if the Ambulance Corps is fully independent of the Town, it would appear that the organization would fall beyond the coverage of the Freedom of Information Law.
I hope that I have been of some assistance. Should any further questions arise, please feel free to contact me.
Robert J. Freeman