Dr. George Silberman
915 E. 17th St., #302
Brooklyn, NY 11230
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 Dr. Silberman:
I have received your letters of November 4 and December 7. Please accept my apologies for the delay in response.
You have asked that I "rule on the availability" of a request made under the Freedom of Information Law to the New York City Department of Homeless Services. You have sought:
"the name, race, competitive civil service status, provisional status, and educational qualifications of the individual chosen or if no person has yet been chosen, I request the race, comp. civil service status, provision status and educational qualifications of the acting incumbent."
In addition, you requested the name and salary of the incumbent in the position.
In this regard, I offer the following comments.
First, as a general matter, the Freedom of Information Law is based upon a presumption of access. Stated differently, all records of an agency are available, except to the extent that records or portions thereof fall within one or more grounds for denial appearing in §87(2)(a) through (i) of the Law.
Second, in my view, only one of the grounds for denial is pertinent to the matter. Specifically, §87(2)(b) states that an agency may withhold records to the extent that disclosure would constitute "an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
Based on the judicial interpretation of the Freedom of Information Law, it is clear that public officers and employees enjoy a lesser degree of privacy than others, for it has been found in various contexts that those individuals are required to be more accountable than others. The courts have found that, as a general rule, records that are relevant to the performance of the official duties of a public officer or employee are available, for disclosure in such instances would result in a permissible rather than an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [see e.g., Farrell v. Village Board of Trustees, 372 NYS 2d 905 (1975); Gannett Co. v. County of Monroe, 59 AD 2d 309 (1977), aff'd 45 NY 2d 954 (1978); Sinicropi v. County of Nassau, 76 AD 2d 838 (1980); Geneva Printing Co. and Donald C. Hadley v. Village of Lyons, Sup. Ct., Wayne Cty., March 25, 1981; Montes v. State, 406 NYS 2d 664 (Court of Claims, 1978); Powhida v. City of Albany, 147 AD 2d 236 (1989); Scaccia v. NYS Division of State Police, 530 NYS 2d 309, 138 AD 2d 50 (1988); Steinmetz v. Board of Education, East Moriches, Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., NYLJ, Oct. 30, 1980); Capital Newspapers v. Burns, 67 NY 2d 562 (1986)]. Conversely, to the extent that items relating to public officers or employees are irrelevant to the performance of their official duties, it has been found that disclosure would indeed constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [see e.g., Matter of Wool, Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., NYLJ, Nov. 22, 1977, dealing with membership in a union; Minerva v. Village of Valley Stream, Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., May 20, 1981, involving the back of a check payable to a municipal attorney that could indicate how that person spends his/her money; Selig v. Sielaff, 200 AD 2d 298 (1994), concerning disclosure of social security numbers].
From my perspective, the only item among those sought that could properly be withheld would be the race of an individual. In my view, race has nothing to do with the performance of a public employee's duties, and reference to one's race could properly be withheld.
I note that it was recently held that disclosure of a public employee's educational background would not constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [see Ruberti, Girvin & Ferlazzo v. NYS Division of State Police, 641 NYS 2d 411, ___ AD 2d ___ (1996)]. Further, salary information identifiable to public employees must be prepared and disclosed pursuant to §87(3)(b) of the Freedom of Information Law.
I hope that the foregoing serves to enhance your understanding of the Freedom of Information Law and that I have been of assistance.
Robert J. Freeman
cc: LeRoy Allen