A5
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
November 18, 1996
TO: Vancouver City Council
From: City Clerk
Subject: Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act:
Staffing Requirements
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT the temporary position of Coordinator of Information and
Privacy not be extended beyond December 31, 1996. In its
place, a regular full-time exempt position be established to
deal with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy
Act, subject to job evaluation by the Director of Human
Resources.
B. THAT the costs associated with this position be funded from
within the existing City Clerk s Department Operating Budget,
without offsets.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The City Manager RECOMMENDS approval of A and B.
COUNCIL POLICY
On February 4, 1994, Council resolved that departments and boards be
instructed that any recommendations for increased staff or enhanced
programs be accompanied by recommendations for matching cost decreases
or related revenue increases in non-tax revenue, subject to Council
discretion.
On December 13, 1994, Council passed the Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy By-Law No. 7364, which delegated the
administrative responsibilities for managing applications under the
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act) to the
City Clerk.
On December 5, 1995, Council resolved that the Coordinator of
Information and Privacy position in the City Clerk s Department
continue to be funded on a temporary basis to December 31, 1996, and any
continuation of the position beyond that date be subject to review at
that time.
BACKGROUND
On November 3, 1994, the Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act was extended to Tier II "local public bodies", including the
City of Vancouver.
The responsibilities for the City's compliance with the Act has been
delegated to the City Clerk's Department. This requires the full-time
resources of one staff person, who is also charged with responsibilities
arising as the City's contact with the Office of the Ombudsman.
Since that time, the City has received 187 formal applications under the
Act and many more informal information requests. The FOI Coordinator
has taken the lead role in FOI training for other City staff, and time
and effort has been devoted to policy development.
PURPOSE
This report provides Council with an update on the City's experience
under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, which
has seen the number of formal requests increase in 1996. Based on this
increase, it is recommended that a new full time position be
established. This position will not be included in the bargaining unit
as an incumbent of this position will access and directly deal with
sensitive and highly confidential materials relating to labour relations
issues.
DISCUSSION
It is clear that the duties and workload imposed by the Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act require the establishment of a
permanent position. The corporate duties imposed on the City by the Act
are considerable. They are the responsibility of one staff member of
the City Clerk s Department.
The Act requires that the City respond to applications within a strict
time frame, assist applicants in meeting their information needs and
also safeguard the public's and the City's rights by withholding records
that legitimately meet the exceptions to disclosure afforded by the Act.
In addition to these duties the Coordinator, with assistance from the
Law Department, is responsible for preparing submissions and carrying
forward the City's position and arguments to formal hearings before the
Provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner. As well, the
Coordinator is responsible for organizing and delivering training to
other departments concerning the Act, as well as policy development.
In addition, the authority of the Office of the Ombudsman was extended
to cover municipalities in 1995, and the Coordinator serves as the City
contact with the Office of the Ombudsman.
STATUS OF APPLICATIONS
The number of FOI applications in the current year has increased from
the rather large number experienced in the initial year following the
introduction of the legislation.
At the time of the first status report in November 1995, a total of 13
months had passed since the Act was extended to the City. In that
period a total of 84 applications were received.
In the ensuing 12-month period from November 1995 - October 1996, 103
applications were received. Of this number, 78 have been completed, 22
are in progress, and three are under review at the Office of the
Information and Privacy Commissioner. Appendix A provides a brief
description of each application received.
The following table compares the types of applications received in
1995-96 as compared to 1994-95:
1994-95 1995-96
Staff and former staff 12 4
Media 13 31
Political Parties 16 1
Unions 4 5
Individuals 27 41
Law Firms 1 11
Commercial Applicants 3 6
Other Groups 8 3
Other Government Agencies 0 1
TOTAL 84 103
When this matter was first considered by Council in 1995, it was agreed
the position would remain temporary for an additional year to ensure
that activity levels associated with the Act remained constant. As the
above numbers indicate, the level of activity has actually increased.
When the FOI Coordinator position was first established in the City
Clerk's Department, it was envisioned that the individual would also
carry forward responsibilities relating to Council Committees. In
reality the Coordinator must devote all of her time to FOI matters.
FEES
Experience to date has shown that any recovery of costs associated with
the Act through fees has been negligible. It is unlikely this situation
will change, as the Act does not allow full cost recovery for the
processing of applications. Fees are not to be a barrier to access.
The first three hours of time spent on any application must be provided
free. The City may then charge for staff time to locate, retrieve,
produce and photocopy the records, and $0.25 per page for photocopies.
There are significant costs that are not recoverable. The City may not
charge for providing an applicant's personal information. The City may
not charge for the line by line review of the records which is required
to determine if they contain third-party business information or
personal information that might need to be severed from the records.
Where staff find that third-party business information may be
releasable, it is then necessary to provide the third parties copies of
this material and seek their representations as to whether its release
might cause harm to the third-party. Neither the third-party
notification procedure or severing of personal or business interest
information from the record is chargeable to the applicant. Nor can the
City charge for the costs of any internal consultations. The City may
not charge for copies of the records that are produced for processing
the application, only for copies that are released to the applicant.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Funding has been provided in the 1996 Operating budget of the City
Clerk's Office to fund the temporary full-time Coordinator position.
There are sufficient funds in the existing departmental budget for the
creation of a regular full-time exempt position.
CONCLUSION
After two years experience, it appears that resource requirements
arising from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
are likely to continue to increase, or at best, remain at current
levels. It is recommended that the funding for the temporary position
of Coordinator of Information and Privacy not be extended beyond
December 31, 1996 and in its place, a new full time position be
established to be responsible for dealing with and responding to
enquiries made under the Act. This position will not be included in the
bargaining unit due to the highly confidential information relating to
labour relations issues and the incumbent's involvement with policy
development related to the Act.
* * *