2023 Edition
A Reference For Compliance
with Florida’s Public Records
and Open Meetings Laws
GOVERNMENT-IN-
THE-SUNSHINE
MANUAL
Volume 45
Florida Office of the Attorney General
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
i
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ xii
2022 Legislative Highlights ....................................................................................................xiii
PART I
GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW
A. SCOPE OF THE SUNSHINE LAW ...............................................................................1
B. WHAT ENTITIES ARE COVERED BY THE SUNSHINE LAW? APPLICATION OF
THE SUNSHINE LAW TO: ............................................................................................1
1. Advisory boards .........................................................................................................1
a. Advisory boards created by a single public ocial ..............................................2
b. Fact-nding committees ....................................................................................3
c. Sta committees ................................................................................................4
2. Candidates or members-elect .....................................................................................6
a. Candidates ........................................................................................................6
b. Members-elect ...................................................................................................6
3. Commissions created by the Florida Constitution .....................................................6
4. Ex ocio board members ..........................................................................................6
5. Federal entities ..........................................................................................................7
6. Governor and Cabinet ...............................................................................................7
7. Individual board members .........................................................................................8
a. Individual board member meeting with a member of another public board .......8
b. Mayor meeting with city commissioner or city council member ........................9
c. Use of nonboard members or sta to act as liaisons or to conduct a de facto
meeting of the board .........................................................................................9
d. Delegation of authority to individual to act on behalf of the board..................11
8. Judiciary ..................................................................................................................12
a. Criminal proceedings ......................................................................................12
b. Civil proceedings .............................................................................................13
c. Depositions .....................................................................................................13
d. Florida Bar grievance proceedings ....................................................................14
e. Grand juries ....................................................................................................14
f. Judicial nominating commissions/Judicial Qualications Commission ............14
g. Mediation proceedings ....................................................................................15
(1) Court-ordered mediation ........................................................................15
(2) Other mediation proceedings ..................................................................15
h. Statutes providing for closed court proceedings ...............................................15
(1) Adoption .................................................................................................15
(2) Dependency ............................................................................................15
(3) Guardian advocate appointments ............................................................16
(4) HIV test results .......................................................................................16
(5) Pregnancy termination notice waiver .......................................................16
(6) Termination of parental rights .................................................................16
(7) Victim and witness testimony in certain circumstances ...........................16
9. Legislature ...............................................................................................................16
10. Married couple serving on the same board ..............................................................17
11. Private organizations ...............................................................................................17
a. Private entities created pursuant to law or by public agencies ...........................17
b. Private entities providing services to public agencies ........................................18
c. Application of the Sunshine Law to specic private entities .............................19
(1) Direct-support organizations ...................................................................19
(2) Economic development organizations .....................................................19
(3) Homeowners’ associations .......................................................................19
(4) Political parties ........................................................................................20
ii
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(5) Volunteer re departments ......................................................................20
12. Sta member or public ocial also serving as member of public board ...................20
C. WHAT MEETINGS OF MEMBERS OF BOARDS ARE COVERED? APPLICATION
OF THE SUNSHINE LAW TO: ..................................................................................21
1.
Board members attending meetings or serving as members of another public board
..21
a. Board members attending meetings of another public board ...........................21
b. Board members serving as members of another public board ...........................21
2. Board member meeting with his or her alternate .....................................................21
3. Community forums sponsored by private organizations .........................................21
4. Condential records discussions .............................................................................22
5.
E-mail, text messages, and other written communications between board members
..23
6. Fact-nding or inspection trips ................................................................................24
7. Informal discussions, workshops, organizational sessions, election of ocers ...........25
8. Investigative meetings ..............................................................................................26
9. Litigation meetings ..................................................................................................26
a. Settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures ..27
(1) Strict compliance with statutory conditions .............................................27
(2) Permitted discussions during closed session .............................................28
(3) Entity involved in pending litigation ........................................................29
(4) Persons authorized to attend closed session ..............................................29
(5) Determination of “conclusion” of the litigation .......................................30
b. Risk management exemption ..........................................................................30
10. Personnel matters ....................................................................................................31
a. Collective bargaining discussions .....................................................................31
(1) Strategy sessions ......................................................................................31
(2) Negotiations ............................................................................................32
b. Disciplinary, grievance, and complaint review proceedings ..............................32
c. Evaluations ......................................................................................................33
d. Selection and screening committees .................................................................34
11. Purchasing meetings ................................................................................................35
a. Application of Sunshine Law ...........................................................................35
b. Recording requirement for exempt meetings ...................................................35
12. Quasi-judicial matters, proceedings, or hearings ......................................................36
13. Real property negotiations .......................................................................................36
14. Security meetings ....................................................................................................36
15. Social events ............................................................................................................37
16. Telephone conversations and virtual meetings .........................................................37
a. Private telephone conversations .......................................................................37
b. Authorization to conduct and participate in public meetings via telephone,
video conferencing, or other electronic media ..................................................38
(1) Sunshine Law ..........................................................................................38
(2) In-person quorum requirements ..............................................................38
(a) State boards ........................................................................................38
(b) Local boards ......................................................................................38
(1) Meetings ...................................................................................38
(2) Workshops ................................................................................39
D. NOTICE AND PROCEDURES ...................................................................................40
1. Agenda ....................................................................................................................40
2. Location of meetings ...............................................................................................41
a. Facilities that discriminate or unreasonably restrict access ...............................41
b. Luncheon meetings .........................................................................................41
c. Out-of-town meetings .....................................................................................41
d. Size of meeting facilities ..................................................................................42
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
iii
3. Minutes ...................................................................................................................42
a. Scope of minutes requirement .........................................................................42
b. Content of minutes .........................................................................................43
c. Tape recording or Internet archive as minutes..................................................43
d. Use of transcript as minutes .............................................................................44
4. Notice requirements ................................................................................................44
a. Reasonable notice ............................................................................................44
b. Notice requirements when meeting adjourned to a later date ..........................45
c. Notice relating to record needed for appellate review .......................................45
d. Paid advertising requirements and additional notice provisions imposed by
other statutes, codes, or ordinances ..................................................................46
5. Public comment ......................................................................................................46
6. Restrictions on public attendance ...........................................................................48
a. Cameras and tape recorders .............................................................................48
b. Exclusion of certain members of the public .....................................................48
c. Inaudible discussions .......................................................................................49
7. Time and length of meeting ....................................................................................49
8. Use of codes or preassigned numbers in order to avoid identifying individuals ........49
9. Voting .....................................................................................................................49
a. Abstention .......................................................................................................49
b. Proxy votes ......................................................................................................50
c. Roll call votes ..................................................................................................50
d. Written or secret ballots ...................................................................................50
E. STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS .......................................................................................51
1. Creation and review of exemptions ..........................................................................51
2. Exemptions are narrowly construed .........................................................................51
3. Eect of statutory exemptions .................................................................................52
a. Notice requirements ........................................................................................52
b. Attendance at closed meetings .........................................................................52
c. Disclosure of matters discussed at closed meetings ...........................................52
4. Special act exemptions .............................................................................................53
F. REMEDIES AND PENALTIES .....................................................................................53
1. Criminal penalties ...................................................................................................53
2. Removal from oce ................................................................................................53
3. Noncriminal infractions ..........................................................................................53
4. Attorney’s fees..........................................................................................................54
5. Civil actions for injunctive or declaratory relief .......................................................55
6. Validity of action taken in violation of the Sunshine Law and subsequent
corrective action ......................................................................................................56
7. Damages .................................................................................................................58
PART II
PUBLIC RECORDS
A. SCOPE OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT ................................................................59
B. WHAT ENTITIES ARE COVERED? APPLICATION OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT TO: ........................................................................................................................60
1. Advisory boards .......................................................................................................60
2. Private organizations ...............................................................................................60
a. Private entities created pursuant to law or by public agencies ...........................61
b. Private entities contracting with public agencies or receiving public funds .......61
(1) “Totality of factors” test ..........................................................................62
iv
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(2) “Delegation of function” test ...................................................................63
c. Private company delegated authority to keep certain records ...........................64
d. Subcontractors ................................................................................................65
e. Other statutory provisions governing records of private entities .......................65
(1) Contract requirements .............................................................................65
(2) Legislative appropriation .........................................................................66
(3) Public funds used for dues .......................................................................66
3. Judiciary ..................................................................................................................66
a. Public Records Act inapplicable to judicial records ..........................................66
b. Public access to and protection of judicial branch records, Fla. R. Gen.
Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420 ..............................................................................66
(1) Scope of the rule .....................................................................................66
(2) Condential judicial records ....................................................................67
(3) Procedures for accessing judicial branch records under rule 2.420 ...........68
c. Discovery material ...........................................................................................68
d. Florida Bar ......................................................................................................69
e. Judicial Qualications Commission and judicial nominating commissions......69
f. Jury records .....................................................................................................70
(1) Grand jury ..............................................................................................70
(2) Trial jury .................................................................................................71
g. Sunshine in Litigation Act ...............................................................................71
4. Legislature ...............................................................................................................71
5. Governor and Cabinet .............................................................................................72
6. Commissions created by the Constitution ...............................................................72
C. WHAT RECORDS ARE COVERED? APPLICATION OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT TO: ........................................................................................................................73
1. Adoption and birth records .....................................................................................73
2. Autopsy and death records.......................................................................................73
a. Autopsy reports ...............................................................................................73
b. Autopsy photographs and recordings ...............................................................74
c. Photographs, video, and audio recordings that depict or record the killing of a
law enforcement ocer or the killing of a victim of mass violence ...................74
d. Death certicates .............................................................................................74
3. Child and vulnerable adult abuse and protection records .........................................75
a. Department of Children and Families abuse records ........................................75
(1) Condentiality of abuse records ..............................................................75
(2) Release of abuse records ...........................................................................75
b. Foster home, licensure, and quality assurance records ......................................76
c. Guardians ad litem and court monitors ...........................................................76
d. Status of abuse records held by law enforcement agencies ................................76
4. Direct-support organizations ...................................................................................77
5. Domestic violence and stalking records ...................................................................77
6. Drafts and notes ......................................................................................................78
7. Education records ....................................................................................................80
a. Charter schools ...............................................................................................80
b. Student records ...............................................................................................80
c. Children in government-sponsored recreation programs ..................................81
d. School system security .....................................................................................82
e. Testing materials..............................................................................................82
8. Election records .......................................................................................................82
a. Ballots .............................................................................................................82
b. Voter registration and voter records .................................................................82
9. Electronic and computer records .............................................................................83
a. Electronic databases and les ...........................................................................83
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
v
b. Consideration of public access in design of electronic recordkeeping system ....84
c. E-mail .............................................................................................................84
d. Social media postings ......................................................................................85
e. Text messages ..................................................................................................85
f. Cybersecurity ..................................................................................................86
10. Emergency records ..................................................................................................86
a. Emergency “911” records ................................................................................86
b. Emergency evacuation plans and special needs registry ....................................86
c. Emergency medical services records .................................................................87
d. Emergency notication ...................................................................................87
e. Emergency planning information furnished to Division of Emergency
Management ...................................................................................................87
f. Emergency shelter and disaster recovery assistance ...........................................87
11. Financial records .....................................................................................................87
a. Audit reports ...................................................................................................88
(1) Auditor General audits ............................................................................88
(2) Local government audits .........................................................................88
(3) State agency inspector general audits .......................................................88
b. Bids, proposals and nancial statements ..........................................................89
c. Budgets ...........................................................................................................89
d. Economic development records .......................................................................90
(1) Business location or expansion plans .......................................................90
(2) Convention center booking business records ...........................................91
e. Ownership records for registered public obligations.........................................91
f. Personal nancial records .................................................................................91
(1) Bank account, debit, and credit card numbers .........................................91
(2) Consumer nancial information ..............................................................91
(3) Financial information submitted by state licensure applicants..................92
(4) Temporary cash assistance program participant .......................................92
(5) Toll payment personal identifying information ........................................92
(6) Utility payment records ...........................................................................92
g. Taxpayer records ..............................................................................................92
12. Firearms records ......................................................................................................93
13. Hospital and medical records...................................................................................93
a. Communicable or infectious disease reports ....................................................93
b. Hospital records ..............................................................................................94
(1) Public hospitals .......................................................................................94
(2) Private hospitals/private organizations operating public hospitals ............94
c. Patient and clinical records ..............................................................................95
(1) Patient and clinical records generally .......................................................95
(2) Disclosure of patient records ...................................................................95
d. Emergency medical services .............................................................................96
e. Hospital employees .........................................................................................96
14. Investigative records of non-law enforcement agencies .............................................97
a. Investigative records generally ..........................................................................97
b. Statutory exemptions .......................................................................................97
(1) Discrimination investigations ..................................................................97
(2) Employee misconduct investigations .......................................................98
(3) Ethics investigations ................................................................................98
(4) Local government inspector general investigations ...................................99
(5) State inspector general investigations .......................................................99
(6) State licensing investigations ....................................................................99
(7) Whistle-blower investigations ................................................................100
(a) Whistle-blower identity .................................................................100
(b) Active investigations ......................................................................100
vi
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
15. Law enforcement records .......................................................................................101
a. Arrest and crime reports and the exemption for active criminal investigative
and intelligence information .........................................................................101
(1) Arrest and crime reports ........................................................................101
(2) Purpose and scope of exemption ............................................................101
(3) Denition of active criminal investigative or intelligence information ...102
(4) Information that is not considered to be criminal investigative or
intelligence information and must be released unless some other
exemption applies ..................................................................................103
(5) Records released to the defendant ..........................................................103
(6) Active versus inactive criminal investigation or intelligence
information ...........................................................................................105
(a) Active criminal investigative information .......................................105
(b) Active criminal intelligence information ........................................106
(c) Pending prosecutions or appeals ....................................................107
(7) Criminal defendant’s public records request ..........................................107
(8) Disclosure of active criminal investigative information to the public .....107
(9) Disclosure of active criminal investigative information to another
criminal justice agency ..........................................................................108
(10) Records containing both active criminal investigative information and
non-exempt information .......................................................................109
(11) Criminal investigative or intelligence information received from other
states or the federal government ............................................................110
(12) Criminal investigative or intelligence information received prior to
January 25, 1979 ...................................................................................110
b. “Baker Act” reports prepared by law enforcement ocers ..............................110
c. Body camera recordings .................................................................................110
d. Confessions ...................................................................................................111
e. Condential informants ................................................................................111
f. Conviction integrity unit reinvestigation information ...................................112
g. Criminal history information ........................................................................112
(1) Criminal history information generally .................................................112
(2) Sealed and expunged records .................................................................113
h. Fingerprint records ........................................................................................113
i. Forensic behavioral health evaluations ...........................................................114
j. Geolocation Information ...............................................................................114
k. Juvenile oender records ...............................................................................114
(1) Condentiality and authorized disclosure ..............................................114
(2) Exceptions to condentiality .................................................................115
(a) Child trac violators .....................................................................115
(b) Felony arrests and adult system transfers ........................................115
(c) Mandatory notication to schools .................................................116
(d) Criminal history information relating to juveniles .........................116
(e) Victim access .................................................................................116
l. Motor vehicle records ....................................................................................116
(1) Automated license plate recognition system records ...............................116
(2) Crash reports .........................................................................................117
(3) Trac citations ......................................................................................118
(4) Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles motor vehicle
records...................................................................................................118
m. Pawnbroker records .......................................................................................118
n. Polygraph records ..........................................................................................118
o. Prison and inmate records .............................................................................119
p. Resource inventories and emergency response plans ......................................119
q. Surveillance techniques, procedures, or personnel ..........................................120
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
vii
r. Undercover personnel ....................................................................................120
s. Victim information .......................................................................................120
(1) Marsy’s Law ...........................................................................................120
(2) Statutory exemptions relating to victim information .............................121
(a) Amount of stolen property ....................................................................121
(b) Commercial solicitation of victims ........................................................121
(c) Documents which are received by an agency regarding victims ...............121
(d) Home or employment address, telephone number, assets ......................121
(e) Information identifying or depicting victims of sex oenses and of
child abuse ............................................................................................122
(1) Law enforcement and prosecution records .....................................122
(2) Court records ................................................................................124
(3) Department of Children and Families abuse records ......................124
(f) Homicide victims and witnesses ............................................................124
(1) Photographs and video or audio recordings of killing of law
enforcement ocer or the killing of a victim of mass violence .......124
(2) Address of victim of an incident of mass violence ..........................125
(3) Homicide witness ..........................................................................125
(g) Human tracking victims .....................................................................125
(h) Relocated victim or witness information ................................................125
16. Litigation records ..................................................................................................126
a. Attorney-client communications ...................................................................126
b. Attorney work product ..................................................................................126
(1) Scope of exemption ...............................................................................128
(a) Attorney bills and payments ..........................................................128
(b) Records prepared prior to litigation or for other purposes ..............128
(c) Settlement records .........................................................................129
(2) Duration of exemption ..........................................................................130
c. Other statutory exemptions relating to litigation records ...............................130
d. Attorney notes ...............................................................................................131
17. Personal records not made or received in the course of ocial business .................132
18. Personnel records ...................................................................................................134
a. Annuity or custodial account activities ..........................................................134
b. Applications for employment, references, and resumes ..................................134
c. Collective bargaining .....................................................................................134
(1) Relationship of collective bargaining agreement to personnel records ....134
(2) Collective bargaining work product exemption .....................................135
d. Complaints against employees .......................................................................135
(1) Law enforcement and correctional ocers .............................................135
(a) Scope of exemption and duration of condentiality.......................135
(b) Limitations on disclosure ...............................................................137
(c) Unauthorized disclosure penalties .................................................137
(2) Public school system employees .............................................................138
(3) State university and Florida College System institution employees.........138
e. Conditions for inspection of personnel records ..............................................138
(1) Privacy issues .........................................................................................139
(2) Sealed records ........................................................................................139
f. Criminal history information ........................................................................139
g. Deferred compensation .................................................................................140
h. Direct deposit ................................................................................................140
i. Drug test results ............................................................................................140
j. Employee assistance program ........................................................................140
k. Employment search or consultant records .....................................................141
l. Evaluations of employee performance ............................................................141
(1) Hospital employees ...............................................................................141
viii
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(2) Public school employees ........................................................................141
(3) State university and Florida College System institution employees.........142
m. Examination questions and answer sheets ......................................................142
n. Home addresses, telephone numbers, and other personal information ...........143
(1) Listing of public ocers and employees covered by exemptions ..............143
(a) Abuse investigators ........................................................................143
(b) Child advocacy centers and child protection team .........................143
(c) Code enforcement ocers .............................................................144
(d) County addiction treatment facility personnel ...............................144
(e) County tax collectors .....................................................................144
(f) Domestic violence and specied other crime victims .....................144
(g) Domestic violence advocates .........................................................145
(h) Emergency medical technicians or paramedics ...............................145
(i) Fireghters ....................................................................................145
(j) Guardians ad litem ........................................................................145
(k) Hospital employees .......................................................................145
(l) Human resources managers (local governments) ............................145
(m) Impaired practitioner consultants ..................................................146
(n) Inspectors General and internal audit personnel ............................146
(o) Investigators and inspectors of the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation .................................................................146
(p) Investigators of the Department of Financial Services and Oce of
Financial Regulation with specied duties .....................................146
(q) Judges, magistrates, and hearing ocers (state) ..............................147
(r) Juvenile Justice juvenile probation and detention ocers and
counselors .....................................................................................147
(s) Law enforcement and correctional personnel .................................147
(t) Personnel of the Department of Health with specied duties .........148
(u) Prosecutors and judges (federal).....................................................148
(v) Prosecutors (state) .........................................................................148
(w) Public defenders and other specied counsel .................................148
(x) Public guardians ............................................................................149
(y)
Revenue collection and enforcement or child support enforcement
.149
(2) Authority to release protected information ............................................149
(3) Records held by agencies that are not the employer of the designated
ocers or employees..............................................................................151
(4) Application of exemption to ..................................................................151
(a) Telephone numbers of cellular telephones issued by agencies .........151
(b) List of names of designated ocers and employees ........................152
(c) Prior home addresses .....................................................................152
(d) Maps showing physical location of homes .....................................152
(e) Home addresses of persons who are not
the owner of the property ..............................................................152
(f) Booking photographs ....................................................................152
o. Medical information and health insurance participant information ...............152
(1) Medical information and medical claims records ...................................152
(2) Health insurance participant information ..............................................153
p. Payroll deduction records ..............................................................................153
q. Retiree lists ....................................................................................................154
r. Salary records ................................................................................................154
s. Travel records ................................................................................................154
t. Undercover personnel of criminal justice agencies .........................................154
19. Security system information and blueprints ...........................................................154
a. Blueprints ......................................................................................................154
b. Security system records ..................................................................................155
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
ix
(1) Security system (alarm) permits and applications ....................................155
(2) Surveillance video recordings ...................................................................155
c. Cybersecurity ................................................................................................156
d. School system security ...................................................................................157
20. Social security numbers .........................................................................................157
21. Telephone records .................................................................................................158
22. Trade secrets and proprietary condential business information ............................159
a. Trade secrets ..................................................................................................159
b. Proprietary condential business information ...............................................160
D. PROVIDING PUBLIC RECORDS .............................................................................160
1. Validity of agency conditions on access ..................................................................160
2. Individuals authorized to inspect and receive copies of public records....................162
3. Purpose of request .................................................................................................162
4. Role of the records custodian .................................................................................163
5. Requests for copies versus requests to inspect public records ..................................164
6. Records maintained by more than one agency .......................................................165
7. Records not in physical possession of agency .........................................................165
8. “Overbroad” public records requests ......................................................................165
9. Written request or form requirements....................................................................166
10. Identication of requester ......................................................................................166
11. Remote access........................................................................................................167
12. Requests to create new records, answer questions about the records, or reformat
existing records ......................................................................................................167
13. Records available in more than one medium .........................................................168
14. Amount of time allowed for response to public records requests ............................169
a. Duty to acknowledge requests promptly ........................................................169
b. Automatic delay impermissible ......................................................................169
c. Unjustied delay ...........................................................................................169
d. Arbitrary time for inspection .........................................................................171
e. Standing requests ..........................................................................................171
15. Condentiality agreements ....................................................................................171
16. Redaction of condential or exempt information .................................................173
17. Privacy rights .........................................................................................................174
18. Liability for disclosure ..........................................................................................175
E. STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS ......................................................................................175
1. Creation of exemptions .........................................................................................175
2. Strict construction .................................................................................................177
3. Retroactive application of new exemptions ............................................................177
4. Retroactive application of statutes eliminating condentiality. ...............................178
5. Dierence between exempt and condential records .............................................178
a. Condential records ......................................................................................178
b. Exempt records ..............................................................................................179
6. Discovery of exempt or condential records ..........................................................180
F. FEDERAL LAW AND THE FLORIDA PUBLIC RECORDS LAW ...........................180
1. Application of federal condentiality requirements to Florida public records .........180
2. Copyrighted records ..............................................................................................181
a. Copyrights held by agencies ..........................................................................181
b. Copyrighted material obtained by agencies ....................................................182
G. FEES FOR INSPECTING AND COPYING PUBLIC RECORDS ............................183
1. Inspection of public records...................................................................................183
2. Copies of public records ........................................................................................183
x
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
3. Special service charge for extensive use of clerical or supervisory labor or extensive
information technology resources ..........................................................................184
a. Meaning of the term “extensive” ....................................................................184
b. Meaning of the term “information technology resources” .............................185
c. Cost to review records for exempt information .............................................185
d. Calculation of labor cost ................................................................................185
e. Reasonable deposit or advance payment ........................................................185
4. Requests for information regarding costs to obtain public records .........................186
5. Requests for free copies of public records ...............................................................187
6. Authority to charge for development, overhead, or travel costs ..............................187
7. Fees to obtain agency records held by private companies ......................................188
8. Sales tax .................................................................................................................188
9. Condential records ..............................................................................................189
10. Requester makes his/her own copies ......................................................................189
11. Fee issues relating to specic records ......................................................................189
a. Clerk of court records ....................................................................................189
(1) County records ......................................................................................189
(2) Judicial records ......................................................................................189
b. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles crash reports .................190
H. REMEDIES AND PENALTIES ...................................................................................190
1. Voluntary mediation program ...............................................................................190
2. Civil action ...........................................................................................................190
a. Remedies .......................................................................................................190
(1) Mandamus ............................................................................................191
(2) Injunction .............................................................................................192
(3) Declaratory relief sought by agencies .....................................................192
(4) Damages ...............................................................................................192
b. Procedural issues ...........................................................................................192
(1) Discovery ..............................................................................................192
(2) Hearing .................................................................................................193
(3) In camera inspection .............................................................................194
(4) Mootness ...............................................................................................195
(5) Stay .......................................................................................................196
(6) Venue ....................................................................................................196
c. Attorney’s fees and costs ................................................................................196
3. Criminal and noncriminal infraction penalties ......................................................200
I. MAINTENANCE, STORAGE, AND RETENTION REQUIREMENTS .................200
1. Maintenance and storage of records .......................................................................200
2. Delivery of records to successor .............................................................................200
3. Transition records of certain ocers-elect ..............................................................201
4. Retention and disposal of records ..........................................................................201
a. Retention schedules .......................................................................................201
b. Disposal of records ........................................................................................201
c. Exempt records ..............................................................................................202
d. Evidence obtained by law enforcement agencies ............................................202
e. Duplicate records ..........................................................................................203
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
xi
APPENDICES
A. PUBLIC RECORDS AND MEETINGS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT .....204
B. GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW AND RELATED STATUTES ............204
C. THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (SELECTED PORTIONS ONLY) ..........................210
D. EXEMPT, CONFIDENTIAL, AND LIMITED ACCESS PUBLIC RECORDS AND
MEETINGS - EXEMPTION SUMMARIES...............................................................224
E. SECTION 11.0431, FLORIDA STATUTES-LEGISLATIVE RECORDS;
EXEMPTIONS FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE .......................................................303
F. TABLE OF APPELLATE CASES .................................................................................305
INDEX TO MANUAL AND EXEMPTIONS.....................................................................326
xii
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
A Public Policy of Open Government
INTRODUCTION
Our system of open government is a valued and intrinsic part of the heritage of our state.
Each day, Floridians use these laws to inform themselves as citizens, to attend government
meetings and to review government records. As a result of these eorts, government leaders can
be held accountable for their actions.
e Founding Fathers of our country recognized this fundamental truth during our
nation’s infancy and it remains just as valid today. As James Madison said: “Knowledge will
forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves
with the power which knowledge gives.”
Florida is nationally recognized for its strong support for government in the sunshine and
this commitment is reected in our statutes and Constitution. As Attorney General, I remain
committed to the principles of transparency embodied in these laws and the benets they secure
for our state.
is year’s edition of the Government in the Sunshine Manual incorporates laws, judicial
decisions, and Attorney General opinions in place as of October 1, 2022. Additional information
about Florida’s Sunshine Laws, including answers to frequently asked questions, is available
through the Oce of the Attorney General’s Internet homepage, which may be reached at
myoridalegal.com.
Suggestions from those who use this Manual are welcome and appreciated. Please forward
comments to: Oce of the Attorney General, e Capitol, PL-01, Tallahassee, Florida 32399.
Ashley Moody
Attorney General
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
xiii
Legislative Highlights
e following are some of the more signicant actions which occurred during the 2022 legislative
session relating to the public’s right of access to meetings and records.
Annuity contract personal identifying information – Provides that personal identifying
information and annuity contract numbers of a payee of a structured settlement as dened in
statute and the names of family members, dependents, and beneciaries of such payee contained
within a court le relating to a proceeding for the approval of the transfer of settlement rights
under the statute shall remain exempt during the pendency of the proceedings and for 6 months
after the nal court order approving or not approving the application. Chapter 22-125, Laws of
Florida, amending s. 119.0714, F.S.
Applicants for presidency of postsecondary institution – Establishes condentiality for
personal identifying information of an applicant for president of a state university or college
except as provided in the exemption. Also provides that any portion of a meeting held for the
purpose of identifying or vetting applicants is exempt. e exemption does not apply to meetings
held to establish qualications for the position or a “compensation framework” or to meetings
held after a nal group of applicants has been established. Chapter 22-15, Laws of Florida,
creating s. 1004.098, F.S.
Crash reports, trac citations – Amends current statute relating to condentiality of crash
reports to provide that the exemption applies to any agency, not just those that regularly receive
crash reports. Provides for immediate disclosure to the media of redacted reports within the 60-
day period that do not contain specied personal information about parties involved in the crash.
Provides that computerized crash report data held by an agency is condential. Specied driver
information in trac citations is made exempt from disclosure requirements. e term “driver
information” does not include the driver’s name. Chapter 22-198, Laws of Florida, amending
s. 316.066 and amending s. 316.650, F.S. Eective date: March 1, 2023.
Cybersecurity records and meetings – Provides condentiality for cybersecurity information
held by an agency, including coverage limits for insurance acquired to protect information
technology systems; critical infrastructure information; cybersecurity incident information
reported pursuant to cited statutes; as well as network schematics and other information that
identies detection, investigation, or response practices for cybersecurity incidents. ere
is also an exemption from the Sunshine Law for portions of meetings that would reveal such
condential information. Disclosure is authorized in certain circumstances. Chapter 22-221,
Laws of Florida, creating s. 119.0725, F.S., and amending ss. 98.015 and 282.318, F.S.
Execution records – Establishes condentiality for identication information of persons or
entities that participate in execution related functions. Chapter 22-115, Laws of Florida,
amending s. 945.10(1), F.S.
Family trust company records – In specied statutory proceedings in which a family trust
company is a party, the clerk must, on written notice from a party, keep all court records of that
case separate from other court records and condential. Chapter 22-111, Laws of Florida,
creating s. 662.1465, F.S.
Homeless counts identifying information – Individual identifying information of a person
contained in specied homeless management information system is condential and exempt.
Release of aggregate information that does not disclose identifying information of a person is not
precluded. Chapter 22-33, Laws of Florida, creating s. 420.6231, F.S.
Juvenile expunged records – Nonjudicial records held by the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement pertaining to the arrest of juveniles for certain crimes who have had the records
xiv
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
sealed or expunged pursuant to s. 943.0582, F.S., are condential. Disclosure is authorized as
provided in the exemption. Chapter 22-112, Laws of Florida, amending s. 943.0582, F.S.
Law enforcement geolocation information – Provides that law enforcement geolocation
information, as dened in the exemption, that is held by a law enforcement agency is exempt.
e exemption does not apply to trac citations, crash reports, homicide reports, arrest reports,
or any other ocial reports issued by an agency which contain law enforcement geolocation
information. Disclosure is authorized under specied circumstances. Chapter 22-107, Laws of
Florida, creating s. 119.071(4)(e), F.S.
Lottery winners – e name of a winner of a prize valued at $250,000 or more is condential
and exempt for 90 days from the date the prize is claimed, unless the winner consents to the
release of his or her name as provided in cited statutes. Chapter 22-134, Laws of Florida,
amending s. 24.1051, F.S.
Sexual harassment victims – e exemption providing condentiality for personal identifying
information of alleged victims of sexual harassment was amended to add that the exemption
applies to the victim of sexual harassment as well as the alleged victim, if such information
identies that person as an alleged victim or as a victim of sexual harassment. e amendment
also states that condentiality may be waived in writing by the alleged victim or victim. Chapter
22-172, Laws of Florida, amending s. 119.071(2)(n), F.S.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
1
PART I
GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW
A. SCOPE OF THE SUNSHINE LAW
Florida’s Government in the Sunshine Law, s. 286.011, F.S., commonly referred to as
the Sunshine Law, provides a right of access to governmental proceedings of public boards or
commissions at both the state and local levels. e law is equally applicable to elected and
appointed boards, and applies to any gathering of two or more members of the same board to
discuss some matter which will foreseeably come before that board for action. Members-elect to
such boards or commissions are also subject to the Sunshine Law, even though they have not yet
taken oce. ere are three basic requirements of s. 286.011, F.S.:
(1) meetings of public boards or commissions must be open to the public;
(2) reasonable notice of such meetings must be given; and
(3) minutes of the meetings must be taken and promptly recorded.
e complete text of the Government in the Sunshine Law and related statutes may be
found in Appendix B.
A constitutional right of access to meetings of collegial public bodies is recognized in
Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const. See Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance Company v. Magaha, 769 So. 2d
1012, 1021 (Fla. 2000), noting that the Sunshine Law “is of both constitutional and statutory
dimension.” Virtually all collegial public bodies are covered by the open meetings mandate of
this constitutional provision with the exception of the judiciary and the state Legislature, which
has its own constitutional provision requiring access. e only exceptions are those established
by law or by the Constitution. e complete text of Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., may be found in
Appendix A of this manual.
e Government in the Sunshine Law applies to “any board or commission of any state
agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or
political subdivision.” e statute thus applies to public collegial bodies within this state, at
the local as well as state level. City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971). “All
governmental entities in Florida are subject to the requirements of the Sunshine Law unless
specically exempted.” Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d
755, 762 (Fla. 2010). Accord Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc. v. School Board of Collier County, 328
So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
e Sunshine Law is equally applicable to elected and appointed boards or commissions.
AGO 73-223. Special district boards (AGO 74-169) and boards created by interlocal agreement
(AGO 84-16) are also included. And see Inf. Op. to Martelli, July 20, 2009 (State Fair Authority,
created by statute as a public corporation, subject to Sunshine Law). Cf. Turner v. Wainwright,
379 So. 2d 148, 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), armed and remanded, 389 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1980)
(legislative requirement that certain board meetings must be open to the public does not imply
that the board could meet privately to discuss other matters).
B. WHAT ENTITIES ARE COVERED BY THE SUNSHINE LAW? APPLICATION OF
THE SUNSHINE LAW TO:
1. Advisory boards
Advisory boards and committees created by public agencies may be subject to the Sunshine
Law, even though their recommendations are not binding upon the entities that create them.
e “dispositive question” is whether the committee has been delegated “decision-making
authority,” as opposed to mere “information-gathering or fact-nding authority.” Sarasota
2
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755, 762 (Fla. 2010). “Where
the committee has been delegated decision-making authority, the committee’s meetings must be
open to public scrutiny, regardless of the review procedures eventually used by the traditional
governmental body.” Id. Accord Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc. v. School Board of Collier County,
328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), quoting extensively from Sarasota Citizens for Responsible
Government, in nding that textbook evaluation committees created by the superintendent
pursuant to school board policy to recommend textbooks, had been delegated decision-making
authority and were therefore subject to the Sunshine Law even though the school board made the
nal decision to approve the textbooks.
For example, in Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974), a citizen
planning committee appointed by a city council to assist in revision of zoning ordinances was
found to be subject to the Sunshine Law. e Gradison court, concluding that the committee
served as the alter ego of the council in making tentative decisions, stated that “any committee
established by the Town Council to act in any type of advisory capacity would be subject to
the provisions of the government in the sunshine law.” Id. at 476. See also Spillis Candela &
Partners, Inc. v. Centrust Savings Bank, 535 So. 2d 694, 695 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (committee
which compiled a report that was perfunctorily accepted by the board made a signicant ruling
aecting decision-making process and was subject to s. 286.011); and Lyon v. Lake County, 765
So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (Sunshine Law applies to site plan review committee created
by county ordinance to serve in an advisory capacity to the county manager). Accord AGOs
98-13 (citizen advisory committee appointed by city council to make recommendations to the
council regarding city government and city services), and 01-84 (school advisory council created
pursuant to former s. 229.58 [now s. 1001.452], F.S).
e Sunshine Law does not establish a lesser standard for members of advisory committees
that are subject to the Sunshine Law. See Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc.,
647 So. 2d 857, 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (“[T]he Sunshine Law equally binds all members of
governmental bodies, be they advisory committee members or elected ocials”). Nor is there an
exception from the Sunshine Law for an advisory group created by a county commissioner and
composed of volunteers. See Inf. Op. to Wallace, January 7, 2019, emphasizing that it is the
nature of the functions of an advisory group that determines the application of the Sunshine Law,
not the manner of their appointment or their volunteer status.
a. Advisory boards appointed by a single public ocial
e Sunshine Law applies to advisory committees appointed by a single public ocial as
well as those appointed by a collegial board. See Inf. Op. to Wallace, January 7, 2019 (“In the rst
place, advisory groups appointed by a single public ocial are not immunized from the public
meetings requirement”).
For example, in Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983), the Florida Supreme
Court determined that the Sunshine Law applied to an ad hoc advisory committee appointed
by a university president to screen applications and make recommendations for the position of
law school dean, because the committee, in deciding which applicants to reject from further
consideration, performed a policy-based, decision-making function. See also Silver Express
Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
(committee established by agency purchasing director to consider and rank various contract
proposals deemed subject to Sunshine Law); Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc. v. School Board of
Collier County, 328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)(textbook committees created by the
superintendent pursuant to school board policy to evaluate and rank textbooks for approval by
the school board governed by s. 286.011, F.S., because they “clearly ‘helped to crystalize the
decision to be made’ by the School Board,” quoting from Silver Express, 691 So. 2d at 1100);
and Linares v. District School Board of Pasco County, No. 17-00230 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 10,
2018), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(Sunshine Law applies to committee formed by school board planning director to develop and
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
3
recommend to the superintendent proposed new school attendance boundaries). Accord AGOs
05-05 (fact that advisory group was created by chief of police and not city commission and its
recommendations were made to police chief would not remove group from ambit of the Sunshine
Law); 85-76 (ad hoc committee appointed by mayor for purpose of making recommendations
concerning legislation); 87-42 (ad hoc committee appointed by mayor to meet with Chamber of
Commerce and draft proposal for transfer of city property). And see Inf. Op. to Lamar, August 2,
1993 (transition team appointed by mayor to make recommendations regarding governmental
reorganization).
b. Fact-nding committees
A limited exception to the applicability of the Sunshine Law to advisory committees
has been recognized for advisory committees established for fact-nding only. “[A] committee
is not subject to the Sunshine Law if the committee has only been delegated information-
gathering or fact-nding authority and only conducts such activities.” Sarasota Citizens for
Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755, 762 (Fla. 2010). See also National
Council on Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017); and Cape
Publications, Inc. v. City of Palm Bay, 473 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Accord AGO 95-
06 (when a group, on behalf of a public entity, functions solely as a fact-nder or information
gatherer with no decision-making authority, no “board or commission” subject to the Sunshine
Law is created).
“In determining whether a committee is subject to the Sunshine Law, the actual
function of the committee must be scrutinized to determine whether it is exercising part of
the decision-making function by sorting through options and making recommendations to the
governmental body.” Inf. Op. to Randolph, June 10, 2010. us, if an advisory committee has
a decision-making function in addition to fact-nding, the Sunshine Law is applicable. See
Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934, 938 (Fla. 1983), recognizing that while a “search and screen”
committee had a fact-gathering role in soliciting and compiling applications, the committee
also “had an equally undisputed decision-making function in screening the applicants” by
deciding which of the applicants to reject from further consideration, and thus was subject
to the Sunshine Law. And see AGO 94-21 (application of Sunshine Law to members of a
negotiating team created by a city commission). Cf. Collier County Public Schools v. Mason
Classical Academy, 342 So. 3d 753 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022), noting that discussions between two
school district employees and the school district attorney conducted as part of the fact-nding
process in an investigation of a charter school “clearly were not meetings pursuant to section
286.011(1) because neither employee was a school board member or part of a decision-making
committee”).
Accordingly, the determination as to whether an advisory committee created by a public
ocial is subject to the Sunshine Law will necessarily depend on the duties and responsibilities
performed by the committee. See Inf. Op. to Wallace, January 7, 2019, noting that the mere
designation of a committee’s function as “providing feedback” to the public ocial is not dispositive
of the status of the committee for Sunshine Law purposes; instead, “the key determination will be
the exact nature of the feedback being requested and provided.” See also AGO 98-13 (application
of the Sunshine Law to a community advisory committee appointed by a city commission).
Moreover, the “fact-nding exception” applies only to advisory committees and not to
boards that have “ultimate decision-making governmental authority.” Finch v. Seminole County
School Board, 995 So. 2d 1068, 1071-1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). In Finch, the court held that
the “fact-nding exception” did not apply to a school board as the ultimate decision-making
body; thus the board could not take a fact-nding bus tour without complying with the Sunshine
Law even though school board members were separated from each other by several rows of seats,
did not discuss their preferences or opinions, and no vote was taken during the trip. And see Inf.
Op. to Sugarman, August 5, 2015 (pension board not authorized to travel out of state to meet
with nancial consultants).
4
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
c. Sta committees
e Sunshine Law applies to meetings of elected or appointed boards; it does not ordinarily
apply to sta committees or meetings. See, e.g., Occidental Chemical Company v. Mayo, 351 So.
2d 336 (Fla. 1977), disapproved in part on other grounds, Citizens v. Beard, 613 So. 2d 403 (Fla.
1992); School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99, 101 (Fla.
1st DCA 1996); and AGO 89-39. e Sunshine Law does not apply “when a governmental
executive uses sta for a fact-nding and advisory function in fullling his or her duties.” Knox
v. District School Board of Brevard, 821 So.2d 311, 315 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
us, a committee composed of sta that is responsible for advising and informing the
decision-maker through fact-nding consultations is not subject to the Sunshine Law. Bennett
v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (meetings of committee appointed by public
college president to report on employee working conditions not subject to Sunshine Law). Cf.
AGO 08-63 (although Sunshine Law does not apply to orientation sessions held by counties for
special magistrates hired to hear value adjustment board petitions, “nothing would preclude a
county from allowing the public to attend such orientations in order to enhance the knowledge
of citizens who appear before value adjustment boards”).
Accordingly, a state agency did not violate the Sunshine Law when agency employees
conducted an investigation into a licensee’s alleged failure to follow state law, and an assistant
director made the decision to le a complaint as “[c]ommunication among administrative sta
in fullling investigatory, advisory, or charging functions does not constitute a ‘Sunshine’ Law
violation.” Baker v. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 937 So. 2d 1161
(Fla. 4th DCA 2006), review denied, 954 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2007). And see Knox v. District School
Board of Brevard, supra, concluding that a team of employees appointed by an area superintendent
to meet with her to interview, evaluate and recommend applicants to the superintendent served
only in a “fact-nding or advisory” capacity since the superintendent received all applications for
the position and he decided which applicants he would interview and nominate to the school
board
Similarly, the court in Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), ruled
that the Sunshine Law did not apply to informal meetings of sta where the discussions were
“merely informational,” where none of the individuals attending the meetings had any decision-
making authority during the meetings, and where no formal action was taken or could have been
taken at the meetings.
Accordingly, “meetings among agency sta to assess and make recommendations regarding
contract management do not implicate” open meetings requirements. Florida Environmental
Regulation Specialists, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 342 So. 3d 710 (Fla.
1st DCA 2022). e court observed that “there was no delegation of policy making authority
to any group of sta members at the department and the decision to terminate the contract was
made by the agency ocial tasked with doing so.” Id. See also Molina v. City of Miami, 837 So. 2d
462, 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (police discharge of rearms committee not subject to Sunshine
Law because the committee “is nothing more than a meeting of sta members who serve in a fact-
nding advisory capacity to the chief ”); J.I. v. Department of Children and Families, 922 So. 2d
405 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (Sunshine Law not applicable to Department of Children and Families
permanency stang meetings conducted to determine whether to le a petition to terminate
parental rights); and National Council on Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 179
(Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (Sunshine Law inapplicable to meetings “held solely for the purpose of
gathering information”).
However, if a sta committee has been delegated decision-making authority as opposed
to mere fact-nding or information-gathering, the Sunshine Law applies to the committee. See
Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934, 938 (Fla. 1983). It is the nature of the act performed, not
the makeup of the committee or the proximity of the act to the nal decision, which determines
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
5
whether a committee composed of sta is subject to the Sunshine Law. Id. See News-Press
Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546, 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), concluding that
it would be “ludicrous” to hold that “a certain committee is governed by the Sunshine Law when
it consists of members of the public, who are presumably acting for the public, but hold that a
committee may escape the Sunshine Law if it consists of individuals who owe their allegiance
to, and receive their salaries from, the governing authority;” and Evergreen the Tree Treasurers
of Charlotte County, Inc. v. Charlotte County Board of County Commissioners, 810 So. 2d 526,
531-532 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (sta committee members delegated decision-making authority
from public ocials no longer function as sta members but “stand in the shoes of such public
ocials” insofar as the Sunshine Law is concerned).
us, in Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d
1099 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), the district court determined that a committee composed primarily
of sta that was created by a college purchasing director to assist and advise her in evaluating
contract proposals was subject to the Sunshine Law. e committee’s job to “weed through
the various proposals, to determine which were acceptable and to rank them accordingly” was
sucient to bring the committee within the scope of the Sunshine Law. See also Roscow v.
Abreu, No. 03-CA-1833 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. August 6, 2004), available in the Cases database at
the open government site at myoridalegal.com (committee created by the state department of
transportation and composed of ocials from state, local, and federal agencies was subject to
the Sunshine Law because the committee was responsible for screening and evaluating potential
corridors and alignments for a possible expansion of the Suncoast Parkway); AGO 05-06 (city
development review committee, composed of several city ocials and representatives of various
city departments to review and approve development applications, is subject to the Sunshine
Law); and AGO 86-51 (land selection committee appointed by water management district and
delegated decision-making authority to consider projects for inclusion on a list of proposed
acquisition projects must comply with Sunshine Law “even though such committee may be
composed entirely of district sta and its decisions and recommendations are subject to further
action by the district’s governing board”).
e Silver Express decision was cited in a recent case nding that textbook committees
established by a school superintendent to evaluate textbooks using a “quantitative ‘rubric for
evaluation’” as provided in a school board policy were subject to the Sunshine Law. e court
noted that even though the superintendent had the statutory duty to recommend textbooks
to the school board, the school board had the authority to select the textbooks. Because the
textbooks with the highest number of points were selected for recommendation to the school
board, the textbook committee selections constituted rankings and “clearly ‘helped to crystalize
the decision to be made by’” the school board. Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc. v. School Board of
Collier County, 328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), quoting Silver Express, 691 So. 2d at 1100.
Similarly, in Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 877 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), the court
held that a meeting of a pre-termination conference panel established pursuant to a county
ordinance and composed of a department head, personnel director, and equal opportunity
director should have been held in the Sunshine. Even though the county administrator had the
sole authority to discipline employees, that authority had been delegated to the department head
who in turn chose to share that authority with the other members of the panel.
By contrast, in Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d
755, 763 (Fla. 2010), the Court found that a county administrator’s discussions with sta and
consultants while negotiating a memorandum of understanding with a baseball team did not
violate the Sunshine Law because the administrator’s “so-called negotiations team only served an
informational role.” According to the Court, “[t]his is not a situation where [the administrator]
and the individuals he consulted made joint decisions. Cf. Dascott v. Palm Beach County, [supra].”
See also McDougall v. Culver, 3 So. 3d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) and Jordan v. Jenne, 938 So. 2d
526 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).
6
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
2. Candidates or members-elect
a. Candidates
e Sunshine Law does not apply to candidates for oce, unless the candidate is an
incumbent seeking reelection. AGO 92-05.
b. Members-elect
e requirements of the Sunshine Law apply not only to meetings of covered boards or
commissions but also to “meetings with or attended by any person elected to such board or
commission, but who has not yet taken oce.” Section 286.011(1), F.S. us, members-elect
are subject to the Sunshine Law in the same manner as board members who are currently in
oce. See also Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288, 289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (individual, upon
election to public oce, loses his or her status as a private individual and acquires a position more
akin to that of a public trustee and therefore is subject to s. 286.011, F.S.). Cf. Inf. Op. to Lamar,
August 2, 1993 (Sunshine Law applies to transition team made up of citizens appointed by the
mayor to make recommendations on city government reorganization). And see Linares v. District
School Board of Pasco County, No. 17-00230 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 10, 2018), available in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (Sunshine Law applied
to advisory committee members “from the moment each member was selected to be on the
[committee]”).
A candidate who is unopposed is not considered to be a member-elect subject to the
Sunshine Law until the election has been held. AGO 98-60. Accord Inf. Op. to Popowitz, August
12, 2016. e Popowitz opinion references a 2010 opinion from the Division of Elections (Div.
of Elections Op. 10-09, July 26, 2010), nding that the date of a candidate’s election to oce
could be deemed to be either the date specied by a court in an election case, election day itself,
the date the nal canvassing board certies the election results, or some other date, depending
upon the particular factual situation involved.
3. Commissions created by the Florida Constitution
Boards or commissions created by the Constitution which prescribes the manner of the
exercise of their constitutional powers are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S., when carrying out such
constitutionally prescribed duties. See Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
(judicial nominating commissions are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S.). Cf. In re Advisory Opinion
of the Governor, 334 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1976) (clemency power does not exist by virtue of legislative
enactment; rather Constitution suciently prescribes rules for the manner of exercise of the
power); and AGO 77-65 (Ch. 120, F.S., inapplicable to Constitution Revision Commission
established by Art. XI, s. 2, Fla. Const.). Compare Turner v. Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1st
DCA), armed and remanded, 389 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1980), holding that the Parole Commission
[now known as the Florida Commission on Oender Review, see s. 1, Ch. 14-191, Laws of
Florida] which Art. IV, s. 8(c), Fla. Const., recognizes may be created by law, is subject to s.
286.011, F.S.
However, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., establishes a constitutional right of access to meetings
of any collegial public body of the executive branch of state government by providing that such
meetings must be open and noticed to the public unless exempted by the Legislature pursuant to
Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., or specically closed by the Constitution.
4. Ex ocio board members
An ex ocio board member is subject to the Sunshine Law regardless of whether he or she
is serving in a voting or non-voting capacity. AGO 05-18. Accord Inf. Op. to Ardaman, June 24,
2021 (mayor who serves as a non-voting ex ocio member of various municipal boards is subject
to the Sunshine Law). And see Linares v. District School Board of Pasco County, No. 17-00230 (Fla.
6th Cir. Ct. January 10, 2018), available in the Cases database at the open government site at
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
7
myoridalegal.com (nding that the Sunshine Law applied equally to all members of an advisory
committee, including a sta member appointed as a non-voting member of the committee whose
role was only to advise the voting committee members).
5. Federal entities
Federal agencies, i.e., agencies created under federal law, operating within the state, do not
come within the purview of the state Sunshine Law. AGO 71-191. us, meetings of a federally-
created council are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 84-16.
However, if a board is created pursuant state law, the Sunshine Law applies even if federal
ocials serve on the board. See Inf. Op. to Markham, September 10, 1996 (technical oversight
committee established by state agencies as part of settlement agreement in federal lawsuit subject
to Sunshine Law); and Inf. Op. to Green, December 11, 1998 (tri-state river commission
established pursuant to state and federal law is subject to the Sunshine Law). See also Inf. Op. to
Knox, January 6, 2005 (St. Johns River Alliance, Inc., a non-prot corporation formed to help
carry out the federal American Heritage Rivers Initiative and the associated intergovernmental
Partnership Agreement among state, local and federal governmental entities, is subject to s.
286.011, F.S., requirements); and Roscow v. Abreu, No. 03-CA-1833 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. August
6, 2004), available in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(committee created by the state department of transportation and composed of ocials from
state, local, and federal agencies was subject to the Sunshine Law because the committee was
responsible for screening and evaluating potential corridors and alignments for a possible
expansion of the Suncoast Parkway). Cf. Brown v. Denton, 152 So. 3d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
(closed-door federal mediation sessions which resulted in changes to pension benets of city
employees in certain unions constituted collective bargaining negotiations which should have
been held in the Sunshine).
6. Governor and Cabinet
Article IV, s. 4 of the Florida Constitution, establishes “a cabinet composed of an attorney
general, a chief nancial ocer, and a commissioner of agriculture.” e Governor and Cabinet
serve as the head of certain departments within the executive branch. In addition, the Governor
and Cabinet have responsibilities that arise under the Constitution. See Art. IV, s. 8, Fla. Const.
(clemency).
e Sunshine Law does not apply to those powers of the Governor and Cabinet which
derive from the Constitution; thus, the Governor and Cabinet in dispensing pardons and the
other forms of clemency authorized by Art. IV, s. 8(a), Fla. Const., are not subject to s. 286.011,
F.S. Cf. In re Advisory Opinion of the Governor, 334 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1976) (Constitution
suciently prescribes rules for the manner of exercise of gubernatorial clemency power; legislative
intervention is, therefore, unwarranted).
Section 286.011, F.S., however, does apply to those functions of the Governor and Cabinet
which are statutory responsibilities as opposed to duties arising under the Constitution. us,
the Governor and Cabinet are subject to the Sunshine Law when sitting in their capacity as a
board created by the Legislature or whose powers are prescribed by the Legislature, such as the
Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund or the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement. In such cases, the Governor and Cabinet are not exercising powers derived from
the Constitution but are subject to the “dominion and control” of the Legislature.
Moreover, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., requires that meetings of “any collegial public body
of the executive branch of state government” be open and noticed to the public. e only
exceptions to this constitutional right of access are those meetings which have been exempted
by the Legislature pursuant to Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., or which are specically closed by
the Constitution. And see Article III s. 4(e), Fla. Const., providing, in relevant part that “all
prearranged gatherings, between . . . the governor, the president of the senate, or the speaker
8
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
of the house of representatives, the purpose of which is to agree upon formal legislative action
that will be taken at a subsequent time, or at which formal legislative action is taken, regarding
pending legislation or amendments, shall be reasonably open to the public.”
7. Individual board members
Section 286.011, F.S., applies to public boards and commissions, i.e., collegial bodies, and
has been applied to meetings of “two or more members” of the same board or commission when
discussing some matter which foreseeably will come before the board or commission. erefore,
the statute does not ordinarily apply to an individual member of a public board or commission
or to public ocials who are not board or commission members. See National Council of
Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017); and Mitchell v. School
Board of Leon County, 335 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). See also Inf. Op. to Dillener, January
5, 1990 (Sunshine Law not normally applicable to meeting of town council member with private
citizens). Cf. Jennings v. Dade County, 589 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), review denied, 598
So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1992), stating that ex parte (i.e., from one side only) communications in quasi-
judicial proceedings raise a presumption that the contact was prejudicial to the decision-making
process; and s. 286.0115, F.S., enacted in response to the Jennings case, relating to access to local
public ocials in quasi-judicial proceedings.
However, there have been circumstances where the application of the Sunshine Law to
individual board members has been considered. As stated by the Supreme Court, the Sunshine
Law is to be construed “so as to frustrate all evasive devices.” Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison,
296 So. 2d 473, 477 (Fla. 1974). And see AGO 89-39 (aides to county commissioners are not
subject to the Sunshine law unless they have been delegated decision-making functions outside of
the ambit of normal sta functions, are acting as liaisons between board members, or are acting
in place of the board or its members at their direction).
a. Individual board member meeting with a member of another public board
e Sunshine Law does not apply to a meeting between individuals who are members of
dierent boards unless one or more of the individuals has been delegated the authority to act on
behalf of his or her board. Rowe v. Pinellas Sports Authority, 461 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1984). Accord
AGO 84-16 (meeting between the chair of a private industry council created pursuant to federal
law and the chair of a ve-county employment and training consortium created pursuant to state
law is not subject to Sunshine Law, unless there is a delegation of decision-making authority to the
chair of the consortium); and Inf. Op. to McClash, April 29, 1992 (Sunshine Law generally not
applicable to county commissioner meeting with individual member of metropolitan planning
organization). And see News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Lee County, Florida, 570 So. 2d
1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (Sunshine Law not applicable to mediation proceeding attended by
individual members of city and county boards who were in litigation because only one member
of each board was present at the proceedings and no nal settlement negotiations could be made
during the mediation conference).
An individual city council member may, therefore, meet privately with an individual
member of the municipal planning and zoning board to discuss a recommendation made by that
board since two or more members of either board are not present, provided that no delegation
of decision-making authority has been made and neither member is acting as a liaison. AGO
87-34. Accord AGOs 99-55 (school board member meeting with member of advisory committee
established by school board), and 97-52 (discussions between individual member of community
college board of trustees and school board member regarding acquisition of property by school
board).
b. Mayor meeting with individual city commissioner or city council member
If the mayor is a member of the council or has a voice in decision-making through the
power to break tie votes, meetings between the mayor and a member of the city council to discuss
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
9
some matter which will come before the city council are subject to the Sunshine Law. AGO 83-
70. And see Inf. Op. to Ardaman, June 24, 2021 (Sunshine Law applies to discussions between
a member of the city council and a mayor who serves as a non-voting member of the council).
On the other hand, if the mayor is not a member of the city council and does not possess
any power to vote even in the case of a tie vote but possesses only the power to veto legislation,
the mayor may privately meet with an individual member of the city council without violating
the Sunshine Law, provided the mayor is not acting as a liaison between members and neither
individual has been delegated the authority to act on behalf of the council. AGOs 90-26 and
85-36. And see Inf. Op. to Cassady, April 7, 2005 (mayor who is not a member of the city
council and cannot vote even in the event of a tie, may meet with an individual council member
to discuss the mayor’s recommendations to the council concerning prospective appointees). Cf.
City of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (since
mayor was responsible under the city charter for disciplining city employees, mayor in carrying
out this function was not subject to s. 286.011, F.S.).
c. Use of nonboard members or sta to act as liaisons or to conduct a de facto meeting
of the board
As a general rule, individual board members “may call upon sta members for factual
information and advice without being subject to the Sunshine Law’s requirements.” Sarasota
Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755, 764 (Fla. 2010). And
see AGO 81-42 (the fact that a city council member has expressed his or her views or voting
intent on an upcoming matter to a news reporter prior to the scheduled public meeting does
not violate the Sunshine Law so long as the reporter is not being used by the member as an
intermediary in order to circumvent the requirements of s. 286.011, F.S.). Compare, State v.
Dorworth, No. 14-MM-5841 (Fla. Orange Co. Ct. October 21, 2014), armed, No. 14-AP-48
(Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. August 19, 2015), available in the Cases database at the open government site
at myoridalegal.com, dismissing a misdemeanor charge against a lobbyist who was accused of
violating the Sunshine Law by relaying information between board members and thereby aiding
the members to meet without complying with the Sunshine Law. e trial judge determined that
by charging the lobbyist, the state attorney “expanded the reach of the Sunshine Law to private
citizens; and, the Legislature did not intend for the statute to apply to private citizens.”
However, because the Sunshine Law must be construed to “frustrate all evasive devices,”
the law is implicated by a meeting between a board member and a nonboard member who is
being used as a liaison for board members. See Transparency for Florida, Inc. v. City of Port St.
Lucie, 240 So. 3d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), citing to AGOs 96-35 (city manager may not
ask each commissioner to state his or her position on a specic matter that will foreseeably be
considered by the commission at a public meeting, in order to provide the information to the
members of the commission) and 75-59 (city manager may meet individually with city council
members “to discuss city business provided that the manager does not act as a liaison for board
members by circulating information and thoughts of individual councilmembers to the rest of
the board”).
erefore, a city manager should refrain from asking each commissioner to state his or her
position on a specic matter which will foreseeably be considered by the commission at a public
meeting in order to provide the information to the members of the commission. AGO 89-23. See
also Inf. Op. to Goren, October 28, 2009 (while individual city commissioners may seek advice
or information from sta, city should be cognizant of the potential that commissioners seeking
clarication by follow-up with sta when sta responses are provided to all commissioners could
be considered to have participated in a de facto meeting of the commissioners by using sta
as a conduit between commissioners). Compare Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government v.
City of Sarasota, supra at 765 (private sta meetings with individual county commissioners in
preparation for a public hearing on a proposed memorandum of understanding [MOU] did
not violate the Sunshine Law because the meetings were “informational briengs regarding the
10
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
contents of the MOU” and “[t]here is no evidence that [county] sta communicated what any
commissioner said to any other commissioner”).
Additionally, in Blackford v. School Board of Orange County, 375 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1979), the court held that a series of scheduled successive meetings between the school
superintendent and individual members of the school board were subject to the Sunshine
Law. While normally meetings between the school superintendent and an individual school
board member would not be subject to s. 286.011, F.S., these meetings were held in “rapid -
-re succession” in order to avoid a public airing of a controversial redistricting problem. us,
even though the superintendent was “adamant that he did not act as a go-between during these
discussions and [denied] that he told any one board member the opinions of the others,” the one-
to-one meetings amounted to a de facto meeting of the school board in violation of s. 286.011,
F.S. Id. at 580. See also Transparency for Florida, Inc. v. City of Port St. Lucie, 240 So. 3d 780
(4th DCA 2018) (evidence did not “conclusively refute” allegations that a series of telephone
calls between the city attorney and individual city councilmembers to discuss termination of
and severance pay to, the city manager did not constitute a Sunshine Law violation; accordingly,
trial court should not have entered summary judgment in favor of the city). Cf. State v. Foster, 12
F.L.W. Supp. 1194a (Fla. Broward Co. Ct. September 26, 2005). In Foster, the judge rejected the
argument made by the commissioners, that the Sunshine Law permitted city commissioners to
attend a private breakfast meeting at which the sheri spoke and the commissioners individually
questioned the sheri but did not direct comments or questions to each other. e court denied
the commissioners’ motion for summary judgment and ruled that the discussion should have
been held in the Sunshine because the sheri was a “common facilitator” who received comments
from each commissioner in front of the other commissioners.
Similarly, in Citizens for a Better Royal Palm Beach, Inc. v. Village of Royal Palm Beach, No.
CL 9114417 AA (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. May 14, 1992), available in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com, the court invalidated a contract for the sale of municipal
property when it determined that after the proposal to sell the property which had been discussed
and approved at a public meeting collapsed, the city manager met individually with council
members and from those discussions the property was sold to another group. e circuit court
found that these meetings resulted in a substantial change in the terms of sale and that the
execution of the contract, therefore, violated the Sunshine Law. See also Sentinel Communications
Company v. School Board of Osceola County, No. CI92-0045 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. April 3, 1992),
available in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (series of private
meetings between school superintendent and individual school board members to consider sta
recommendations concerning administrative structure of the school system and to privately
address any of the board’s concerns, should have been held in the sunshine; while individual
board members are not prohibited from meeting privately with sta or the superintendent for
informational purposes or on an ad hoc basis, the Sunshine Law “shall be construed to prohibit
the scheduling of a series of such meetings which concern a specic agenda”); and AGO 93-90
(board that is responsible for assessing the performance of its chief executive ocer [CEO] should
not use a review procedure in which individual board members evaluate the CEO’s performance
and send their individual written comments to the board chair for compilation and subsequent
discussion with the CEO).
Not all sta decisions, however, are required to be made or approved by a board. us,
the district court concluded in Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. omas, 364 So. 2d
480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), that the decision to appeal made by legal counsel to a public board
after discussions between the legal sta and individual members of that board was not subject to
the Sunshine Law. And see Inf. Op. to Biasco, July 2, 1997 (administrative ocers or sta who
serve public boards should not poll board members on issues which will foreseeably come before
the board although an administrative ocer is not precluded from contacting individual board
members for their views on a matter when the ocer, and not the board, has been vested with
the authority to take action).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
11
d. Delegation of authority to individual to act on behalf of the board
“e Sunshine Law does not provide for any ‘government by delegation’ exception; a
public body cannot escape the application of the Sunshine Law by undertaking to delegate the
conduct of public business through an alter ego.” IDS Properties, Inc. v. Town of Palm Beach, 279
So. 2d 353, 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), certied question answered sub nom., Town of Palm Beach
v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974). See also News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson,
410 So. 2d 546, 547-548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (when public ocials delegate de facto authority
to act on their behalf in the formulation, preparation, and promulgation of plans on which
foreseeable action will be taken by those public ocials, those delegated that authority stand in
the shoes of such public ocials insofar as the Sunshine Law is concerned).
In News-Press Publishing Company v. Lee County, 570 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), a
newspaper challenged the trial court’s decision to require the parties (two cities and a county) to
participate in mediation and to each appoint a representative “with full authority to bind them.”
e judge then amended the order to allow the parties to limit the representatives’ authority so
that no nal settlement decisions could be made during the mediation conference. On appeal,
the district court concluded that the mediation’s narrow scope did not give rise to a substantial
delegation aecting the board’s decision-making function so as to require the mediation to be
open to the public. 570 So. 2d at 1327. And see Broward County v. Conner, 660 So. 2d 288,
290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), review denied, 669 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 1996) (since Sunshine Law
provides that actions of a public board are not valid unless they are made at an open public
meeting, a county’s attorneys would not be authorized to enter into a settlement agreement
on the commission’s behalf “without formal action by the county commission at a meeting as
required by the statute”). Compare Lee County v. Pierpont, 693 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997),
armed, 710 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 1998) (authorization to county attorney to make settlement oers
to landowners not to exceed appraised value plus 20%, rather than a specic dollar amount, did
not violate the Sunshine Law).Moreover, the Attorney General’s Oce has advised that a single
member of a board who has been delegated the authority to negotiate the terms of a lease on
behalf of the board “is subject to the Sunshine Law and, therefore, cannot negotiate for such a
lease in secret.” AGO 74-294. Accord AGO 84-54. Similarly, when an individual member of a
public board, or a board member and the executive director of the board, conducts a hearing or
investigatory proceeding on behalf of the entire board, the hearing or proceeding must be held
in the sunshine. AGOs 75-41 and 74-84. And see AGO 10-15 (special magistrate subject to the
Sunshine Law when exercising the delegated decision-making authority of the value adjustment
board).
e Attorney General’s Oce has advised that a single member of a board who has been
delegated the authority to negotiate the terms of a lease on behalf of the board “is subject to the
Sunshine Law and, therefore, cannot negotiate for such a lease in secret.” AGO 74-294. Accord
AGO 84-54. Similarly, when an individual member of a public board, or a board member and
the executive director of the board, conducts a hearing or investigatory proceeding on behalf
of the entire board, the hearing or proceeding must be held in the sunshine. AGOs 75-41 and
74-84. And see AGO 10-15 (special magistrate subject to the Sunshine Law when exercising the
delegated decision-making authority of the value adjustment board).
However, if the board member has been authorized only to gather information or function
as a fact-nder, the Attorney General’s Oce has concluded that the Sunshine Law does not
apply. See e.g. AGOs 95-06, 93-78, and 90-17 (if board member is authorized only to explore
various contract proposals, with such proposals being related back to the governing body for
consideration, the discussions between the board member and the applicant are not subject to
the Sunshine Law). Cf. State, Department of Management Services v. Lewis, 653 So. 2d 467 (Fla.
1st DCA 1995) (issuance of an order of reconsideration by a board chair does not violate the
Sunshine Law where the purpose of the order is to provide notice of a hearing to the parties and
12
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
allow them an opportunity to provide argument on the issue).
More recently, the First District Court of Appeal ruled that a statute (s. 627.091[6], F.S.),
requiring a “committee” of a national insurance rating organization to comply with the Sunshine
Law when meeting to discuss the need to alter Florida rates, did not apply to an actuary who
performed this function instead of a committee. National Council on Compensation Insurance v.
Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). In Fee, the court noted that the term “committee”
has been dened as a “subordinate group,” not a single person, and that “the multi-person
concept of the term ‘committee’ further nds support in well-established precedent construing
the Sunshine Law.”
Moreover, if the individual, rather than the board, is vested by law, charter, or ordinance
with the authority to take action, such discussions are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S. See City
of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (since the
mayor was responsible under the city charter for disciplining city employees and since the mayor
was not a board or commission and was not acting for a board, meetings between the mayor and
a city employee concerning the employee’s duties were not subject to s. 286.011, F.S.). Cf. AGO
13-14 (where contract terms regarding the police chief’s employment have been discussed and
approved at a public city commission meeting, Sunshine Law does not require that the consistent
written employment contract drafted by the town attorney as directed by the commission be
subsequently presented to and approved at another commission meeting).
8. Judiciary
e open meetings provision found in Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., does not include meetings
of the judiciary. In addition, separation of powers principles make it unlikely that the Sunshine
Law, a legislative enactment, could apply to the courts established pursuant to Art. V, Fla.
Const. AGO 83-97. us, questions of access to judicial proceedings usually arise under other
constitutional guarantees relating to open and public judicial proceedings, Amend. VI, U.S.
Const., and freedom of the press, Amend. I, U.S. Const.
However, a circuit conict committee established by the Legislature to approve attorneys
handling conict cases is subject to the Sunshine Law, even though the chief judge or his or her
designee is a member, because the “circuit conict committees are created by the Legislature,
subject to its dominion and control.” AGO 83-97. And see Canney v. Board of Public Instruction
of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973) (Sunshine Law applies to quasi-judicial functions;
a board exercising quasi-judicial functions is not a part of the judicial branch of government).
a. Criminal proceedings
A court possesses the inherent power to control the conduct of proceedings before it.
Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982); and State ex rel. Miami
Herald Publishing Company v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 1976). A three-pronged test for
closing criminal proceedings has been developed to provide “the best balance between the need
for open government and public access, through the media, to the judicial process, and the
paramount right of a defendant in a criminal proceeding to a fair trial before an impartial jury.”
Lewis, supra at 7. And see Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 136 So. 3d 770, 779 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2014); and Miami Herald Media Company v. State, 218 So. 3d 460 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
e factors to be considered are whether:
1) closure is necessary to prevent a serious and imminent threat to the administration of
justice;
2) no alternatives are available, other than change of venue, which would protect the
defendant’s right to a fair trial; and
3) closure would be eective in protecting the defendant’s rights without being broader
than necessary to accomplish that purpose.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
13
b. Civil proceedings
Stressing that all trials, civil and criminal, are public events and that there is a strong
presumption of public access to these proceedings, the Supreme Court in Barron v. Florida
Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 1988), set forth the following factors which must
be considered by a court in reviewing a request for closure of civil proceedings:
1) a strong presumption of openness exists for all court proceedings;
2) both the public and news media have standing to challenge any closure order with the
burden of proof being on the party seeking closure;
3) closure should occur only when necessary
a) to comply with established public policy as set forth in the Constitution,
statutes, rules or case law;
b) to protect trade secrets;
c) to protect a compelling governmental interest;
d) to obtain evidence to properly determine legal issues in a case;
e) to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties; or
f) to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected by a
common law or privacy right not generally inherent in the specic type of civil
proceeding sought to be closed.
4) whether a reasonable alternative is available to accomplish the desired result and if none
exists, the least restrictive closure necessary to accomplish its purpose is used;
5) the presumption of openness continues through the appellate review process and the party
seeking closure continues to have the burden to justify closure.
And see Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 723 So. 2d 208, 209 (Fla.
1998), reiterating support for the Barron standards and stating that “public access to court proceedings
and records [is] important to assure testimonial trustworthiness; in providing a wholesome eect
on all ocers of the court for purposes of moving those ocers to a strict conscientiousness in the
performance of duty; in allowing nonparties the opportunity of learning whether they are aected;
and in instilling a strong condence in judicial remedies, which would be absent under a system of
secrecy;” and Lake v. State, 193 So. 3d 932, 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (trial court did not depart
from essential requirements of law by refusing to close Jimmy Ryce Act civil commitment review
proceeding; statutory provision requiring that certain treatment records introduced into evidence
be maintained under seal unless opened by the judge “does not require that the press and public be
barred from any discussion of treatment or treatment records during a review hearing”).
c. Depositions
While the courts have recognized that court proceedings are public events and the public
generally has access to such proceedings, the general public and the press do not have a right under
the First Amendment or the rules of procedure to attend discovery depositions. See Palm Beach
Newspapers, Inc. v. Burk, 504 So. 2d 378, 380 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S.Ct. 346 (1987),
stating that while discovery depositions in criminal cases are judicially compelled for the purpose
of allowing parties to investigate and prepare, they are not judicial proceedings. Accord Post-
Newsweek Stations, Florida, Inc. v. State, 510 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1987) (media not entitled to notice
and opportunity to attend pretrial discovery depositions in criminal cases); and SCI Funeral Services
of Florida, Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (upholding protective order closing
depositions to the media based on privacy concerns). Cf. Lewis v. State, 958 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2007) (while Burk applied to unled depositions made during an ongoing, active criminal
prosecution, materials related to defendant’s prosecution, including depositions, are subject to
disclosure after the case becomes nal).
14
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
d. Florida Bar grievance proceedings
An attorney’s claim that the Florida Bar violated the Sunshine Law by refusing to
allow him to attend a grievance committee meeting of the Bar was rejected in Florida Bar v.
Committee, 916 So. 2d 741, 744-745 (Fla. 2005): “e grievance committee meetings of the
Bar are private, and therefore the Bar is justied in prohibiting [the attorney] from attendance.”
e Court reiterated its statement from e Florida Bar: In re Advisory Opinion, 398 So. 2d
446, 447 (Fla. 1981), that “[n]either the legislature nor the governor can control what is purely
a judicial function.”
e. Grand juries
Section 905.24, F.S., provides that “[g]rand jury proceedings are secret”; thus, these
proceedings are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S. See Clein v. State, 52 So. 2d 117, 120 (Fla.
1950) (it is the policy of the law to shield the proceedings of grand juries from public scrutiny);
and In re Getty, 427 So. 2d 380, 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (public disclosure of grand jury
proceedings “could result in a myriad of harmful eects”). e grand jury has also been
referred to as a “coordinate branch of the judiciary, and as an arm, appendage, or adjunct of
the circuit court.” State ex rel. Christian v. Rudd, 302 So. 2d 821, 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974).
Cf. Butterworth v. Smith, 110 S.Ct. 1376 (1990), striking down a Florida statute to the extent
that it prohibited a witness from disclosing his own testimony before a grand jury after the
grand jury’s term has ended.
In addition, hearings on certain grand jury procedural motions are closed. e
procedural steps contemplated in s. 905.28(1), F.S., for reports or presentments of the grand
jury relating to an individual which are not accompanied by a true bill or indictment, are
cloaked with the same degree of secrecy as is enjoyed by the grand jury in the receipt of
evidence, its deliberations, and nal product. erefore, a newspaper has no right of access to
grand jury procedural motions and to the related hearing. In re Grand Jury, Fall Term 1986,
528 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). And see Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., v. Doe, 460 So. 2d
406 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (hearing ancillary or related to a grand jury session constitutes a
proceeding which comes within the protection of s. 905.24); and In re Subpoena to Testify Before
Grand Jury Directed to Custodian of Records, 864 F.2d 1559 (11th Cir. 1989) (while a court
must hold a hearing and give reasons for closure of criminal court proceedings, a court is not
required to give newspapers a hearing and give reasons for closure of grand jury proceedings).
f. Judicial nominating commissions/Judicial Qualications Commission
Judicial nominating commissions for the Supreme Court of Florida, the district courts
of appeal, or for a judicial circuit for the trial courts within the circuit are not subject to the
Sunshine Law. Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Article V, s. 11(d),
Fla. Const., however, requires that except for its deliberations, the proceedings of a judicial
nominating commission and its records are open to the public. While the deliberations
of a commission are closed, such a limitation appears to be applicable to that point in the
proceedings when the commissioners are weighing and examining the reasons for and against
a choice. Inf. Op. to Russell, August 2, 1991.
e statewide judicial nominating commission for workers’ compensation judges,
however, is not a judicial nominating commission as contemplated by the Constitution; thus,
such a commission created pursuant to the workers’ compensation law is subject to s. 286.011,
F.S. AGO 90-76.
Proceedings of the Judicial Qualications Commission are condential. However, upon
a nding of probable cause and the ling of formal charges against a judge or justice by the
commission with the Clerk of the Supreme Court, all further proceedings of the commission
are public. Article V, s. 12(a)(4), Fla. Const.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
15
g. Mediation proceedings
(1) Court-ordered mediation
Court-ordered mediation and arbitration are to be conducted according to the rules of
practice and procedure adopted by the Florida Supreme Court. Sections 44.102(1) and 44.103(1),
F.S. And see rule 10.360(a), Florida Rules For Certied and Court-Appointed Mediators (“A
mediator shall maintain condentiality of all information revealed during mediation except where
disclosure is required or permitted by law or is agreed to by all parties.”). (e.s.) Cf. Everglades Law
Center, Inc. v. South Florida Water Management District, 290 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019),
noting that written mediation communications are condential pursuant to ss. 44.103(3) and
44. 405(1), F.S., and must be redacted from the full transcript of a closed litigation session when
it becomes public pursuant to s. 286.011(8), F.S.
Public access to court-ordered mediation proceedings between two cities and a county
was raised in News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Lee County, Florida, 570 So. 2d 1325 (Fla.
2d DCA 1990). Initially, the judge required the parties to have present a representative “with
full authority to bind them”; however, after the media objected to the closure of the mediation
proceeding, the judge amended the order to limit the representatives’ authority so that no nal
settlement decisions could be made during the mediation conference. On appeal, the district
court noted that no two members of any of the public boards would be present at the mediation
proceedings and that the mediation’s narrow scope did not give rise to a substantial delegation
aecting the boards’ decision-making function so as to require the mediation to be open to the
public. 570 So. 2d at 1327. Cf. Brown v. Denton, 152 So. 3d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (closed-
door federal mediation sessions which resulted in changes to pension benets of city employees
in certain unions constituted collective bargaining negotiations which should have been held in
the Sunshine; “[w]e cannot condone hiding behind federal mediation, whether intentionally or
unintentionally, in an eort to thwart the requirements of the Sunshine Law.”).
Similarly, in O’Connell v. Board of Trustees, 1 F.L.W. Supp. 285 (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. Feb. 9,
1993), the court noted that as to public agencies, mediation is subject to the Sunshine Law; thus,
no more than one member of a collegial body should attend the mediation conference. And
see Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.720(d), stating that “[i]f a party to mediation is a public entity required to
operate in compliance with chapter 286, Florida Statutes, that party shall be deemed to appear
at a mediation conference by the physical presence of a representative with full authority to
negotiate on behalf of the entity and to recommend settlement to the appropriate decision-
making body of the entity.” Accord Fla. R. App. P. 9.720(a).
(2) Other mediation proceedings
Mediation meetings conducted pursuant to the Florida Governmental Conict Resolution
Act, ss. 164.101-164.1061, F.S., which involve ocials or representatives of local governmental
entities who have the authority to negotiate on behalf of that governmental entity are subject
to the Sunshine Law. Inf. Op. to McQuagge, February 13, 2002. Similarly, a closed attorney-
client session may not be held to discuss settlement negotiations on an issue that is the subject of
ongoing mediation pursuant to a partnership agreement between a water management district
and others which is not in litigation. AGO 06-03.
h. Statutes providing for closed court proceedings
Certain court proceedings may be closed in accordance with Florida Statutes as follows:
(1) Adoption: Hearings held under the Florida Adoption Act are closed. Section 63.162(1),
F.S. See In re Adoption of H.Y.T., 458 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 1984) (statute providing that all
adoption hearings shall be held in closed court is not unconstitutional).
(2) Dependency: Except as provided in s. 39.507, F.S., dependency adjudicatory hearings are
open to the public unless, by special order, the court determines that the public interest
16
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
or welfare of the child is best served by closing the hearing. Section 39.507(2), F.S. And
see Mayer v. State, 523 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 529 So. 2d 694
(Fla. 1988) (former version of statute requiring hearings to be closed did not violate First
Amendment).
(3) Guardian advocate appointments: Hearings for appointment of guardian advocates are
condential. Section 39.827(4), F.S.
(4) HIV test results: Court proceedings in cases where a person is seeking access to human
immunodeciency virus (HIV) test results are to be conducted in camera unless the person
tested agrees to a hearing in open court or the court determines that a public hearing is
necessary to the public interest and proper administration of justice. Section 381.004(2)
(e)9., F.S.
(5) Pregnancy termination notice waiver: Hearings conducted in accordance with a petition
for a waiver of the notice requirements pertaining to a minor seeking to terminate her
pregnancy shall remain condential and closed to the public, as provided by court rule.
Section 390.01114(6)(f), F.S.
(6) Termination of parental rights: Hearings involving termination of parental rights are
condential and closed to the public. Section 39.809(4), F.S. See Natural Parents of J.B.
v. Florida Department of Children and Family Services, 780 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2001), upholding
the constitutionality of the statute. And see J.I. v. Department of Children and Families,
922 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (Sunshine Law does not apply to Department of
Children and Families permanency stang meetings conducted to determine whether to
le petition to terminate parental rights). Cf. Staneld v. Florida Department of Children
and Families, 698 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (trial court may not issue “gag” order
preventing a woman from discussing a termination of parental rights case because “[t]he
court cannot prohibit citizens from exercising their First Amendment right to publicly
discuss knowledge that they have obtained independent of court documents even though
the information may mirror the information contained in court documents”).
(7) Victim and witness testimony in certain circumstances: Except as provided in s.
918.16(2), F.S., if any person under 16 years of age or any person with an intellectual dis-
ability is testifying in any civil or criminal trial concerning any sex oense, the judge shall
clear the courtroom, except for listed individuals. Section 918.16(1), F.S. If the victim
of a sex oense is testifying concerning that oense, the court shall clear the courtroom,
except for listed individuals, upon request of the victim, regardless of the victim’s age or
mental capacity. Section 918.16(2), F.S. Cf. Pritchett v. State, 566 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA),
review denied, 570 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1990) (where a trial court failed to make any ndings
to justify closure, application of s. 918.16, F.S., to the trial of a defendant charged with
capital sexual battery violates the defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial). Accord
Kovaleski v. State, 854 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), cause dismissed, 860 So. 2d 978
(Fla. 2003).
For a more complete listing of statutory exemptions, please see Appendix D and the Index.
9. Legislature
Article I, s. 24, Fla. Const., requires that meetings of the Legislature be open and noticed
as provided in Art. III, s. 4(e), Fla. Const., except with respect to those meetings exempted by
the Legislature pursuant to Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., or specically closed by the Constitution.
And see Art. III, s. 4(c), Fla. Const. (votes of members during nal passage of legislation pending
before a committee and, upon request of two members of a committee or subcommittee, on any
other question, must be recorded).
Pursuant to Art. III, s. 4(e), Fla. Const., the rules of procedure of each house of the
Legislature must provide that all legislative committee and subcommittee meetings of each house
and joint conference committee meetings be open and noticed. Such rules must also provide:
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
17
[A]ll prearranged gatherings, between more than two members
of the legislature, or between the governor, the president of the
senate, or the speaker of the house of representatives, the purpose
of which is to agree upon formal legislative action that will be
taken at a subsequent time, or at which formal legislative action
is taken, regarding pending legislation or amendments, shall be
reasonably open to the public. All open meetings shall be subject
to order and decorum. is section shall be implemented and
dened by the rules of each house, and such rules shall control
admission to the oor of each legislative chamber and may,
where reasonably necessary for security purposes or to protect a
witness appearing before a committee, provide for the closure of
committee meetings. Each house shall be the sole judge for the
interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of this section.
In accordance with Article III, s. 4(e), both the Senate and the House of Representatives
have adopted rules implementing this section. Senate Rules may be found online at senate.gov.
Rules of the House of Representatives may be found at myoridahouse.gov.
10. Married couple serving on the same board
ere is no per se violation of the Sunshine Law for a husband and wife to serve on the same
public board or commission so long as they do not discuss board business without complying
with the requirements of s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 89-06.
11. Private organizations
e Attorney General’s Oce has recognized that private organizations generally are not
subject to the Sunshine Law unless the private organization has been created by a public entity,
has been delegated the authority to perform some governmental function, or plays an integral
part in the decision-making process of a public entity. AGO 07-27.
However, as discussed below, the Sunshine Law applies to private entities created by law or
by public agencies, and to private entities providing services to governmental agencies and acting
on behalf of those agencies in the performance of their public duties.
a. Private entities created pursuant to law or by public agencies
e Supreme Court has stated that “[t]he Legislature intended to extend application of the
‘open meeting’ concept so as to bind every ‘board or commission’ of the state, or of any county or
political subdivision over which [the Legislature] has dominion or control.” City of Miami Beach
v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38, 40 (Fla. 1971).
Accordingly, if a private entity has been created by law or by a public agency to perform
a public function, the Sunshine Law applies. See National Council on Compensation Insurance v.
Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017), noting the application of the Sunshine Law to
governmental bodies and to private entities created by a public entity. Accord AGO 00-08 (“a
board or commission created by a public agency or entity is subject to section 286.011, Florida
Statutes”).
For example, in AGO 04-44, the Attorney General advised that a nonprot corporation
established by state law to manage corrections work programs of the Department of Corrections,
was subject to the Sunshine Law. And see AGOs 98-42 (association legislatively designated as the
governing organization of athletics in Florida public schools), 97-17 (not-for-prot corporation
created by a city redevelopment agency to assist in the implementation of its redevelopment
plan), and 16-01 and 98-01 (board of trustees of an insurance trust fund created pursuant to
collective bargaining agreement between a city and the employee union). Cf. s. 20.41(6) and
(8), F.S., providing that area agencies on aging, described as “nongovernmental, independent,
18
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
not-for-prot corporations” are “subject to [the Public Records Act], and, when considering any
contracts requiring the expenditure of funds, are subject to ss. 286.011-286.012, relating to
public meetings.”
b. Private entities providing services to public agencies
A private corporation performing services for a public agency and receiving compensation
for such services is not by virtue of this relationship alone subject to the Sunshine Law unless
the public agency’s governmental or legislative functions have been delegated to it. McCoy
Restaurants, Inc. v. City of Orlando, 392 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1980) (airlines are not by virtue of their
lease with the aviation authority public representatives subject to the Sunshine Law). And see
AGOs 98-47 (Sunshine Law does not apply to private nongovernmental organization when the
organization counsels and advises private business concerns on their participation in a federal loan
program made available through a city). 80-45 (the receipt of Medicare, Medicaid, government
grants and loans, or similar funds by a private nonprot hospital does not, standing alone, subject
the hospital to the Sunshine Law); and Inf. Op. to Gaetz and Coley, December 17, 2009 (mere
receipt of federal grant does not subject private economic development organization to Sunshine
Law).
However, although private entities are generally not subject to the Sunshine Law simply
because they do business with public agencies, the Sunshine Law can apply if a public entity has
delegated “the performance of its public purpose” to a private entity. Memorial Hospital-West
Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 729 So. 2d 373, 382-383 (Fla. 1999). Accord National
Council on Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017); and Holield
v. Big Bend Cares, Inc., 326 So. 3d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021).
For example, in Keesler v. Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc., 32 So. 3d 659, 660 (Fla.
1st DCA 2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1289 (Fla. 2010), the court deemed it “undisputed” that
a not-for-prot corporation charged by the City of Pensacola with overseeing the development of
public waterfront property “is subject to the requirements of the Sunshine Law.”
Similarly, the Attorney General’s Oce has found meetings of the following entities to
be subject to the Sunshine Law: Family Services Coalition, Inc., board of directors, performing
services for the Department of Children and Families which services would normally be performed
by the department, AGO 00-03; Astronauts Memorial Foundation when performing duties
funded under the General Appropriations Act, AGO 96-43; nonprot organization designated
by county to fulll role of county’s dissolved cultural aairs council, AGO 98-49; nonprot
corporation specically created to contract with county for operation of a public golf course on
county property acquired by public funds, AGO 02-53; downtown redevelopment task force
which, although not appointed by city commission, stood in place of the city commission when
considering downtown improvement issues, AGO 85-55; and a private nonprot corporation, if
the county accepts the corporation’s oer to review, recodify, and prepare draft amendments to the
county zoning code, AGO 83-95. Cf. Inf. Op. to Bedell, December 28, 2005 (private nonprot
organization which entered into an agreement with a city to operate a theater, received city
funding in the form of a loan for this purpose, and leased property from the city, should comply
with the Sunshine Law when holding discussions or making decisions regarding the theater).
More recently, the First District determined a national insurance rating organization with
statutory responsibility to le proposals for changes in Florida rates was not subject to the Sunshine
Law. e court determined that the state insurance agency retained the responsibility to approve
or disapprove rates and “did not delegate any authority to carry out an agency function required
to be performed in the sunshine.” National Council on Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So.
3d 172, 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). See also Holield v. Big Bend Cares, Inc., 326 So. 3d 739
(Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (private entity that entered into a contract with a state agency to perform
certain services was not subject to the Sunshine Law because the public entity did not delegate the
performance of its public purpose to the private corporation).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
19
c. Application of the Sunshine Law to specic private entities
(1) Direct-support organizations
In AGO 05-27, after reviewing the responsibilities of a nonprot corporation created
pursuant to statute as a direct-support organization and the organization’s relationship to the public
agency, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that the organization was subject to the Sunshine
Law. See also Inf. Op. to Chiumento, June 27, 1990 (Sunshine Law applies to school district
direct-support organizations created pursuant to statute; although the direct-support organizations
“constitute private nonprot corporations, they seek to assist the district school board in carrying
out its functions of meeting the educational needs of the students in the county”). And see AGOs
92-53 (John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art Foundation, Inc., established pursuant to statute
as a not-for-prot corporation to assist the museum in carrying out its functions subject to Sunshine
Law), and 11-01 (Sunshine Law applies to Biscayne Park Foundation, Inc., created as a nonprot
foundation to act as an instrumentality on behalf of the Village of Biscayne Park and intended to
enhance the Village’s opportunities to raise monies through special events, sponsorships, donations,
and grants for the Village).
e Legislature has specically exempted portions of meetings of some direct-support
organizations. For example, any portion of a meeting of the board of directors of a university
direct-support organization, or of the executive committee or other committee of the board, at
which any proposal seeking research funding from the organization or a plan or program for either
initiating or supporting research is discussed is exempt from s. 286.011, F.S. Section 1004.28(5)
(c), F.S. See also s. 292.055(9), F.S. (portions of meetings of Department of Veterans’ Aairs direct-
support organization during which the identity of a donor or potential donor who wishes to remain
anonymous is discussed are exempt).
(2) Economic development organizations
Several Attorney General Opinions have considered whether the Sunshine Law applies to
private economic development organizations. ese opinions have concluded that the Sunshine Law
applies when there has been a delegation of a public agency’s authority to conduct public business
such as carrying out the terms of the county’s economic development strategic plan. AGO 10-30.
See also AGO 10-44 (Sunshine Law applies to nonprot corporation delegated authority to carry
out the terms of the county’s green economic development plan). Compare Inf. Op. to Gaetz and
Coley, December 17, 2009 (open government laws did not apply to private economic development
corporation since no delegation of a public agency’s governmental function was apparent and the
corporation did not appear to play an integral part in the decision-making process of the agency).
Cf. Economic Development Commission v. Ellis, 178 So. 3d 118, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (trial court
erred by using the “delegation of function” test to conclude that a private entity under contract with
a county to provide economic development services was subject to the Public Records Act because
there was “not a clear, compelling, complete delegation of a governmental function” to the entity;
instead, the court should have used the “totality of factors” test to make this determination). For
more information on the “delegation of function” and “totality of factors” tests, please refer to the
discussion on pages 62-64.
(3) Homeowners’ associations
e Sunshine Law does not generally apply to meetings of a homeowners’ association board
of directors. Inf. Op. to Fasano, June 7, 1996. Other statutes govern access to records and meetings
of these associations. See, e.g., s. 720.303(2), F.S. (homeowners’ association board of directors);
s. 718.112(2)(c), F.S. (condominium board of administration); s. 719.106(1)(c), F.S. (cooperative
board of administration); and s. 723.078(2)(c), F.S. (mobile home park homeowners’ association
board of directors). Cf. AGOs 99-53 (an architectural review committee of a homeowners’ association
is subject to the Sunshine Law where that committee, pursuant to county ordinance, must review
and approve applications for county building permits), and 07-44 (property owners association
subject to open government laws when acting on behalf of a municipal services taxing unit).
20
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(4) Political parties
Meetings of political parties are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S. Inf. Op. to Armesto,
September 18, 1979.
(5) Volunteer re departments
In AGO 04-32, the Attorney General advised that boards of directors of volunteer re
departments that provide reghting services to the county and use facilities and equipment
acquired with county funds are subject to the Sunshine Law. Cf. AGO 00-08 (meetings of Lee
County Fire Commissioner’s Forum, a nonprot corporation created by re districts operating in
Lee County, at which two or more members of the same district board discuss matters that may
foreseeably come before the board for ocial action are subject to the Sunshine Law). And see
Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire Department, 352 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977),
cert. denied, 358 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1978) (private nonprot volunteer re department, which
had been given stewardship over reghting, which conducted its activities on county-owned
property, and which was funded in part by public money, was an “agency” for purposes of the
Public Records Act, and its membership les, minutes of its meetings and charitable activities
were subject to disclosure).
12. Sta member or public ocial also serving as member of public board
In some cases, sta members or public ocials also serve as members of public boards.
If so, discussions between those board members that involve matters which foreseeably could
come before the board must be held in the Sunshine. For example, a 1993 Attorney General
Opinion concluded that communications between the sheri and the state attorney, as members
of the county’s criminal justice commission, would be subject to the Sunshine Law when such
discussions involve matters which foreseeably would come before the commission. AGO 93-41.
Cf. AGO 11-04, noting that if the state attorney and sheri elect to appoint individuals to serve
on a county criminal justice commission in the place of each ocer, as authorized by county
ordinance, neither the state attorney nor the sheri would be a member of the commission so
as to make these communications subject to the Sunshine Law. See now, s. 286.01141, F.S.
(2013), creating a Sunshine Law exemption for that portion of a meeting of a duly constituted
local advisory criminal justice commission at which members of the commission discuss active
criminal intelligence or investigative information that is currently being considered by or which
may foreseeably come before the commission, provided that public disclosure of the discussion is
made at any public meeting of the commission at which the matter is being considered.
However, the Sunshine Law is applicable only to discussions of matters which may
foreseeably come before the board. For example, the Sunshine Law would not apply to meetings
between the mayor and city commissioners where a mayor performs the duties of city manager
and the city commissioners individually serve as the head of a city department when the meeting is
held solely by these ocers in their capacity as department heads for the purpose of coordinating
administrative and operational matters between executive departments of city government for
which no formal action by the governing body is required or contemplated. ose matters which
normally come before, or should come before, the city commission for discussion or action,
however, must not be discussed at such meetings. AGO 81-88. Accord AGOs 83-70 and 75-
210 (mayor may discuss matters with individual city council member which concern his or her
administrative functions and would not come before the council for consideration and further
action).
Similarly, the Sunshine Law would not apply to a school faculty meeting simply because two
or more members of school advisory council who are also faculty members attend the faculty meeting
as long as council members refrain from discussing matters that may come before the council for
consideration. Inf. Op. to Hughes, February 17, 1995; and Inf. Op. to Boyd, March 14, 1994.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
21
C. WHAT MEETINGS OF MEMBERS OF BOARDS ARE COVERED? APPLICATION
OF THE SUNSHINE LAW TO:
1. Board members attending meetings or serving as members of another public board
a. Board members attending meetings of another public board
Several Attorney General Opinions have considered whether one or more members of a
board may attend or participate in a meeting of another public board. For example, in AGO 99-
55, the Attorney General’s Oce said that a school board member could attend and participate in
the meeting of an advisory committee appointed by the school board without prior notice of his
or her attendance. However, the opinion cautioned that “if it is known that two or more members
of the school board are planning to attend and participate, it would be advisable to note their
attendance in the advisory committee meeting notice.”
Moreover, while recognizing that commissioners may attend meetings of a second public
board and comment on agenda items that may subsequently come before the commission for nal
action, the Attorney General Opinions have also advised that if more than one “commissioner is
in attendance at such a meeting, no discussion or debate may take place among the commissioners
on those issues.” AGO 00-68. Accord AGO 98-79 (city commissioner may attend a public
community development board meeting held to consider a proposed city ordinance and express
his or her views on the proposed ordinance even though other city commissioners may be in
attendance; however, the city commissioners in attendance may not engage in a discussion or
debate among themselves because “the city commission’s discussions and deliberations on the
proposed ordinance must occur at a duly noticed city commission meeting”). See also AGOs 05-
59 and 77-138.
b. Board members serving as members of another public board
Board members who also serve on a second public board may participate in the public
meetings of the second board held in accordance with s. 286.011, F.S., and express their
opinions without violating the Sunshine Law. AGO 07-13. In other words, “when two county
commissioners are presently serving on [a regional planning] council this does not turn a meeting
of the planning council into a county commission meeting, and the Sunshine Law does not require
any additional or dierent notice of planning council meetings because of the presence of these
county commission members.” Id. Similarly, AGO 98-14 concluded that membership of three city
council members on the metropolitan planning organization did not turn a council meeting into a
metropolitan planning organization meeting that required separate notice. Because, however, the
discussion of metropolitan planning organization matters was planned for the council meeting,
the city council had properly included mention of such items in its notice of the council meeting.
Additionally, in AGO 91-95, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that a county
commissioner may attend and participate in the discussion at a public meeting held by the
governing board of a county board on which another commissioner serves. However, “in an eort
to satisfy the spirit of the Sunshine Law,” the opinion also recommended that the published notice
of the county board “include mention of the anticipated attendance and participation of county
commission members in board proceedings.” Id.
2. Board member meeting with his or her alternate
Since the alternate is authorized to act only in the absence of a board or commission member,
there is no meeting of two individuals who exercise independent decision-making authority at the
meeting. ere is, in eect, only one decision-making ocial present. erefore, a meeting
between a board member and his or her alternate is not subject to the Sunshine Law. AGO 88-45.
3. Community forums sponsored by private organizations
A “Candidates’ Night” sponsored by a private organization at which candidates for
public oce, including several incumbent city council members, will speak about their political
22
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
philosophies, trends, and issues facing the city, is not subject to the Sunshine Law unless the council
members discuss issues coming before the council among themselves. AGO 92-05. Compare Inf.
Op. to Jove, January 12, 2009, concluding that a public forum hosted by a city council member
with city council members invited to attend and participate in the discussion would be subject to
s. 286.011, F.S.
Similarly, in AGO 94-62, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that the Sunshine
Law does not apply to a political forum sponsored by a private civic club during which
county commissioners express their position on matters that may foreseeably come before the
commission, so long as the commissioners avoid discussions among themselves on these issues.
And see AGO 08-18 (participation by two city council members in a citizens police academy does
not violate the Sunshine Law; “[t]he educational course is not changed into a meeting of a board
or commission . . . by the attendance and participation of members of the city council in the
course work of the academy”).
However, caution should be exercised to avoid situations in which private political or
community forums may be used to circumvent the statute’s requirements. AGO 94-62. See Town
of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473, 477 (Fla. 1974) (Sunshine Law must be construed
“so as to frustrate all evasive devices”). For example, in State v. Foster, 12 F.L.W. Supp. 1194a
(Fla. Broward Co. Ct. September 26, 2005), the court rejected the city commissioners’ argument
that the Sunshine Law permitted them to attend a private breakfast meeting at which the sheri
spoke and the commissioners individually questioned the sheri but did not direct comments
or questions to each other. Instead, the court denied the commissioners’ motion for summary
judgment and ruled that the discussion should have been held in the Sunshine because the sheri
was a “common facilitator” who received comments from each commissioner in front of the other
commissioners.
More recently, members of a city planning and zoning commission violated the
Sunshine Law when they participated in discussions at meetings of a community improvement
organization which involved planning and zoning matters. City of Bradenton Beach v. Metz, No.
2017 CA 003581 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. August 9, 2019), available online in the Cases database at
the open government site at myoridalegal.com. e trial judge found that the commissioners’
participation in the discussions was particularly troubling because they continued to attend,
despite Sunshine Law concerns expressed by the city attorney.
4. Condential records discussions
e Florida Supreme Court has stated that in the absence of a statute exempting a meeting
in which privileged material is discussed, s. 286.011, F.S., should be construed as containing no
exceptions. City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971).
e Public Records Act was amended in 1991 after several district courts held that certain
proceedings could be closed when considering condential material. Section 119.07(7), F.S.,
provides that an exemption from s. 119.07, F.S., “does not imply an exemption from s. 286.011.
e exemption from s. 286.011 must be expressly provided.” us, exemptions from the Public
Records Act do not by implication allow a public agency to close a meeting where exempt records
are to be discussed in the absence of a specic exemption from the Sunshine Law. See AGOs
10-04 and 91-75 (school board), 04-44 (PRIDE), 93-41 (county criminal justice commission),
and 91-88 (pension board).
For example, while s. 288.075(2), F.S., allows a private corporation to request condentiality
for certain records relating to a planned corporate relocation to Florida, this exemption “applies
only to records and does not constitute an exemption from the provisions of the Government in
the Sunshine Law . . . .” AGO 04-19. Accord AGO 80-78 and Inf. Op. to Rooney, June 8, 2011.
In AGO 05-03, the Attorney General advised that a federal law prohibiting disclosure of
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
23
certain identifying information did not authorize a state committee to close its meetings, although
the committee should take steps to ensure that identifying information is not disclosed at such
meetings. And see AGO 12-20 (county transportation board designated as “appropriate local
ocial” authorized by statute to receive and investigate whistle-blower complaints must comply
with the open meetings requirements in the Sunshine Law; however, the board must also “protect
the condential information it is considering at a meeting and must not disclose the name of the
whistle-blower unless one of the specic circumstances listed in the statute is present). Cf. AGO
96-40 ( town may not require a complainant to sign a waiver of condentiality before accepting
a whistle-blower’s complaint for processing since the Legislature has provided for condentiality
of the whistle-blower’s identity).
Similarly, in AGO 96-75, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that since under s.
286.011(8), F.S., the transcript of a closed attorney-client session is open to public inspection
once the litigation is concluded, the city and its attorney should be sensitive to any discussions
of condential medical reports during such a meeting and take precautions to protect the
condentiality of such medical reports so that when the transcript is opened for inspection, the
privacy of the employee will not be breached. Compare Everglades Law Center, Inc. v. South Florida
Water Management District, 290 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019), noting that the statements
made in AGO 96-75, regarding taking steps to protect condentiality and privacy applied to
“an individual’s medical record in the context of a workers’ compensation claim,” and did not
address “the condentiality of mediation communications involving information regarding
multiple persons,” these mediation communications are condential pursuant to ss. 44.102(3)
and 44.405(3), F.S., and should be redacted from the full public transcript. [Emphasis supplied
by the court].
5. E-mail, text messages, and other written communications between board members
e Sunshine Law requires boards to meet in public; boards may not take action on
or engage in private discussions of board business via written correspondence, e-mails, text
messages, or other electronic communications. us, members of an advisory committee created
to make recommendations to the superintendent on school attendance boundaries violated the
Sunshine Law when they exchanged private electronic communications (emails and Facebook
messages) relating to committee business. Linares v. District School Board of Pasco County, No.
17-00230 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 10, 2018), available online in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com. See also AGO 89-39 (members of a public board may not
use computers to conduct private discussions among themselves about board business).
Similarly, city commissioners may not use an electronic newsletter to communicate among
themselves on issues that foreseeably may come before the commission. Inf. Op. to Syrkus,
October 31, 2000. And see AGO 09-19 (members of a city board or commission may not
engage on the city’s Facebook page in an exchange or discussion of matters that foreseeably will
come before the board or commission for ocial action); and Inf. Op. to Martelli, July 20,
2009 (authority should discuss business at publicly noticed meetings “rather than in a series of
letters between authority members”). Cf. Inf. Op. to Galaydick, October 19, 1995 (school board
members may share laptop computer even though computer’s hard drive contains information
reecting ideas of an individual member as long as computer is not being used as a means of
communication between members).
us, a procedure whereby a board takes ocial action by circulating a memorandum for
each board member to sign whether the board member approves or disapproves of a particular
issue, violates the Sunshine Law. Inf. Op. to Blair, May 29, 1973. And see Leach-Wells v. City
of Bradenton, 734 So. 2d 1168, 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (selection committee created by city
council to evaluate proposals violated the Sunshine Law when the city clerk unilaterally ranked
the proposals based on the committee members’ individual written evaluations; the court held
that “the short-listing was formal action that was required to be taken at a public meeting”);
Schweickert v. Citrus County Port Authority, No. 12-CA-1339 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct. September 30,
24
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
2013), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(ad hoc committee appointed by board violated the Sunshine Law when the members submitted
individual written evaluations of the proposals to the sta, which then compiled the scores
and ranked the proposals for submission to the board; the committee should have ranked the
proposals at a public meeting); and AGO 93-90 (board not authorized to use employee evaluation
procedure whereby individual board members send their individual written comments to the
board chair for compilation and subsequent private discussion with the employee). Compare
Carlson v. Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (state agency “evaluation
team” members who individually evaluated competing proposals, individually assigned scores,
and individually submitted their scores for consideration by others, did not take “formal action”
and thus were not obligated to conduct a meeting subject to the Sunshine Law).
However, a commissioner may send a written report to other commissioners on a subject
that will be discussed at a public meeting without violating the Sunshine Law, if prior to the
meeting, there is no interaction related to the report among the commissioners and the report,
which must be maintained as a public record, is not being used as a substitute for action at a
public meeting. AGO 89-23. And see AGO 01-20 (e-mail communication of information from
one council member to another is a public record but does not constitute a meeting subject to the
Sunshine Law when it does not result in the exchange of council members’ comments or responses
on subjects involving foreseeable action by the council). Cf. Inf. Op. to Kessler, November 14,
2007 (procedural rule requiring county commissioner to make a written request to commission
chair to withdraw an item from the consent agenda does not violate the Sunshine Law).
If, on the other hand, the report is circulated among board members for comments with
such comments being provided to other members, there is interaction among the board members
which is subject to s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 90-03. Similarly, in AGO 96-35, the Attorney General’s
Oce concluded that while a school board member may prepare and circulate an informational
memorandum or position paper to other board members, the use of a memorandum to solicit
comments from other board members or the circulation of responsive memoranda by other board
members would violate the Sunshine Law. “Such action would be equivalent to private meetings
discussing the public business through the use of memoranda without allowing an opportunity
for public input.” Id.
In addition, the Attorney General’s Oce stated that while it is not a “direct violation” of
the Sunshine Law for members to circulate their own written position papers on the same subject
as long as the board members avoid any discussion or debate among themselves except at an open
public meeting, this practice is “strongly discourage[d].” AGO 07-35. See also AGO 01-21 (city
council’s discussions and deliberations on matters coming before the council must occur at a
duly noticed city council meeting and the circulation of position statements must not be used to
circumvent the requirements of the statute); AGO 08-07 (city commissioner may post comment
regarding city business on blog or message board; however, any subsequent postings by other
commissioners on the subject of the initial posting could be construed as a response subject to
the Sunshine Law); and Inf. Op. to Jove, January 22, 2009 (posting of anticipated vote on blog).
6. Fact-nding or inspection trips
e Sunshine Law does not prohibit advisory boards from conducting inspection trips
provided that the board members do not discuss matters which may come before the board for
ocial action. See Bigelow v. Howze, 291 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); and AGO 02-24 (two
or more members of an advisory group created by a city code to make recommendations to the
city council or planning commission on proposed development may conduct vegetation surveys
without subjecting themselves to the requirements of the Sunshine Law, provided that they do not
discuss among themselves any recommendations or comments the committee may make).
e “fact-nding exception” to the Sunshine Law, however, does not apply to a board with
“ultimate decision-making authority.” See Finch v. Seminole County School Board, 995 So. 2d
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
25
1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008), holding that a district school board, as the ultimate decision-making
body, violated the Sunshine Law when the board, together with school ocials and members
of the media, took a bus tour of neighborhoods aected by the board’s proposed rezoning even
though board members were separated from each other on the bus, did not express any opinions
or their preference for any of the rezoning plans, and did not vote during the trip. See also Citizens
for Sunshine, Inc. v. School Board of Martin County, 125 So. 3d 184 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (three
school board members violated the Sunshine Law when they visited an adult education school
and talked with a school administrator, teachers, and students, because the “undisputed evidence
showed that the defendant board members, without providing notice, conducted a meeting at the
adult education school relating to matters on which foreseeable action would have been taken.”).
Cf. Citizens for Sunshine v. City of Sarasota, No. 2013 CA 007532 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. July 8,
2016), a’d sub nom. Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. Chapman, 225 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, in which
the trial judge held that a city commissioner did not violate the Sunshine Law when she spoke
about city commission issues at a private event organized by local merchants even though another
commissioner was in the audience.
7. Informal discussions, workshops, organizational sessions, election of ocers
e Sunshine Law extends to the discussions and deliberations as well as the formal action
taken by a public board or commission. ere is no requirement that a quorum be present or
that an item be listed on a board agenda in order for a meeting of members of a public board
or commission to be subject to s. 286.011, F.S. As the Florida Supreme Court said, “collective
inquiry and discussion stages” are embraced within the terms of the statute. Town of Palm Beach
v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 474, 477 (Fla. 1974).
Accordingly, the law is applicable to any gathering, whether formal or casual, of two or
more members of the same board or commission to discuss some matter on which foreseeable
action will be taken by the public board or commission. Sarasota Citizens for Responsible
Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755, 764 (Fla. 2010). And see City of Miami Beach v.
Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971); and Board of Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224
So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1969).
It is the how and the why ocials decided to so act which interests the public, not merely
the nal decision. As the court recognized in Times Publishing Company v. Williams, 222 So.
2d 470, 473 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969), disapproved in part on other grounds, Neu v. Miami Herald
Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985):
Every thought, as well as every armative act, of a public ocial
as it relates to and is within the scope of his ocial duties, is a
matter of public concern; and it is the entire decision-making
process that the legislature intended to aect by the enactment of
the statute before us.
us, two members of a civil service board violated the Sunshine Law when they held
a private discussion about a pending employment appeal during a recess of a board meeting.
Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. City of Sarasota, No. 2010CA4387NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. February 27,
2012), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com.
Similarly, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that the following gatherings are subject to the
Sunshine Law: a public forum hosted by a city council member with city council members
invited to attend and participate in the discussion, Inf. to Jove, January 12, 2009; “executive
work sessions” held by a board of commissioners of a housing authority to discuss policy matters,
AGO 76-102; “workshop meetings” of a planning and zoning commission, AGO 74-94; and
“conference sessions” held by a town council before its regular meetings, AGO 74-62. Cf. AGO
04-58 (“coincidental unscheduled meeting of two or more county commissioners to discuss
emergency issues with sta” during a declared state of emergency is not subject to s. 286.011
if the issues do not require action by the county commission); and Inf. Op. to Spencer, April
26
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
23, 2003 (where city charter provides that special meeting of the council may be called by three
members of the council, Sunshine Law is not violated if three members call a special meeting; “[t]
he members must, however, be mindful not to discuss substantive issues which may come before
the council in their consideration of whether a special meeting is necessary”).
e Sunshine Law applies to an organizational session of a board. Ru v. School Board of
Collier County, 426 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Discussions between two members of a
three-member complaint review board regarding their selection of a third member are subject to
s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 93-79. Additionally, the Sunshine Law is applicable to meetings held to
elect ocers of the board. AGOs 72-326 and 71-32 (boards may not use secret ballots to elect
ocers).
e Sunshine Law is, therefore, applicable to all functions of covered boards and
commissions, whether formal or informal, which relate to the aairs and duties of the board
or commission. “[T]he Sunshine Law does not provide that cases be treated dierently based
upon their level of public importance.” Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647
So. 2d 857, 868 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). See, e.g., Inf. Op. to Nelson, May 19, 1980 (meeting
with congressman and city council members to discuss “federal budgetary matters which vitally
concern their communities” should be held in the sunshine because “it appears extremely likely
that discussion of public business by the council members [and perhaps decision making] will
take place at the meeting”).
8. Investigative meetings
e Sunshine Law is applicable to investigative inquiries of public boards or commissions.
e fact that a meeting concerns alleged violations of laws or regulations does not remove it from
the scope of the law. AGO 74-84; and Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County,
278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973).
A number of statutory exemptions to the Sunshine Law have been enacted to close
meetings of some agencies (usually state agencies) when those agencies are making investigatory
determinations. For example, s. 112.324(2)(c)(d) and (e), F.S., provides that any proceeding
related to a complaint, referral, or preliminary investigation conducted by the Commission on
Ethics or other specied entities is exempt from open meetings requirements until the complaint
is dismissed as legally insucient, the alleged violator requests in writing that the proceedings be
made public, the Commission on Ethics determines that it will not investigate a referral, or until
the Commission or other specied entity determines whether probable cause exists to believe that
a violation has occurred. Compare ss. 455.225(4) and 456.073(4), F.S. (meetings of probable
cause panels of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and Department of
Health exempt from Sunshine Law until 10 days after probable cause is found to exist or until
condentiality is waived by subject of investigation).
9. Litigation meetings
In the absence of a legislative exemption, discussions between a public board and its attorney
are subject to s. 286.011, F.S. Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla.
1985) (s. 90.502, F.S., providing for the condentiality of attorney-client communications under
the Florida Evidence Code, does not create an exemption for attorney-client communications at
public meetings; application of the Sunshine Law to such discussions does not usurp Supreme
Court’s constitutional authority to regulate the practice of law, nor is it at odds with Florida Bar
rules providing for attorney-client condentiality).
However, a discussion or activity that is not a meeting for purposes of the Sunshine Law
shall not be construed to waive the attorney-client privilege established in s. 90.502, F.S. Section
90.502(6), F.S. See Collier County Public Schools v. Mason Classical Academy, Inc., 342 So. 3d 753
(Fla. 2d DCA 2022), in which the court observed that s. 90.502(6), F.S., permits school district
employees to claim the attorney-client privilege if they can establish that their conversations with
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
27
counsel were protected by the privilege.
ere are statutory exemptions, however, which apply to some discussions of pending
litigation between a public board and its attorney.
a. Settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures
Section 286.011(8), F.S., provides:
Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), any board or commission of any state
agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political
subdivision, and the chief administrative or executive ocer of the governmental entity, may
meet in private with the entity’s attorney to discuss pending litigation to which the entity is
presently a party before a court or administrative agency, provided that the following conditions
are met:
(a) e entity’s attorney shall advise the entity at a public meeting that he or she desires advice
concerning the litigation.
(b) e subject matter of the meeting shall be conned to settlement negotiations or strategy
sessions related to litigation expenditures.
(c) e entire session shall be recorded by a certied court reporter. e reporter shall record
the times of commencement and termination of the session, all discussion and proceedings,
the names of all persons present at any time, and the names of all persons speaking. No
portion of the session shall be o the record. e court reporter’s notes shall be fully
transcribed and led with the entity’s clerk within a reasonable time after the meeting.
(d) e entity shall give reasonable public notice of the time and date of the attorney-client
session and the names of persons who will be attending the session. e session shall
commence at an open meeting at which the persons chairing the meeting shall announce
the commencement and estimated length of the attorney-client session and the names of
the persons attending. At the conclusion of the attorney-client session, the meeting shall
be reopened, and the person chairing the meeting shall announce the termination of the
session.
(e) e transcript shall be made part of the public record upon conclusion of the litigation.
(e.s.)
(1) Strict compliance with statutory conditions
It has been held that the Legislature intended a strict construction of s. 286.011(8), F.S.
City of Dunnellon v. Aran, 662 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). “e clear requirements of
the statute are neither onerous nor dicult to satisfy.” Id. at 1027. Accord School Board of Duval
County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
While section 286.011(8), F.S., does not specify who calls the closed attorney-client meeting,
it requires that the governmental entity’s attorney “shall advise the entity at a public meeting
that he or she desires advice concerning the litigation.” us, the exemption merely provides
a governmental entity’s attorney an opportunity to receive necessary direction and information
from the governmental entity regarding pending litigation. AGO 04-35. Accordingly, one of
the conditions that must be met prior to holding a closed attorney-client meeting is that the city
attorney must indicate to the city council at a public meeting that he or she wishes the advice of
the city council regarding the pending litigation to which the city is presently a party before a
court or administrative agency. Inf. Op. to Vock, July 11, 2001. “If the city attorney does not
advise the city council at a public meeting that he or she desires the council’s advice regarding the
litigation, the city council is not precluded from providing such advice to the city attorney but it
must do so at a public meeting.” Id.
28
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
e requirement that the board’s attorney advise the board at a public meeting that he or
she desires advice concerning litigation is not satised by a previously published notice of the
closed session; such an announcement must be made at a public meeting of the board. AGO
04-35. e request may be made during a special meeting provided that the special meeting at
which the request is made is open to the public, reasonable notice has been given, and minutes
are taken. AGO 07-31.
In City of Dunnellon v. Aran, supra, the court said that a city council’s failure to announce
the names of the lawyers participating in a closed attorney-client session violated the Sunshine
Law. e court rejected the city’s claim that when the mayor announced that attorneys hired by
the city would attend the session (but did not give the names of the individuals), his “substantial
compliance” was sucient to satisfy the statute. Cf. Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at
901, noting that deviation from the agenda at an attorney-client session is not authorized; while
such deviation is permissible if a public meeting has been properly noticed, “there is no case law
aording the same latitude to deviations in closed door meetings.”
(2) Permitted discussions during closed session
Section 286.011(8)(b), F.S., states that the subject matter of the meeting shall be conned
to settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures. If a board goes
beyond the “strict parameters of settlement negotiations and strategy sessions related to litigation
expenditures” and takes “decisive action,” a violation of the Sunshine Law results. Zorc v. City of
Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 900. And see AGO 99-37 (closed-meeting exemption may be used only
when the attorney for a governmental entity seeks advice on settlement negotiations or strategy
relating to litigation expenditures; such meetings should not be used to nalize action or discuss
matters outside these two narrowly prescribed areas). Accord AGO 04-35.
Section 286.011(8), F.S., “simply provides a governmental entity’s attorney an opportunity
to receive necessary direction and information from the government entity. No nal decisions
on litigation matters can be voted on during these private, attorney-client strategy meetings.
e decision to settle a case, for a certain amount of money, under certain conditions is a
decision which must be voted upon in a public meeting.” School Board of Duval County v. Florida
Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99, 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), quoting Sta of Fla. H.R. Comm.
on Gov’t Operations, CS/HB 491 (1993) Final Bill Analysis & Economic Impact Statement 2
(Fla. State Archives), at 3.
us, “[t]he settlement of a case is exactly that type of nal decision contemplated by the
drafters of section 286.011(8) which must be voted upon in the sunshine.” Zorc v. City of Vero
Beach, 722 So. 2d at 901. Accord AGO 08-17 (any action to approve a settlement or litigation
expenditures must be voted on in a public meeting).
Accordingly, a court found that a city did not comply with s. 286.011(8), F.S., when it
held closed meetings that “covered a wide range of political and policy issues not connected
to” settlement of pending litigation regarding a comprehensive plan amendment or litigation
expenses relating to the pending cases which at that point were on appeal. “While some of the
discussion at these meetings did in fact involve the costs associated with the pending litigation, by
and large the meetings pertained to nding a way to readopt the comprehensive plan amendment
that had been invalidated by the court and to avoid future litigation regarding the readopted
amendment.” Anderson v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d 548, 553 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).
Similarly, a city council violated the Sunshine Law where the “great majority” of the
discussion at an attorney-client session concerned the specics of a proposed amendment to
the city’s trespass ordinance which was designed to address concerns expressed in a federal court
decision nding the ordinance to be unconstitutional. City of St. Petersburg v. Wright, 241 So.
3d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018). e participants at the closed meeting “did not limit themselves
to discussing settlement or litigation expenditures” in the federal litigation. Id. See also Freeman
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
29
v. Times Publishing Company, 696 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (discussion of methods or
options to achieve continuing compliance with a long-standing federal desegregation mandate
[such as whether to modify the boundaries of a school zone to achieve racial balance] must be
held in the sunshine). Compare Bruckner v. City of Dania Beach, 823 So. 2d 167, 172 (Fla.
4th DCA 2002) (closed city commission meeting to discuss various options to settle a lawsuit
involving a challenge to a city resolution, including modication of the resolution, authorized
because the commission “neither voted, took ocial action to amend the resolution, nor did it
formally decide to settle the litigation”).
(3) Entity involved in pending litigation
Section 286.011(8) permits an entity to use the exemption if the entity “is presently a party
before a court or administrative agency . . . .” For example, a city council and its attorney may
hold a closed-door meeting pursuant to this statute to discuss settlement negotiations or strategy
related to litigation expenditures for pending litigation involving a workers’ compensation suit
against the city because the system prescribed in ch. 440, F.S., “operates as a means of adjudicating
workers’ compensation claims and would be considered litigation before an administrative
agency.” AGO 96-75.
In Brown v. City of Lauderhill, 654 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the court said it
could “discern no rational basis for concluding that a city is not a ‘party’ to pending litigation in
which it is the real party in interest.” And see Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d at 900 (city
was presently a party to ongoing litigation by virtue of its already pending claims in bankruptcy
proceedings); and AGOs 09-15 (exemption applicable when city is real party in interest of a
pending lawsuit despite not being a named party at the time of the meeting), and 08-17 (health
care district may hold a closed attorney-client meeting to discuss settlement negotiations and
strategies related to litigation expenditures for pending litigation in which its wholly-owned
subsidiary holding company is the named party).
Although the Brown decision established that the exemption could be used by a city that
was a real party in interest on a claim involved in pending litigation, that decision does not mean
that an agency may meet in executive session with its attorney where there is only the threat
of litigation. See AGOs 04-35 and 98-21 (s. 286.011[8] exemption “does not apply when no
lawsuit has been led even though the parties involved believe litigation is inevitable”).
Similarly, s. 286.011(8), F.S. “may not be used to conduct a closed meeting during a
mandatory arbitration proceeding, when there is no pending legal proceeding in a court or before
an administrative agency.” AGO 13-17. And see AGOs 06-03 (exemption not applicable to
pre-litigation mediation proceedings), 09-14 (exemption not applicable to discussion of terms
of mediation in conict resolution proceedings under the “Florida Governmental Conict
Resolution Act,” ss. 164.101-164.1061, F.S.), and 09-25 (town council which received pre-suit
notice letter under the Bert J. Harris Act, s. 70.001, F.S., is not a party to pending litigation
for purposes of s. 286.011[8], F.S).; and Inf. Op. to Barrett, February 17, 2016 (board not
authorized to use exemption to discuss pending investigation and subpoena where there is no
ongoing judicial or administrative proceeding).
(4) Persons authorized to attend closed session
Only those persons listed in the statutory exemption, i.e., the entity, the entity’s attorney,
the chief administrative ocer of the entity, and the court reporter are authorized to attend a
closed attorney-client session. us, other sta members, consultants, or ocials are not allowed
to be present. School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d at 101.
See Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d 891, 898 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 735 So.
2d 1284 (Fla. 1999) (city charter provision requiring that city clerk attend all council meetings
does not authorize clerk to attend closed attorney-client session; municipality may not authorize
what the Legislature has expressly forbidden); AGO 01-10 (clerk of court not authorized to
30
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
attend); and AGO 09-52 (attorneys representing superintendent not authorized to attend
closed session to discuss settlement of administrative action in which school board is the named
party). Cf. AGO 95-06 (s. 286.011(8), F.S., does not authorize the temporary adjournment and
reconvening of meetings in order for members who are attending such a session to leave the room
and consult with others outside the meeting).
Since the entity’s attorney is permitted to attend the closed session, if the school board
hires outside counsel to represent it in pending litigation, both the school board attorney and
the litigation attorney may attend a closed session. AGO 98-06. See Zorc v. City of Vero Beach,
722 So. 2d at 898 (attendance of special counsel authorized). And see AGO 08-42 (qualied
interpreters for the deaf are treated by the Americans with Disabilities Act as auxiliary aids in the
nature of hearing aids and other assistive devices and may attend litigation strategy meetings of a
board or commission to interpret for a deaf board member without violating section 286.011(8),
F.S). Cf. AGO 15-13 (mayor who is a voting member of the city council is not precluded from
attending closed session relating to pending litigation in which city council is a party, even though
plaintis have also sued the mayor in his individual capacity).
(5) Determination of “conclusion” of the litigation
Section 286.011(8)(e), F.S., provides that transcripts of closed meetings “shall be made
part of the public record upon conclusion of the litigation.” See AGO 15-03 (transcript of
a litigation strategy session which was closed to the public while the litigation was ongoing
became a public record once the litigation was concluded). Cf. Everglades Law Center, Inc. v.
South Florida Water Management District, 290 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019), noting that the
mediation communications disclosed by a governmental agency during a closed session must
be redacted from the transcript of the meeting when it becomes public record; the exemptions
from disclosure for mediation communications in ss. 44.102(1) and 44.405(1), F.S., are not
inconsistent with the requirements of s. 286.011(8)(e), F.S.
e statute does not recognize a continuation of the exemption for “derivative claims”
made in separate, subsequent litigation. AGO 13-13. For example, a transcript of a closed
meeting to discuss settlement of a quiet title lawsuit became a public record upon the entry of
a nal judgment in that case, even though the same parties were now embroiled in an inverse
condemnation lawsuit. Chmielewski v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA
2014). Similarly, a claim for payment of attorney’s fees does not extend the application of the
exemption after a nal judgment has been entered and a mandate issued. Inf. Op. to Boutsis,
December 13, 2012.
Accordingly, a dismissal with prejudice pursuant to a settlement agreement that confers
continuing jurisdiction on the court to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement operates as
a conclusion of the litigation. AGO 15-03. By contrast, litigation that is ongoing but temporarily
suspended pursuant to a stipulation for settlement has not been concluded for purposes of s.
286.011(8), F.S., and a transcript of meetings held between the city and its attorney to discuss
such litigation may be kept condential until conclusion of the litigation. AGO 94-64. And see
AGO 94-33 (public agency may maintain the condentiality of a record of a strategy or settlement
meeting between a public agency and its attorney until the suit is dismissed with prejudice or
the applicable statute of limitations has run); and Inf. Op. to Boutsis, supra (legislative history of
s. 286.011[8], F.S., indicates “that the Legislature intended the exemption to continue through
the appeals segment of the litigation”). Cf. Wagner v. Orange County, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2007), concluding that the phrase “conclusion of the litigation or adversarial administrative
proceedings” for purposes of the attorney work product exemption from the public records law
found in s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., encompasses postjudgment collection eorts such as a legislative
claims bill.
In AGO 13-21, the Attorney General’s Oce observed that s. 286.011(8)(e), F.S., “should
be seen as a tool which governmental boards or commissions may employ in their discretion
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
31
but the statute should not be read as a prohibition against the release of such records prior to
the conclusion of . . . litigation.” erefore, a city council, as the collegial body to which the
exemption applies, may waive the exemption and release transcripts of meetings held pursuant to
s. 286.011(8), F.S., prior to the conclusion of litigation. Id.
b. Risk management exemption
Section 768.28(16)(c), F.S., states that portions of meetings and proceedings relating solely
to the evaluation of claims or to oers of compromise of claims led with a risk management
program of the state, its agencies and subdivisions, are exempt from s. 286.011, F.S. e minutes
of such meetings and proceedings are also exempt from public disclosure until the termination of
the litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident. Section 768.28(16)
(d), F.S.
is exemption is limited and applies only to tort claims for which the agency may be
liable under s. 768.28, F.S. AGO 04-35. e exemption is not applicable to meetings held
prior to the ling of a tort claim with the risk management program. AGO 92-82. Moreover, a
meeting of a city’s risk management committee is exempt from the Sunshine Law only when the
meeting relates solely to the evaluation of a tort claim led with the risk management program or
relates solely to an oer of compromise of a tort claim led with the risk management program.
AGO 04-35.
Unlike s. 286.011(8), F.S., s. 768.28(16), F.S., does not specify the personnel who are
authorized to attend the meeting. See AG0 00-20, advising that personnel of the school district
who are involved in the risk management aspect of the tort claim being litigated or settled may
attend such meetings without jeopardizing the condentiality provisions of the statute.
10. Personnel matters
In the absence of a specic statutory exemption, meetings of a public board or commission
to discuss personnel matters are subject to the Sunshine Law. Times Publishing Company v.
Williams, 222 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969), disapproved in part on other grounds, Neu v. Miami
Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985).
a. Collective bargaining discussions
(1) Strategy sessions
A limited exemption from s. 286.011, F.S., exists for discussions between the chief
executive ocer of the public employer, or his or her representative, and the legislative body of the
public employer relative to collective bargaining. Section 447.605(1), F.S. A similar exemption
is contained in s. 110.201(4), F.S., for discussions between the Department of Management
Services and the Governor, between the department and the Administration Commission or
agency heads, or between any of their respective representatives, relative to collective bargaining.
A duly-appointed labor negotiating committee of a city that does not have a city manager
or city administrator qualies as the “chief executive ocer” for purposes of s. 447.605(1), F.S.,
and may use the exemption when meeting with the city council to discuss collective bargaining.
AGO 85-99. And see AGO 99-27, concluding that a committee formed by the city manager to
represent the city in labor negotiations may participate in closed executive sessions conducted
pursuant to s. 447.605(1), F.S. e exemption also extends to meetings of the negotiating
committee itself which are held to discuss labor negotiation strategies, including when the
committee adjourns during negotiations to hold a caucus among its members to determine the
strategy to be employed in ongoing negotiations. Id.
If a school superintendent’s responsibility to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of
the school board has been completely delegated to a separate labor negotiating committee and
the superintendent does not participate in the collective bargaining negotiations, the exemption
32
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
aorded by s. 447.605(1), F.S., applies to discussions between the committee and the school
board only and does not encompass discussions among the committee, school board and
superintendent. AGO 98-06.
e exemption aorded by s. 447.605(1), F.S., applies only in the context of actual and
impending collective bargaining negotiations. AGO 85-99. It does not allow private discussions
of a proposed “mini-PERC ordinance” or the stance a public body intends to adopt in regard
to unionization and/or collective bargaining. AGO 75-48. Moreover, a public body may not
conduct an entire meeting outside the Sunshine Law merely by discussing one topic during the
course of that meeting which may be statutorily exempt from s. 286.011, F.S. AGO 85-99.
Section 447.605(1), F.S., does not directly address the dissemination of information that
may be obtained at the closed meeting, but there is clear legislative intent that matters discussed
during such meetings are not to be open to public disclosure. AGO 03-09.
(2) Negotiations
e collective bargaining negotiations between the chief executive ocer and a bargaining
agent are not exempt and pursuant to s. 447.605(2), F.S., must be conducted in the sunshine.
Once the collective bargaining process begins, when one side or its representative, whether
before or after the declaration of an impasse, meets with the other side or its representative to
discuss anything relevant to the terms and conditions of the employer-employee relationship, the
meeting is subject to the Sunshine Law. City of Fort Myers v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc.,
514 So. 2d 408, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Accord Brown v. Denton, 152 So. 3d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA
2014), review denied, No. SC 16-2490 (Fla. February 24, 2016). See also AGO 99-27. As with
other meetings subject to s. 286.011, F.S., minutes of the negotiation meeting must be kept. Inf.
Op. to Fulwider, June 14, 1993.
e Legislature has, therefore, divided Sunshine Law policy on collective bargaining for
public employees into two parts: when the public employer is meeting with its own side, it is
exempt from the Sunshine Law; when the public employer is meeting with the other side, it is
required to comply with the Sunshine Law. City of Fort Myers v. News-Press Publishing Company,
Inc., 514 So. 2d at 412. And see Brown v. Denton, 152 So. 3d at 12 (By holding closed-door
negotiations that resulted in changes to public employee pension benets, “the [city and pension
board] ignored an important party who also had the right to be in the room -- the public.”).
Cf. Palm Beach County Classroom Teachers’ Association v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 411
So. 2d 1375, 1376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (collective bargaining agreement cannot be used “to
circumvent the requirements of public meetings” in s. 286.011, F.S.).
b. Disciplinary, grievance, and complaint review proceedings
Meetings of a board or commission to conduct disciplinary proceedings are subject to
the Sunshine Law. See, e.g., AGO 92-65 (employee termination hearing conducted by housing
authority commission). And see News-Press Publishing Company v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646, 647-
648 (Fla. 1977), in which the Court disapproved of a county’s use of “pseudonyms or cloaked
references” during a county commission meeting held to reprimand an unnamed department
head.
us, two members of a civil service board violated the Sunshine Law when they held
a private discussion about a pending employment appeal during a recess of a board meeting.
Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. City of Sarasota, No. 2010CA4387NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct.
February 27, 2012), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com. And see Bareld v. City of West Palm Beach, No. CL94-2141-AC (Fla.
15th Cir. Ct. May 6, 1994) , available online in the Cases database at the open government
site at myoridalegal.com. (complaint review board of a city police department is subject to
the Sunshine Law); AGO 80-27 (sheri civil service board created by special act is subject to
the Sunshine Law). Cf. AGO 93-79 (discussions between two members of a three-member
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
33
complaint review board regarding their selection of the third member of the board must be
conducted in accordance with s. 286.011, F.S.).
Similarly, in Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 877 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), the court
held that a meeting of a pre-termination conference panel established pursuant to county
ordinance and composed of a department head, personnel director, and equal opportunity
director should have been held in the Sunshine. Even though the county administrator had
the sole authority to discipline employees, that authority had been delegated to the department
head who in turn chose to share that authority with the other members of the panel. See also
AGO 10-14 (team created by charter school board of directors to review employment decisions
is subject to the Sunshine Law). Cf. AGO 77-132 (personnel council composed of citizens
appointed by members of county commission to hear appeals from county employees who
have been disciplined not authorized to deliberate in secret).
A grievance committee established as “the nal hearing body for all matters determined
to be grievances and [authorized] to uphold, modify, or deny any grievance” is subject to the
Sunshine Law “because the [committee] clearly exercises decision-making authority.” Dascott
v. Palm Beach County, supra at 13. And see AGO 84-70 (Sunshine Law applies to sta grievance
committee created to make a determination of “all facts and circumstances” and nonbinding
recommendations to a county administrator regarding disposition of employee grievances).
Cf. Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher’s Association v. School Board of Palm Beach County,
411 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), in which the court armed the lower tribunal’s refusal
to issue a temporary injunction to exclude a newspaper reporter from a grievance arbitration
hearing. A collective bargaining agreement cannot be used “to circumvent the requirements of
public meetings” in s. 286.011, F.S. Id. at 1376.
By contrast, in Jordan v. Jenne, 938 So. 2d 526, 530 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), the court
determined that the Sunshine Law did not apply to a professional standards committee
responsible for reviewing charges against a sheri’s deputy and making recommendations to
the inspector general, because the inspector general made the “ultimate decision” on discipline
and did not deliberate with the committee. See also McDougall v. Culver, 3 So. 3d 391 (Fla.
2d DCA 2009) (Internal Aairs memorandum containing ndings and recommendations
circulated to senior ocials for review and comment before submission to the sheri for a
decision on disciplinary action did not constitute a meeting under the Sunshine Law since
ocials only provided a recommendation but did not deliberate with the sheri or have
decision-making authority).
Similarly, if the mayor as chief executive ocer, rather than the city council, is responsible
under the city charter for disciplining city employees, meetings between the mayor and a city
employee concerning discipline of the employee are not subject to the Sunshine Law. City
of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). And
see AGO 07-54 (while post-termination hearings before city manager are not subject to the
Sunshine Law, hearings before a three-member panel appointed by the city manager should
be open).
c. Evaluations
e Sunshine Law applies to meetings of a board of county commissioners when
interviewing applicants for county positions appointed by the board, when conducting job
evaluations of county employees answering to and serving at the pleasure of the board, and
when conducting employment termination interviews of county employees who serve at the
pleasure of the board. AGO 89-37.
A board that is responsible for assessing the performance of its chief executive ocer
(CEO) should conduct the review and appraisal process in a proceeding open to the public as
prescribed by s. 286.011, F.S., instead of using a review procedure in which individual board
34
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
members evaluate the CEO’s performance and send their individual written comments to the
board chair for compilation and subsequent discussion with the CEO. AGO 93-90. However,
meetings of individual school board members with the superintendent to discuss the individual
board members’ evaluations do not violate the Sunshine Law when such evaluations do not
become the board’s evaluation until they are compiled and discussed at a public meeting by the
school board for adoption by the board. AGO 97-23.
d. Selection and screening committees
e Sunshine Law applies to advisory committees created by an agency to assist in the
selection process. In Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983), a committee created to
screen applications and make recommendations for the position of a law school dean was held
to be subject to s. 286.011, F.S. By screening applicants and deciding which applicants to
reject from further consideration, the committee performed a policy-based, decision-making
function delegated to it by the president of the university. See also Krause v. Reno, 366 So. 2d
1244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (Sunshine Law governs advisory group created by city manager to
assist in screening applications and to recommend several applicants for the position of chief
of police), and AGO 77-43 (Sunshine Law applies to committee selected by a county bar
association on behalf of the school board to screen applicants and make recommendations
for the position of school board attorney). Cf. Dore v. Sliger, No. 90-1850 (Fla. 2d Cir.
Ct. July 11, 1990), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com. (faculty of university law school prohibited from conducting secret ballots
on personnel hiring matters).
However, if the sole function of the screening committee is simply to gather information
for the decision-maker, rather than to accept or reject applicants, the committee’s activities
are outside the Sunshine Law. See Cape Publications, Inc. v. City of Palm Bay, 473 So. 2d
222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), holding that the Sunshine Law was not violated when the city
manager, who was responsible for selecting the new police chief, asked several people to sit in
on the interviews, as the only function of this group was to assist the city manager in acquiring
information on the applicants he had chosen by asking questions during the interviews and
then discussing the qualications of each candidate with the city manager after the interview.
And see Knox v. District School Board of Brevard, 821 So. 2d 311, 314 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002),
holding that an interview team composed of sta was not subject to s. 286.011, F.S., even
though the team made recommendations since “all the applications went to the superintendent
and he decided which applicants to interview and nominate to the school board.”
Moreover, s. 1004.098(2)(a), F.S., provides that any portion of a meeting held for the
purpose of identifying or vetting applicants for president of a state university or a Florida
College System institution, including any portion of a meeting which would disclose personal
identifying information of applicants which is otherwise condential under s. 1004.098(1), F.S.,
is exempt from disclosure requirements. Section 1004.28(1), F.S., establishes condentiality
for personal identifying information of these applicants. e age, race, and gender of applicants
who met the minimum qualications for the position who were considered and the personal
identifying information of applicants included in the nal group of applicants are no longer
condential beginning at the earlier of the date the nal group of applicants is established or
21 days before the date of a meeting at which an interview of an applicant will be conducted
or at which nal action or a vote is to be taken on the oer of employment of an applicant. A
complete recording is required of any portion of the closed meeting. e recording is exempt
from disclosure requirements.
Section 1004.098(2)(a), F.S., does not apply to any portion of a meeting held to establish
qualications for the position or establishing a compensation framework to be oered to an
applicant. e exemption also does not apply to meetings held after a nal group of applicants
for the position has been established. Section 1004.098(2)(c).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
35
11. Purchasing meetings
a. Application of Sunshine Law
A committee appointed by a public college’s purchasing director to consider proposals
submitted by contractors was held to be subject to the Sunshine Law because its function was
to “weed through the various proposals, to determine which were acceptable and to rank them
accordingly.” Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d
1099, 1100 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Accord Inf. Op. to Lewis, March 15, 1999 (panels established
by state agency to create requests for proposals and evaluate vendor responses are subject to the
Sunshine Law), and AGO 80-51 (Sunshine Law applicable to city selection committee screening
proposals from consultants and audit rms). And see Leach-Wells v. City of Bradenton, 734 So.
2d 1168, 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (selection committee created by city council to evaluate
proposals violated the Sunshine Law when the city clerk unilaterally ranked the proposals based
on the committee members’ individual written evaluations; the court held that “the short-listing
was formal action that was required to be taken at a public meeting”); and Schweickert v. Citrus
County Port Authority, No. 12-CA-1339 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct. September 30, 2013), , available online
in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (ad hoc committee
appointed by board violated the Sunshine Law when the members submitted individual written
evaluations of the proposals to the sta, which then compiled the scores and ranked the proposals
for submission to the board; the committee should have ranked the proposals at a public meeting).
Compare Carlson v. Florida Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (state
agency “Evaluation Team” members who individually evaluated the competitors’ proposals,
individually assigned scores, and individually submitted their scores for consideration by the
“Negotiation Team” were not required to conduct a public meeting to perform these functions
because “the Evaluation Team [or more accurately, its individual members] neither ranked the
competitors nor excluded any from consideration of the ultimate decider, the Negotiation Team”).
In Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen’s Association, Local 1922-1, 652
So. 2d 1169, 1170 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the court ruled that a board’s selection and negotiation
committee violated the Sunshine Law when competing bidders were requested to excuse
themselves from the public committee meeting during presentations by competitors. Cf. Pinellas
County School Board v. Suncam, Inc., 829 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (school board violated
the Sunshine Law when it refused to permit videotaping of a public meeting held to evaluate
general contractor construction proposals). See now s. 286.0113(2)(b), F.S., discussed below,
providing an exemption from the Sunshine Law for protions of certain competitive solicitation
meetings and requiring a complete recording of the exempt portions.
b. Recording requirement for exempt meetings
Section 286.0113(2)(b)1. and 2., F.S., provide that any portion of a meeting at which a
negotiation with a vendor is conducted pursuant to a competitive solicitation, at which a vendor
makes an oral presentation as part of a competitive solicitation, or at which a vendor answers
questions as part of a competitive solicitation, is exempt from the Sunshine Law. In addition,
any portion of a team meeting at which negotiation strategies are discussed is also exempt. See
Carlson v. Florida Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017), in which the
court rejected the agency’s argument that the exemption applies to the entirety of any meeting
at which negotiation strategies are discussed, even those portions that have nothing to do with
procurement. However, the court also said that “the exempted ‘portion’ includes not only the
negotiation-strategies discussions themselves, but also meeting activities inextricably intertwined
with those discussions.” Id. at 1269. Cf. s. 255.0518, F.S. (sealed bids received pursuant to a
competitive solicitation for construction or repairs of a public building or public work must be
opened at a public meeting conducted in compliance with the Sunshine Law).
e term “[c]ompetitive solicitation” means “the process of requesting and receiving sealed
bids, proposals, or replies in accordance with the terms of a competitive process, regardless of the
method of procurement.” Section 286.0113(2)(a)1., F.S.
36
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
e term “team” means a group of members established by an agency for the purpose of
conducting negotiations as part of a competitive solicitation. Section 286.0113(2)(a)2., F.S.
A complete recording must be made of the exempt meeting; no portion of the exempt
meeting may be held o the record. Section 286.0113(2)(c), F.S. Cf. AGO 10-42 (where
statute required that closed proceedings of state committee be recorded and that no portion be
o the record, audio recording of the proceedings “would appear to be the most expedient and
cost-ecient manner to ensure that all discussion is recorded”).
e recording and any records presented at the exempt meeting are exempt from public
disclosure until the agency provides notice of an intended decision or until 30 days after
opening the bids, proposals, or nal replies, whichever occurs earlier. Section 286.0113(2)
(c)1. and 2., F.S. And see s. 286.0113(2)(c)3., F.S. (exempt status of recording if the agency
rejects all bids, proposals, or replies, and concurrently provides notice of its intent to reissue a
competitive solicitation).
12. Quasi-judicial matters, proceedings or hearings
e Sunshine Law does not authorize boards to conduct closed-door hearings or
deliberations simply because the board is acting in a “quasi-judicial” capacity. Canney v.
Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973). And see Occidental
Chemical Company v. Mayo, 351 So. 2d 336, 340n.7 (Fla. 1977), disapproved in part on other
grounds, Citizens v. Beard, 613 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1992) (characterization of the Public Service
Commission’s decision-making process as “quasi-judicial” did not exempt it from s. 286.011,
F.S.); and Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher’s Association v. School Board of Palm Beach
County, 411 So. 2d 1375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), arming the lower court’s refusal to issue a
temporary injunction to exclude a newspaper reporter from a grievance hearing.
us, in the absence of statutory exemption, “[t]he fact that a board or commission
is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity does not remove it from the reach of section 286.011,
Florida Statutes.” AGO 10-04. And see AGOs 92-65, 83-43 and 77-132. Cf. AGO 10-15
(special magistrate subject to the Sunshine Law when exercising the delegated decision-making
authority of the value adjustment board).
13. Real property negotiations
In the absence of a statutory exemption, the negotiations by a public board or commission
for the sale or purchase of property must be conducted in the sunshine. See City of Miami
Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38, 40 (Fla. 1971) (city commission not authorized to hold closed
sessions to discuss condemnation issues). In addition, if the authority of the public board or
commission to acquire or lease property has been delegated to a single member, that member
is subject to s. 286.011, F.S., and is prohibited from negotiating the acquisition or lease of the
property in secret. AGO 74-294. Cf. AGO 95-06 (statutory exemption from Ch. 119, F.S.,
for certain records relating to the proposed purchase of real property does not authorize a city
or its designee to conduct negotiations for purchase of property outside the Sunshine Law).
Advisory committees charged with land acquisition responsibilities are also subject to
the Sunshine Law. See AGOs 87-42 (ad hoc committee appointed by mayor to meet with
the Chamber of Commerce to discuss a proposed transfer of city property), and 86-51 (land
selection committee appointed by water management district to evaluate and recommend
projects for acquisition). Cf. Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d
857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (committee established by county commission to negotiate lease
agreement subject to s. 286.011).
14. Security meetings
While there is no general exemption from open meetings requirements that applies to
all discussions relating to “security,” s. 281.301(1), F.S., provides an exemption for portions
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
37
of meetings relating directly to or that would reveal the security or resafety systems for any
property owned by or leased to the state or any of its political subdivisions or for any privately
owned or leased property which is in the possession of an agency.
Similarly, s. 286.0113(1), F.S., states that the portion of a meeting that would reveal
a security or resafety system plan or portion thereof made condential and exempt by s.
119.071(3)(a), F.S. (providing an exemption from the Public Records Act for a “security or
resafety system plan”) is exempt from open meetings requirements. See Inf. Op. to Sherman,
July 2, 2018, noting that the phrasing of s. 286.0113(1), F.S., and the statement of legislative
intent included in the session law show that the exemption applies to any portion of a meeting
in which a record as dened in s. 119.071(3)(a) would be revealed.
Section 119.0725(2), F.S., discussed more fully on page 157 provides condentiality
for specied cybersecurity information held by an agency. Any portion of a meeting that
would reveal cybersecurity information made condential in s. 119.0725(2), F.S., is exempt
from open meetings requirements. Section 119.0725(3), F.S. An exempt portion may
not be o the record and must be recorded and transcribed; the recording and transcript
are condential. Id. See also s. 282.318(6) (portions of meetings held to discuss specied
cybersecurity records held by state agencies are exempt); s. 286.0113(3)(a), F.S. (exemption for
portions of meetings held by local government owned utilities that would reveal information
technology security records made exempt under s. 119.0713(5), F.S.); s. 1004.0962(5), F.S.
(exemption for portions of meetings held to discuss a postsecondary educational institution’s
“campus emergency response”); and s. 1004.055(2), F.S. (exemption for portions of meetings
held to discuss specied information technology security records maintained by postsecondary
educational institutions). Cf. s. 286.0113(4)(b), F.S. (exemption for portions of meetings that
would reveal building plans or geographical maps indicating the actual or proposed location
of 911, E911, or public safety radio communication system infrastructure).
15. Social events
Members of a public board or commission are not prohibited under the Sunshine Law
from meeting together socially, provided that matters which may come before the board or
commission are not discussed at such gatherings. AGO 92-79. Accord Inf. Op. to Batchelor,
May 27, 1982.
erefore, a luncheon meeting held by a private organization for members of a public
board or commission at which there is no discussion among such ocials on matters relating
to public business would not be subject to the Sunshine Law merely because of the presence
of two or more members of a covered board or commission. AGO 72-158. Cf. AGO 71-295,
cautioning that “[p]ublic bodies should avoid secret meetings, from which the public and the
press are eectively excluded, preceding ocial meetings, even though such secret meetings are
held ostensibly for purely social purposes only and with the understanding that the members
of the public body will, in good faith, attempt to avoid any discussion of ocial business.”
16. Telephone conversations and virtual meetings
a. Private telephone conversations
Private telephone conversations between board members to discuss matters which
foreseeably will come before that board for action violate the Sunshine Law. See State v.
Childers, No. 02-21939-MMC; 02-21940-MMB (Escambia Co. Ct. June 5, 2003), per curiam
armed, 886 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), available online in the Cases database at the
open government site at myoridalegal.com (private telephone conversation during which
two county commissioners and the supervisor of elections discussed redistricting violated
the Sunshine Law). See also the discussion on pages 23-24 regarding the application of the
Sunshine Law to emails, text messages, and other written communications between board
members.
38
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
b. Authorization to conduct and participate in public meetings via telephone, video
conferencing, or other electronic media
(1) Sunshine Law
Although both the Florida Constitution and the Sunshine Law require that, unless exempt
by law, meetings of a government board must be “public meetings” that are “open to the public,”
neither provision requires that members of the public board be physically present during the
meeting. AGO 20-03. Instead, the Attorney General’s Oce has observed that a board’s use
of electronic media technology to increase public participation in meetings and the use of such
media to allow members of a board or commission to participate in a duly noticed public meeting
does not necessarily raise Sunshine Law issues, “but rather implicates the ability of a board or
commission to conduct public business with a quorum.” See Inf. Op. to Stebbins, December 1, 2015.
(2) In person quorum requirements
e Attorney General’s Oce has advised that if a quorum is required to conduct ocial
business, boards may only conduct meetings by teleconferencing or other technological means
if they are authorized to do so by law or the in person requirement for constituting a quorum is
lawfully suspended during a state of emergency. AGO 20-03. And see Executive Order 20-69,
issued by Governor DeSantis on March 20, 2020 (recognizing that public boards should be able
to use technology to conduct meetings in light of the declared public health emergency resulting
from the COVID-19 pandemic, and suspending Florida Statutes requiring that a quorum be
physically present during the state of emergency). Executive Order 20-69 (which expired on
November 1, 2020), stipulated that boards holding virtual meetings must still comply with the
Sunshine Law. See also AGO 20-03, noting that if “meetings are conducted by teleconferencing
or other technological means, public access must still be aorded which permits the public to
attend the meeting. at public access may be provided by teleconferencing or technological
means.”
Similarly, “[a]s an administrative arm of the city’s governing body . . . it would appear
that the same legislative requirement for the physical presence of a quorum in order to conduct
municipal business would apply when the retirement board is carrying out its delegated duties.”
AGO 10-34. us, in January 2021, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that in the absence
of legislation providing otherwise, the same physical presence quorum requirement that governs
school board meetings would apply to meetings of school board advisory committees. Inf. Op.
to Myrick, January 28, 2021. See now s. 1001.43(10), F.S., eective July 1, 2021, providing that
members of school district “special committees and advisory committees may attend meetings
in person or through the use of telecommunications networks such as telephonic and video
conferencing.”
(a) State boards
In AGO 98-28, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that s. 120.54(5)(b)2., F.S.,
authorizes state boards to conduct public meetings via entirely electronic means provided
that the board complies with uniform rules of procedure adopted by the state Administration
Commission. ese rules contain notice requirements and procedures for providing points of
access for the public. See Rule 28-109, F.A.C. And see AGO 20-03, noting that state boards have
been conducting meetings using “communications media technology” since 1997.
(b) Local boards
(1) Meetings
As to local boards, the Attorney General’s Oce has noted that the authorization in s.
120.54(5)(b)2., to conduct meetings entirely through the use of electronic media technology
applies only to state agencies. AGOs 20-03 and 98-28. us, unless the in-person requirement to
constitute a quorum has been waived by law or lawfully suspended during a state of emergency,
a quorum of the board must be physically present. AGO 20-03.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
39
For example, since s. 1001.372(2)(b), F.S., requires a district school board to hold its
meetings at a “public place in the county,” a quorum of the board must be physically present
at the meeting of the school board. Id. And see AGOs 09-56 (where a quorum is required and
absent a statute to the contrary, the requisite number of members must be physically present at a
meeting in order to constitute a quorum). and 10-34 (city may not adopt an ordinance allowing
members of a city board to appear by electronic means to constitute a quorum). Cf. s. 120.525(4),
F.S., allowing a voting member of a regional planning council that covers three or more counties
who participates via telephone or videoconferencing to be counted towards a quorum, provided
that at least one third of the voting members are present at the meeting location and that notice
of intent to participate remotely is given at least 24 hours prior to the meeting; s. 163.01(18),
F.S., authorizing certain entities created by interlocal agreement to conduct public meetings and
workshops by means of communications media technology; and Ch. 17-214, Laws of Florida,
authorizing the Monroe County School Board, Monroe County Commission, or any political
subdivision thereof, to adopt rules and procedures for using communications media technology
for meetings at which no nal action is taken.
However, if a quorum of a local board is physically present, “the participation of an absent
member by telephone conference or other interactive electronic technology is permissible when
such absence is due to extraordinary circumstances such as illness[;] . . . [w]hether the absence
of a member due to a scheduling conict constitutes such a circumstance is a determination that
must be made in the good judgment of the board.” AGO 03-41.
For example, if a quorum of a local board is physically present at the public meeting site,
a board may allow a member with health problems to participate and vote in board meetings
through the use of such devices as a speaker telephone that allow the absent member to participate
in discussions, to be heard by other board members and the public and to hear discussions
taking place during the meeting. AGO 94-55. And see AGOs 92-44 (participation and voting
by ill county commissioner), and 02-82 (physically-disabled city advisory committee members
participating and voting by electronic means).
(2) Workshops
e physical presence of a quorum has not been required where electronic media
technology (such as video conferencing and digital audio) is used to allow public access and
participation at workshop meetings where no formal action will be taken. e use of electronic
media technology, however, does not satisfy quorum requirements necessary for ocial action
to be taken. See Inf. Op. to Stebbins, December 1, 2015 (approval of board meeting minutes
constitutes ocial action; vote to approve minutes not exempted from quorum requirements).
Moreover, as discussed above, boards conducting workshop meetings electronically must still
comply with the Sunshine Law.
For example, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that airport authority members may
conduct informal discussions and workshops over the Internet, provided proper notice is given,
and interactive access by members of the public is provided. AGO 01-66. Such interactive access
must include not only public access via the Internet but also at designated places within the
authority boundaries where the airport authority makes computers with Internet access available
to members of the public who may not otherwise have Internet access. Id. For meetings, however,
where a quorum is necessary for action to be taken, the physical presence of the members making
up the quorum would be required in the absence of a statute providing otherwise. Id. Internet
access to such meetings, however may still be oered to provide greater public access. Id. Cf.
AGO 08-65, noting that a city’s plan to provide additional public access to on-line workshop
meetings by making computers available at a public library “should ensure that operating-type
assistance is available at the library where the computers are located.”
However, the use of an electronic bulletin board to discuss matters over an extended period
of days or weeks, which does not permit the public to participate online, violates the Sunshine Law
40
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
by circumventing the notice and access provisions of that law. AGO 02-32. And see Inf. Op. to
Ciocchetti, March 23, 2006 (even though the public would be able to participate online, a town
commission’s proposed use of an electronic bulletin board to discuss matters that foreseeably may
come before the commission over an extended period of time would not comply with the spirit or
letter of the Sunshine Law because the burden would be on the public to constantly monitor the
site in order to participate meaningfully in the discussion). Compare AGO 08-65 (city advisory
boards may conduct workshops lasting no more than two hours using an on-line bulletin board if
proper notice is given and interactive access to members of the public is provided).
Moreover, there is no apparent authority for the use of electronic media technology to
allow board members to remove a workshop or meeting from within the jurisdiction in which
the board is empowered to carry out its functions and claim compliance with the Sunshine Law
by providing the public electronic access to the remote meeting. Inf. Op. to Sugarman, August
5, 2015.
D. NOTICE AND PROCEDURES
1. Agenda
e Sunshine Law does not mandate that an agency provide notice of each item to be
discussed via a published agenda although the Attorney General’s Oce has recommended the
publication of an agenda, if available. e courts have rejected such a requirement because it
could eectively preclude access to meetings by members of the general public who wish to
bring specic issues before a governmental body. See Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla.
3d DCA 1973); and Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (posted agenda
unnecessary and public body not required to postpone meeting due to inaccurate press report
which was not part of the public body’s ocial notice eorts).
us, the Sunshine Law does not require boards to consider only those matters on a
published agenda. “[W]hether to impose a requirement that restricts every relevant commission
or board from considering matters not on an agenda is a policy decision to be made by the
legislature.” Law and Information Services, Inc. v. City of Riviera Beach, 670 So. 2d 1014, 1016
(Fla. 4th DCA 1996). And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010),
review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (Sunshine Law does not prohibit use of consent agenda
procedure).
Even though the Sunshine Law does not prohibit a board from adding topics to the agenda
of a regularly noticed meeting, the Attorney General’s Oce has advised boards to postpone
formal action on any added items that are controversial. See AGO 03-53, stating that “[i]n the
spirit of the Sunshine Law, the city commission should be sensitive to the community’s concerns
that it be allowed advance notice and, therefore, meaningful participation on controversial issues
coming before the commission.”
While the Sunshine Law requires notice of meetings, not of the individual items which may
be considered at that meeting, other statutes, codes, or ordinances may impose such a requirement
and agencies subject to those provisions must follow them. See Inf. Op. to Mattimore, February
6, 1996.
For example, s. 120.525(2), F.S., requires that agencies subject to the Administrative
Procedure Act must prepare an agenda in time to ensure that a copy may be received at least 7
days before the event by any person in the state who requests a copy and who pays the reasonable
cost of the copy. e agenda, along with any meeting materials available in electronic form
excluding condential and exempt information, shall be published on the agency’s website. Id.
After the agenda has been made available, changes may be made only for good cause. Id.
Similarly, special districts are required to post certain information on the district’s ocial
website, including: “[a]t least 7 days before each meeting or workshop, the agenda of the event.”
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
41
Section 189.069(2)(a)15., F.S. e information must remain on the website for at least 1 year
after the event. Id.
2. Location of meetings
a. Facilities that discriminate or unreasonably restrict access to the facility
Section 286.011(6), F.S., prohibits boards or commissions subject to the Sunshine Law
from holding their meetings at any facility which discriminates on the basis of sex, age, race,
creed, color, origin, or economic status, or which operates in such a manner as to unreasonably
restrict public access to such a facility. And see s. 286.26, F.S., relating to accessibility of public
meetings to the physically handicapped.
Public boards or commissions, therefore, are advised to avoid holding meetings at places
where the public and the press are eectively excluded. AGO 71-295. us, a police pension
board should not hold its meetings in a facility where the public has limited access and where
there may be a “chilling” eect on the public’s willingness to attend by requiring the public to
provide identication, to leave such identication while attending the meeting, and to request
permission before entering the room where the meeting is held. AGO 96-55. And see Inf. Op.
to Galloway, August 21, 2008, in which the Attorney General’s Oce expressed concerns about
holding a public meeting in a private home in light of the possible “chilling eect” on the public’s
willingness to attend.
While a city may not require persons wishing to attend public meetings to provide
identication as a condition of attendance, it may impose certain security measures on members
of the public entering a public building, such as requiring the public to go through metal
detectors. AGO 05-13.
b. Luncheon meetings
Public access to meetings of public boards or commissions is the key element of the
Sunshine Law, and public agencies are advised to avoid holding meetings in places not easily
accessible to the public. e Attorney General’s Oce has suggested that public boards or
commissions avoid the use of luncheon meetings to conduct board or commission business.
ese meetings may have a “chilling” eect upon the public’s willingness or desire to attend.
People who would otherwise attend such a meeting may be unwilling or reluctant to enter a
public dining room without purchasing a meal and may be nancially or personally unwilling
to do so. Inf. Op. to Campbell, February 8, 1999; and Inf. Op. to Nelson, May 19, 1980. Cf.
City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38, 41 (Fla. 1971), in which the Florida Supreme Court
observed: “A secret meeting occurs when public ocials meet at a time and place to avoid being
seen or heard by the public.” See also the discussion on page 48 relating to inaudible discussions.
c. Out-of-town meetings
e fact that a meeting is held in a public room does not make it public within the
meaning of the Sunshine Law; for a meeting to be “public,” the public must be given advance
notice and provided with a reasonable opportunity to attend. Bigelow v. Howze, 291 So. 2d 645,
647-648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). See also the discussion on pages 24-25 relating to inspection and
fact-nding trips.
Accordingly, a school board workshop held outside county limits over 100 miles away
from the board’s headquarters violated the Sunshine Law where the only advantage to the board
resulting from the out-of-town gathering (elimination of travel time and expense due to the fact
that the board members were attending a conference at the site) did not outweigh the interests of
the public in having a reasonable opportunity to attend. Rhea v. School Board of Alachua County,
636 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). e court refused to adopt a rule prohibiting any board
workshops from being held at a site more than 100 miles from its headquarters, instead applying
a balancing of interests test to determine which interest predominates in a given case. As stated
42
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
by the court, “[t]he interests of the public in having a reasonable opportunity to attend a Board
workshop must be balanced against the Board’s need to conduct a workshop at a site beyond the
county boundaries.” Id. at 1385. And see Inf. Op. to Sugarman, August 5, 2015 (no apparent
authority for use of electronic media technology to allow city pension board members to remove
a workshop or meeting from within the jurisdiction in which the board is empowered to carry
out its functions and claim compliance with the Sunshine Law by providing the public with
electronic access to the remote meeting).
In addition, there may be other statutes which limit where board meetings may be held.
See, e.g., s. 125.001, F.S. (meetings of the board of county commissioners may be held at any
appropriate public place in the county); s. 1001.372, F.S. (school board meetings may be held at
any appropriate public place in the county). And see AGOs 08-01 and 03-03 (municipality may
not hold commission meetings at facilities outside its boundaries). See now ss. 166.0213(1),
F.S. (governing body of municipality with 500 or fewer residents may hold meetings within 5
miles of the exterior jurisdictional boundary of the municipality at such time and place as may
be prescribed by ordinance or resolution); 166.0213(2), F.S. (governing body of a municipality
may hold joint meetings to receive, discuss, and act upon matters of mutual interest with the
governing body of the county within which the municipality is located or the governing body of
another municipality at such time and place as shall be prescribed by ordinance or resolution);
and 125.001(2), F.S. (authorizing boards of county commissioners to hold joint public meetings
with governing boards of adjacent counties or municipalities upon due public notice within
the jurisdiction of all participating counties and municipalities; provided that an authorizing
resolution is adopted, no ocial vote is taken at the joint meeting, and the joint meeting may
not take the place of a public hearing required by law). Cf. AGO 20-03, noting that a quorum of
the board must be physically present at the meeting of a board which is required to be held at a
place within the body’s jurisdiction. For more information on this issue, please see the discussion
on pages 38-40.
Conduct which occurs outside the state which would constitute a knowing violation of
the Sunshine Law is a second degree misdemeanor. Section 286.011(3), F.S. Such violations
are prosecuted in the county in which the board or commission normally conducts its ocial
business. Section 910.16, F.S.
d. Size of meeting facilities
e Sunshine Law requires that meetings of a public board or commission be “open to
the public.” If a large turnout is expected for a particular meeting, the Attorney General’s Oce
has recommended that public boards and commissions take reasonable steps (such as moving
the meeting to a larger room) to accommodate those who wish to attend. Inf. Op. to Galloway,
August 21, 2008. If the largest available public meeting room cannot accommodate all of those
who are expected to attend, the use of video technology (e.g., a television screen outside the
meeting room) may be appropriate. See Kennedy v. St. Johns River Water Management District,
No. 2009-0441-CA (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. September 27, 2010), per curiam armed, 84 So. 3d 331
(Fla. 5th DCA 2011), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (even though not all members of the public were able to enter the meeting
room, board did not violate the Sunshine Law when it held a meeting at the board’s usual meeting
place and in the largest available room; the court noted, however, that the board set up a computer
with external speakers so that those who were not able to enter the meeting room could view and
hear the proceedings).
3. Minutes
a. Scope of minutes requirement
Section 286.011(2), F.S., requires that minutes of a meeting of a public board or
commission be promptly recorded and open to public inspection. Workshop meetings are not
exempted from this requirement. AGOs 08-65 and 74-62. And see Lozman v. City of Riviera
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
43
Beach, No. 502007CA007552XXXXMBAN (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. June 9, 2009), per curiam
armed, 46 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), available online in the Cases database at the
open government site at myoridalegal.com (minutes required for city council’s agenda review
meetings).
Because the term “promptly” is not dened in the statute, it “should be construed in
its plain and ordinary sense.” Inf. Op. to Board of Trustees, January 27, 2009. e informal
advisory opinion notes that Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (2003) denes
“prompt” as done, performed, delivered, etc., at once or without delay.
Draft minutes of a board meeting may be circulated to individual board members for
corrections and studying prior to approval by the board, so long as any changes, corrections,
or deletions are discussed and adopted during the public meeting when the board adopts the
minutes. AGOs 02-51 and 74-294. Cf. Inf. Op. to Stebbins, December 1, 2015 (vote to
approve minutes constitutes ocial action of a board; no authority to exempt a vote to approve
minutes from quorum requirements).
e minutes are public records when the person responsible for preparing the minutes
has performed his or her duty even though they have not yet been sent to the board members or
ocially approved by the board. AGO 91-26. And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193
(Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (city violated both the language
and the purpose of s. 286.011[2] by denying public access to its minutes until after approval).
Section 286.011, F.S., does not specify who is responsible for taking the minutes of public
meetings. is appears to be a procedural matter which the individual boards or commissions
must resolve. Inf. Op. to Baldwin, December 5, 1990.
b. Content of minutes
e term “minutes” as used in s. 286.011, F.S., contemplates a brief summary or series of
brief notes or memoranda reecting the events of the meeting; accordingly a verbatim transcript
is not required. AGO 82-47. And see State v. Adams, No. 91-175-CC (Fla. Sumter Co. Ct. July 15,
1992), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(no violation of Sunshine Law where minutes failed to reect brief discussion concerning a
proposed inspection trip). Cf. s. 20.052(5)(c), F.S., requiring that minutes, including a record of
all votes cast, be maintained for all meetings of an advisory body, commission, board of trustees,
or other collegial body adjunct to an executive agency.
c. Tape recording or Internet archive as minutes
e Sunshine Law does not require that public boards and commissions tape record their
meetings. See AGO 86-21. However, other statutes may require that certain proceedings be
recorded. See Carlson v. Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d 1261 (Fla.1st DCA 2017) (statute
mandating that a “complete recording” be made of portions of a closed negotiation team meeting
requires more than an agenda and meeting notes). Cf. AGO 10-42 (where statute requires that
all closed proceedings of child abuse death review committee be recorded and that no portion
be o the record, audio recording of the proceedings “would appear to be the most expedient
and cost-ecient manner to ensure that all discussion is recorded”).
However, while a board is authorized to tape record the proceedings if it chooses to do
so, the Sunshine Law also requires written minutes. AGO 75-45. Similarly, while a board may
archive the full text of all workshop discussions conducted on the Internet, written minutes of
the workshops must also be prepared and promptly recorded. AGO 08-65.
Moreover, the tape recordings are public records and their retention is governed by
schedules established by the Division of Library and Information Services of the Department of
State in accordance with s. 257.36(6), F.S. AGO 86-21. Accord AGO 86-93 (tape recordings
44
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
of school board meetings are subject to Public Records Act even though written minutes are
required to be prepared and made available to the public).
d. Use of transcript as minutes
Although a written transcript is not required, a board may use a written transcript of the
meeting as the minutes, if it chooses to do so. Inf. Op. to Fulwider, June 14, 1993.
4. Notice requirements
a. Reasonable notice required
A vital element of the Sunshine Law is the requirement that boards subject to the law
provide “reasonable notice” of all meetings. See s. 286.011(1), F.S. Even before the statutory
amendment in 1995 expressly requiring notice, the courts had stated that in order for a public
meeting to be in essence “public,” reasonable notice of the meeting must be given. See Hough v.
Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288, 291 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515, 517
(Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Reasonable public notice is required for all meetings subject to the Sunshine Law and is
required even though a quorum is not present. AGO 90-56. And see Baynard v. City of Chiefland,
Florida, No. 38-2002-CA-000789 (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. July 8, 2003) available online in the Cases
database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (reasonable notice required even if
subject of meeting is “relatively unimportant”). Notice is required even though meetings of the
board are “of general knowledge” and are not conducted in a closed door manner. TSI Southeast,
Inc. v. Royals, 588 So. 2d 309, 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). “Governmental bodies who hold
unnoticed meetings do so at their peril.” Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647
So. 2d 857, 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).
e Sunshine Law does not dene the term “reasonable notice,” and “[f ]ew cases address
the question of what is reasonable notice.” See Transparency for Florida, Inc. v. City of Port St.
Lucie, 240 So. 3d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). In Transparency, the court referenced AGO 73-
170, which concluded that the type of notice given depends on the purpose for the notice, the
character of the event about which the notice is given, and the nature of the rights to be aected.
“Where there is no specic legislative directive as to what constitutes reasonable notice as a matter
of law, we agree with the Attorney General that it is a fact specic inquiry.” Transparency, at 787.
erefore, the type of notice is variable and depends upon the facts of the situation and
the board involved. In each case, an agency must give notice at such time and in such a manner
as to enable the media and the general public to attend the meeting. AGOs 00-08, 04-44, 80-
78 and 73-170. And see Rhea v. City of Gainesville, 574 So. 2d 221, 222 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
(purpose of the notice requirement is to apprise the public of the pendency of matters that might
aect their rights, aord them the opportunity to appear and present their views, and aord
them a reasonable time to make an appearance if they wish). Cf. Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So.
2d 785, 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (where county attorney provided citizen with “personal due
notice” of a committee meeting and its function, it would be “unjust to reward” the citizen by
concluding that a meeting lacked adequate notice because the newspaper advertisement failed
to correctly name the committee). See also Suncam, Inc. v. Worrall, No. CI97-3385 (Fla. 9th
Cir. Ct. May 9, 1997), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (Sunshine Law requires notice to the general public; agency not required to
provide “individual notice” to company that wished to be informed when certain meetings were
going to occur).
For example, “burying a notice inside a committee application and calendar on the
instructional materials page of the [school district’s] website is an unreasonable way to give public
notice of a meeting” of a school board textbook committee that is subject to the Sunshine Law.
Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc. v. School Board of Collier County, 328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
45
2021). Additionally, the notices did not mention that the meetings were open to the public. By
contrast, the school board posted notices of regular school board meetings on the public notice
page of the district website and in an electronic newsletter.
While the Attorney General’s Oce cannot specify the type of notice which must be given
in all cases, the following notice guidelines are suggested:
1. e notice should contain the time and place of the meeting and, if available, an agenda,
or if no agenda is available, a statement of the general subject matter to be considered.
2. e notice should be prominently displayed in the area in the agency’s oces set aside for
that purpose, e.g., for cities, in city hall, and on the agency’s website, if there is one.
3. Except in the case of emergency or special meetings, notice should be provided at least 7
days prior to the meeting. Emergency sessions should be aorded the most appropriate
and eective notice under the circumstances.
4. Special meetings should have no less than 24 and preferably at least 72 hours reasonable
notice to the public. See Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (three
days notice of special meeting deemed adequate).
5. e use of press releases, faxes, e-mails, and/or phone calls to the local news media is highly
eective in providing notice of upcoming meetings.
e notice procedures set forth above should be considered as suggestions which will
vary depending upon the circumstances of each particular situation. See AGO 73-170 (“If the
purpose for notice is kept in mind, together with the character of the event about which notice
is to be given and the nature of the rights to be aected, the essential requirements for notice in
that situation will suggest themselves”). See also AGOs 00-08, 94-62 and 90-56. An individual
challenging the adequacy of a meeting notice is not required “to allege and prove that some
member of the public was not aorded an opportunity to attend the meeting because notice was
not adequate,” because this “is not an element of a cause of action for a Sunshine Law violation.”
Transparency for Florida, Inc. v. City of Port St. Lucie, 240 So. 3d 780, 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018).
us, in Rhea v. City of Gainesville, 574 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), the court held
that a complaint alleging that members of the local news media were contacted about a special
meeting of the city commission one and one-half hours before the meeting stated a sucient cause
of action that the Sunshine Law had been violated. Compare News and Sun-Sentinel Company v.
Cox, 702 F. Supp. 891 (S.D. Fla. 1988) (no Sunshine Law violation occurred when on March 31,
a “general notice” of a city commission meeting scheduled for April 5 was posted on the bulletin
board outside city hall); and Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, No. 502008CA027882 (Fla. 15th
Cir. Ct. December 8, 2010), per curiam armed, 79 So. 3d 36 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (no violation of
Sunshine Law where notice of special meeting held on Monday, September 15 was posted at city
hall and faxed to the media on Friday, September 12 and members of the public [including the
media] attended the meeting).
e determination as to who will actually prepare the notice or agenda is essentially “an
integral part of the actual mechanics and procedures for conducting that meeting and, therefore,
aptly relegated to local practice and procedure as prescribed by . . . charters and ordinances.”
Hough, 278 So. 2d at 291.
b. Notice requirements when meeting adjourned to a later date
If a meeting is to be adjourned and reconvened later to complete the business from the
agenda of the adjourned meeting, the second meeting should also be noticed. AGO 90-56.
c. Notice relating to record needed for appellate review
Section 286.0105, F.S., requires:
46
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Each board, commission, or agency of this state or of any political
subdivision thereof shall include in the notice of any meeting or
hearing, if notice of the meeting or hearing is required, of such
board, commission, or agency, conspicuously on such notice,
the advice that, if a person decides to appeal any decision made
by the board, agency, or commission with respect to any matter
considered at such meeting or hearing, he or she will need a
record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he or she
may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is
made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon
which the appeal is to be based.
is statute applies to every “board, commission, or agency of this state.” See AGO 19-14
(Education Practices Commission, established in s. 1012.79, F.S., is a “commission” for purposes
of s. 286.0105, F.S.)
e notice requirement in s. 286.0105, F.S., “is imposed at each occasion where notice
of a meeting or hearing is required and is to be included in the notice to be given to the public
of such meeting.” Linares v. District School Board of Pasco County, No. 17-00230 (Fla. 6th Cir.
Ct. January 10, 2018), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com, quoting from AGO 89-82. See also Everglades Law Center, Inc. v. South
Florida Water Management District, 290 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019), noting that with the
adoption of s. 286.0105, F.S., “the legislature understood the importance of a verbatim record for
appellate review of government board decisions .”
d. Paid advertising requirements and additional notice provisions imposed by other
statutes, codes, or ordinances
While the Sunshine Law requires only that reasonable public notice be given, a public
agency may be subject to additional notice requirements imposed by other statutes, charters or
codes. In such cases, the requirements of that statute, charter, or code must be strictly observed.
Inf. Op. to Mattimore, February 6, 1996.
For example, while the Sunshine Law does not mandate that an agency use a paid
advertisement to provide public notice of a meeting, other statutes may specify publication
requirements for certain actions. See Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515, 517n.1 (Fla. 1st DCA
1985) (Sunshine Law does not require city council to give notice “by paid advertisements” of
its intent to take action regarding utilities system improvements, although the Legislature “has
required such notice for certain subjects,” e.g., 166.041[3][c], F.S.). See also s. 189.015(1),
F.S. (notice requirements for meetings of the governing bodies of special districts); and s.
1001.372(2)(c), F.S. (school board meetings). Cf. s. 50.0311, F.S. (Internet website publication
of governmental agency notices).
Similarly, a board or commission subject to Ch. 120, F.S., the Administrative Procedure
Act, must comply with the notice and publication requirements of that act. See, e.g., s. 120.525,
F.S. ose requirements, however, are imposed by Ch. 120, F.S., not s. 286.011, F.S., although
the notice of a board or commission meeting published pursuant to Ch. 120, F.S., also satises
the notice requirements of s. 286.011, F.S. Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. Baranko,
407 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
5. Public comment
Prior to the adoption of s. 286.0114, F.S. (2013), Florida courts had determined that s.
286.011, F.S., provides a right to attend public meetings, but does not provide a right to be heard.
See Herrin v. City of Deltona, 121 So. 3d 1094, 1097 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (phrase “open to the
public” as used in s. 286.011, F.S., means that “meetings must be properly noticed and reasonably
accessible to the public, not that the public has the right to be heard at such meetings”). See also
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
47
Keesler v. Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc., 32 So. 3d 659 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review
denied, 47 So. 3d 1289 (Fla. 2010); and Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA
2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010).
However, as the court observed in Herrin, s. 286.0114(2), F.S., now mandates that
“[m]embers of the public shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard on a proposition
before a board or commission.” e opportunity to be heard does not have to occur at the
same meeting at which the board or commission takes ocial action if the opportunity “occurs
at a meeting that is during the decisionmaking process and is within reasonable proximity in
time before the meeting at which the board or commission takes the ocial action.” Section
286.0114(2), F.S.
e terms “proposition” or “ocial action” are not dened in the statute, nor is there a
distinction between ocial action taken at a formal meeting versus an informal setting, such as a
workshop. Inf. Op. to Jacquot, April 25, 2014. “In light of the purpose of the statute to allow
public participation during the decisionmaking process on a proposition, it should be liberally
construed to facilitate that purpose.” Id.
Section 286.0114(3), F.S., states that the public’s “opportunity to be heard” does not apply
to:
1. An ocial act that must be taken to deal with an emergency situation aecting the public
health, welfare, or safety, if compliance with the requirements would cause an unreasonable
delay in the ability of the board or commission to act;
2. An ocial act involving no more than a ministerial act, including, but not limited to,
approval of minutes and ceremonial proclamations;
3. A meeting that is exempt from s. 286.011; or
4. A meeting during which the board or commission is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity.
See AGO 17-01 (s. 286.0114, F.S., does not require that members of the public be given
a reasonable opportunity to be heard at quasi-judicial code enforcement hearings held by
a special magistrate pursuant to authority delegated from the county code enforcement
board).
e statute does not prohibit a board or commission from “maintaining orderly conduct
or proper decorum in a public meeting.” Section 286.0114(2), F.S. In addition, the opportunity
to be heard is “subject to rules or policies adopted by the board or commission” as provided in s.
286.0114(4), F.S. ese rules or policies are limited to those that:
1. Provide guidelines regarding the amount of time an individual has to address the board or
commission;
2. Prescribe procedures for allowing representatives of groups or factions on a proposition to
address the board or commission, rather than all members of such groups or factions, at
meetings in which a large number of individuals wish to be heard;
3. Prescribe procedures or forms for an individual to use in order to inform the board or
commission of a desire to be heard; to indicate his or her support, opposition, or neutrality
on a proposition; and to indicate his or her designation of a representative to speak for him
or her or his or her group on a proposition if he or she so chooses; or
4. Designate a specied period of time for public comment.
If a board or commission adopts such rules or policies and complies with them, it is
deemed to be acting in compliance with the statute. Section 286.0114(5), F.S. See Larson v.
Palm Beach County, No. 502016CA001706 (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. September 26, 2019), per curiam
armed, 311 So. 3d 853 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), available online in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com, upholding a board procedural rule giving members of the
public three minutes to speak on all items on the consent agenda versus three minutes on each
regular agenda item. And see City of Miami v. Airbnb, Inc., 260 So. 3d 478, 483-484 (Fla. 3d
48
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
DCA 2018)( temporary injunction prohibiting city from requiring speakers at public hearings to
give their names and addresses was overbroad). Cf. Jones v. Heyman, 888 F.2d 1328, 1333 (11th
Cir. 1989) (mayor’s actions in attempting to conne the speaker to the agenda item in the city
commission meeting and having the speaker removed when the speaker appeared to become
disruptive constituted a reasonable time, place and manner regulation and did not violate the
speaker’s First Amendment rights); and Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, Fla., 138 S.Ct. 1945
(2018), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the existence of probable cause for a speaker’s
arrest for failure to follow the city council’s rules of procedure did not bar the speaker’s First
Amendment retaliation claim.
A circuit court is authorized to issue injunctions for the purpose of enforcing s. 286.0114,
F.S. Section 286.0114(6), F.S. However, an action taken by a board or commission which is found
to be in violation of that statute is not void as a result of the violation. Section 286.0114(8), F.S.
6. Restrictions on public attendance
a. Cameras and tape recorders
A board or commission may adopt reasonable rules and policies which ensure the orderly
conduct of a public meeting and require orderly behavior on the part of those persons attending
a public meeting. A board, however, may not ban the use of nondisruptive recording devices.
Pinellas County School Board v. Suncam, Inc., 829 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (school board’s
ban on unobtrusive videotaping invalid). Accord AGO 91-28. And see AGO 77-122 (silent
nondisruptive tape recording of district meeting permissible).
e Legislature in Ch. 934, F.S., appears to implicitly recognize the public’s right to silently
record public meetings. AGO 91-28. Chapter 934, F.S., the Security of Communications Act,
regulates the interception of oral communications. Section 934.02(2), F.S., however, denes
“[o]ral communication” to specically exclude “any public oral communication uttered at a
public meeting . . . .” See also Inf. Op. to Gerstein, July 16, 1976, stating that public ocials
may not complain that they are secretly being recorded during public meetings in violation of s.
934.03, F.S.
b. Exclusion of certain members of the public
e term “open to the public” as used in the Sunshine Law means open to all persons who
choose to attend. AGO 99-53. Cf. Ribaya v. Board of Trustees of City Pension Fund for Fireghters
and Police Ocers in City of Tampa, 162 So. 3d 348, 356 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (although there
appears to be no case law “squarely resolving” whether a wrongful exclusion of one person would
void all actions taken at the meeting, “there is legal support for that proposition”).
us the court in Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen’s Association, Local
1922-1, 652 So. 2d 1169, 1170 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), ruled that a procurement committee
violated the Sunshine Law by requesting that bidders voluntarily excuse themselves from each
other’s presentations. See now s. 286.0113(2), F.S., providing an exemption from the Sunshine
Law for any portion of a meeting at which a vendor makes an oral presentation or answers
questions as part of a competitive solicitation, and requiring a complete recording of the exempt
portion of the meeting.
Sta of a public agency clearly are members of the public as well as employees of the agency;
they cannot, therefore, be excluded from public meetings. AGO 79-01. Section 286.011, F.S.,
however, does not preclude the reasonable application of ordinary personnel policies, for example,
the requirement that annual leave be used to attend meetings, provided that such policies do not
frustrate or subvert the purpose of the Sunshine Law. Id.
Although not directly addressing the open meetings laws, courts of other states have
ruled that in the absence of a compelling governmental interest, agencies may not single out
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
49
and exclude a particular news organization or reporter from press conferences. See, e.g., Times-
Picayune Publishing Corporation v. Lee, 15 Media L. Rep. 1713 (E.D. La. 1988); Borreca v. Fasi,
369 F. Supp. 906 (D. Hawaii 1974); Quad-City Community News Service, Inc. v. Jebens, 334 F.
Supp. 8 (S.D. Iowa 1971); and Southwestern Newspapers Corporation v. Curtis, 584 S.W.2d 362
(Tex. Ct. App. 1979).
c. Inaudible discussions
A school district advisory committee violated the Sunshine Law when it conducted
“breakout sessions” where the members discussed committee business at two separate tables
which meant that members at one table could not hear what was being discussed at the other
table and members of the public could not hear what was being discussed at the sessions. Linares
v. District School Board of Pasco County, No. 17-00230 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 10, 2018),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com. And
see AGO 71-159 (cautioning against discussions of public business which are audible only to “a
select few” who are at the table with board members). Cf. Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. City of
Sarasota, No. 2010CA4387NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. February 27, 2012), available online in the
Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (two members of a civil service
board violated the Sunshine Law when they held a private discussion concerning a pending
employment appeal during a recess of a board meeting).
7. Time and length of meeting
In Greenbarg v. Metropolitan Dade County Board of County Commissioners, 618 So. 2d 760
(Fla. 3d DCA 1993), the court held that there was “no impropriety” when a county commission
continued to meet until the “early morning hours.”
8. Use of codes or preassigned numbers in order to avoid identifying individuals
Section 286.011, F.S., requires that meetings of public boards or commissions be “open
to the public at all times . . . .” See Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821,
823 (Fla. 1985), disapproving a procedure permitting representatives of the media to attend a
city council meeting provided that they agreed to “respect the condentiality” of certain matters:
“Under the Sunshine Law, a meeting is either fully open or fully closed; there are no intermediate
categories.”
e use of preassigned numbers or codes at public meetings to avoid identifying the
names of applicants violates s. 286.011, F.S., because “to permit discussions of applicants for the
position of a municipal department head by a preassigned number or other coded identication
in order to keep the public from knowing the identities of such applicants and to exclude the
public from the appointive or selection process would clearly frustrate or defeat the purpose of
the Sunshine Law.” AGO 77-48. Accord AGO 76-240 (Sunshine Law prohibits the use of coded
symbols at a public meeting in order to avoid revealing the names of applicants for the position of
city manager). And see News-Press Publishing Company v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646, 648 (Fla. 1977)
(“public policy of this state as expressed in the public records law and the open meetings statute
eliminate any notion that the commission was free to conduct the county’s personnel business by
pseudonyms or cloaked references”).
9. Voting
a. Abstention
Section 286.012, F.S., provides:
A member of a state, county, or municipal governmental board,
commission, or agency who is present at a meeting of any such
body at which an ocial decision, ruling, or other ocial act is
to be taken or adopted may not abstain from voting . . . and a
vote shall be recorded or counted for each such member present,
50
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
unless, with respect to any such member, there is, or appears to be,
a possible conict of interest under s. 112.311, s. 112.313, or s.
112.3143, or additional or more stringent standards of conduct,
if any, adopted pursuant to s. 112.326. If there is or appears to be
a possible conict under s. 112.311, s. 112.313, or s. 112.3143,
the member shall comply with the disclosure requirements of s.
112.3143. If the conict is one arising from the additional or
more stringent standards adopted pursuant to s. 112.326, the
member shall comply with any disclosure requirements adopted
pursuant to s. 112.326. If the ocial decision, ruling, or act
occurs in the context of a quasi-judicial proceeding, a member
may abstain from voting on such matter if the abstention is to
assure a fair proceeding free from potential bias or prejudice. (e.s.)
A member of a state, county, or municipal board who is present at a meeting is thus
prohibited from abstaining from voting except as authorized in s. 286.012, F.S. See AGO 02-40
(s. 286.012, F.S., applies to advisory board appointed by a county commission). Cf. Inf. Op. to
Dickens, August 10, 2006 (nothing in the language of s. 286.012 indicates that a member who
temporarily absents himself or herself from the dais [but is still present in the meeting room]
during a vote should be recorded as an armative vote).
Failure of a member to vote, however, does not invalidate the entire proceedings. City of
Hallandale v. Rayel Corporation, 313 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cause dismissed sua sponte,
322 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1975) (to rule otherwise would permit any member to frustrate ocial
action merely by refusing to participate). And see Inf. Op. to Dickens, supra (failure of a member
to vote does not render a voted matter invalid if a quorum is present and the required number of
armative votes have been cast by the voting members).
Section 286.012, F.S., applies only to state, county, and municipal boards. AGO 04-21.
Special district boards are not subject to its provisions and may adopt their own rules regarding
abstention, subject to s. 112.3143, F.S. AGOs 04-21, 85-78 and 78-11.
Questions as to what constitutes a conict of interest and when board members are
prohibited from voting under the above statutes should be referred to the Florida Commission
on Ethics.
b. Proxy votes
In the absence of statutory authority, proxy voting by board members is not allowed.
AGO 78-117.
c. Roll call vote
While s. 286.012, F.S., requires that each member present cast a vote either for or against
the proposal under consideration by the public board or commission, it is not necessary that a
roll call vote of the members present and voting be taken so that each member’s specic vote on
each subject is recorded. e intent of the statute is that all members present cast a vote and that
the minutes so reect that by either recording a vote or counting a vote for each member. Ru v.
School Board of Collier County, 426 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (roll call vote so as to record
the individual vote of each such member is not necessary). Cf. s. 20.052(5)(c), F.S., requiring
that minutes, including a record of all votes cast, be maintained for all meetings of an advisory
body, commission, board of trustees, or other collegial body adjunct to an executive agency.
d. Written or secret ballot
A secret ballot violates the Sunshine Law. See AGO 73-264 (members of a personnel board
may not vote by secret ballot during a hearing concerning a public employee). Accord AGOs 72-
326 and 71-32 (board may not use secret ballots to elect the chair and other ocers of the board).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
51
However, board members are not prohibited from using written ballots to cast a vote as
long as the votes are made openly at a public meeting, the name of the person who voted and his
or her selection are written on the ballot, and the ballots are maintained and made available for
public inspection in accordance with the Public Records Act. See AGO 73-344.
In addition, because the Sunshine Law expressly requires that public meetings be open
to the public “at all times,” after the ballots are marked, the person who tallies the votes should
announce the names of the persons who voted and their votes. For example, a judge found that
a board violated the Sunshine Law when the board members’ individual votes for each applicant
were not announced at the public meeting. According to the court, “[t]he fact that the ballots
are preserved as public records available for public inspection does not satisfy the requirement
of openness.” Schweickert v. Citrus County Port Authority, No. 12-CA-1339 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct.
September 30, 2013), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com. See also AGO 71-32 (if at any time during a public meeting, the proceedings
become “covert, secret or not wholly exposed to the view and hearing of the public,” that portion
of the meeting is not “open to the public at all times”).
E. STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS
1. Creation and review of exemptions
Article I, s. 24(b), Fla. Const., requires that all meetings of a collegial public body of the
executive branch of state government or of local government, at which ocial acts are to be taken
or at which the public business of such body is to be transacted or discussed, be open and noticed
to the public. All laws in eect on July 1, 1993, that limit access to meetings remain in force until
they are repealed. Article I, s. 24(d), Fla. Const.
e Legislature is authorized to provide by general law passed by two-thirds vote of each
house for the exemption of meetings, provided such law states with specicity the public necessity
justifying the exemption and is no broader than necessary to accomplish the stated purpose of
the law. Article I, s. 24(c), Fla. Const. See s. 119.011(8), F.S., dening the term “exemption” to
include a provision of general law which provides that a “specied . . . meeting, or portion thereof,
is not subject to the access requirements” in s. 286.011, F.S., or Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const. And see
Halifax Hospital Medical Center v. News-Journal Corporation, 724 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1999) (open
meetings exemption for certain hospital board meetings unconstitutional because it did not meet
the constitutional standard of specicity as to stated public necessity and limited breadth to
accomplish that purpose). Compare Baker County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, Inc.,
870 So. 2d 189, 195 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), upholding a more recent public meetings exemption
because “the constitutional concerns expressed by the Florida Supreme Court in Halifax” were
met due to a more specic legislative justication accompanied by adequate ndings to support
the breadth of the exemption.
Section 119.15, F.S., the Open Government Sunset Review Act, provides for legislative
review of exemptions from the open government laws. Pursuant to the Act, in the fth year
after enactment of a new exemption or expansion of an existing exemption, the exemption shall
be repealed on October 2 of the fth year, unless the Legislature acts to reenact the exemption.
Section 119.15(3), F.S. e two-thirds vote requirement for enactment of exemptions set forth
in Art. I, s. 24(c), Fla. Const., applies to re-adoption of exemptions as well as initial creation of
exemptions. AGO 03-18.
2. Exemptions are narrowly construed
As a statute enacted for the public benet, the Sunshine Law should be liberally construed to
give eect to its public purpose, while exemptions should be narrowly construed. See, e.g., Board of
Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1969); Wood v. Marston, 442
So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983). And see Turner v. Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148, 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980),
armed and remanded, 389 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1980) (rejecting a board’s argument that a legislative
52
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
requirement that certain board meetings must be open to the public implies that the board could
meet privately to discuss other matters); and Carlson v. Florida Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d
1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017), rejecting an agency’s argument that a statute providing an exemption for
“[a]ny portion of team meeting at which negotiation strategies are discussed” covered the entirety
of any meeting at which negotiation strategies were discussed.
e courts have recognized that the Sunshine Law should be construed so as to frustrate all
evasive devices. City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971); Blackford v. School Board
of Orange County, 375 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979); Wolfson v. State, 344 So. 2d 611 (Fla.
2d DCA 1977). As the Florida Supreme Court stated in Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of
Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260, 264 (Fla. 1973):
Various boards and agencies have obviously attempted to read
exceptions into the Government in the Sunshine Law which do
not exist. Even though their intentions may be sincere, such
boards and agencies should not be allowed to circumvent the plain
provisions of the statute. e benet to the public far outweighs
the inconvenience of the board or agency. If the board or agency
feels aggrieved, then the remedy lies in the halls of the Legislature
and not in eorts to circumvent the plain provisions of the statute
by devious ways in the hope that the judiciary will read some
exception into the law.
If a board member is unable to determine whether a meeting is subject to the Sunshine Law,
he or she should either leave the meeting or ensure that the meeting complies with the Sunshine
Law. See City of Miami Beach v. Berns, supra at 41; Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d
473, 477 (Fla. 1974) (“e principle to be followed is very simple: When in doubt, the members of
any board, agency, authority or commission should follow the open-meeting policy of the State.”).
3. Eect of statutory exemptions
a. Notice requirements
If a statute exempts meetings from the requirements of s. 286.011, F.S., the meetings are also
exempt from the notice provisions in that statute that would otherwise apply. AGO 93-86. Accord
AGO 07-28.
b. Attendance at closed meetings
In some cases, a statutory exemption species the persons who are permitted to attend a
closed session. For example, s. 286.011(8), F.S., establishing an open meetings exemption for certain
discussions pertaining to pending litigation, provides that only the entity, the entity’s attorney, the
entity’s chief administrative ocer, and a court reporter may attend the closed meeting. See AGO
01-10 (clerk of court not authorized to attend).
However, where an exemption for certain public hospital board meetings relating to a “written
strategic plan” did not specify who may attend (other than a court reporter), the Attorney General’s
Oce recommended that the board “strictly limit attendance to only those individuals who are
essential to the purpose of the meeting, i.e., to discuss, receive a report on, modify, or approve a
strategic plan, in order to avoid what the courts might consider to be a disclosure to the public.”
AGO 07-28. And see AGO 06-34 (members of a local advocacy council, who are attending a closed
session of the statewide advocacy council during the discussion of one of the local council’s cases,
may not remain in the closed session when the statewide advocacy council is considering cases from
other advocacy councils which are unrelated to the local advocacy council’s cases).
c. Disclosure of matters discussed at closed meeting
In a 2014 informal opinion, the Attorney General’s Oce considered whether the
unauthorized disclosure by a council member of information discussed during a closed “shade
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
53
meeting” held pursuant to s. 286.011(8), F.S., would violate the Sunshine Law or have other
legal consequences. e opinion concluded that the prohibitions and penalties for violation of
the Sunshine Law that are set forth in s. 286.011(3), F.S., appear to be directed only at persons
who attend closed meetings that should have been open to the public. See Inf. Op. to Pritt,
November 26, 2014. Accordingly, the Attorney General’s Oce was unable to conclude that
unauthorized disclosure of matters disclosed at a valid closed session would violate the Sunshine
Law. Id. However, other statutory provisions, such as ss. 112.313(8), 112.51, or 839.26, F.S.,
relating to disclosure of privileged information could apply to this situation. Id. And see AGO 03-
09 (exemption for collective bargaining strategy sessions in s. 447.605[1], F.S., does not directly
address the dissemination of information that may be obtained at the closed meeting, but there
is clear legislative intent that matters discussed during such meetings are not to be open to public
disclosure).
4. Special act exemptions
Prior to July 1, 1993, exemptions from the Sunshine Law could be created by special act.
Article I, s. 24, Fla. Const., however, now limits the Legislature’s ability to enact an exemption from
the constitutional right of access to open meetings established thereunder. While exemptions in
eect on July 1, 1993, remain in force until repealed, the Constitution requires that exemptions
enacted after that date must be by general law. Such law must state with specicity the public
necessity for the exemption and be no broader than necessary to accomplish that stated purpose.
F. REMEDIES AND PENALTIES
1. Criminal penalties
A knowing violation of the Sunshine Law is a misdemeanor of the second degree. Section
286.011(3)(b), F.S. See Carlson v. Florida Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d 1261, 1263 (Fla.
1st DCA 2017), declaring that the Sunshine Law is “serious business,” because “there is criminal
liability for ocials who knowingly disregard it.”
A person convicted of a second degree misdemeanor may be sentenced to a term of
imprisonment not to exceed 60 days and/or ned up to $500. Sections 775.082(4)(b) and
775.083(1)(e), F.S. e criminal penalties apply to members of advisory councils subject to the
Sunshine Law as well as to members of elected or appointed boards. AGO 01-84 (school advisory
council members).
Conduct which occurs outside the state which constitutes a knowing violation of the
Sunshine Law is a second degree misdemeanor. Section 286.011(3)(c), F.S. Such violations are
prosecuted in the county in which the board or commission normally conducts its ocial business
while violations occurring within the state may be prosecuted in that county. Section 910.16, F.S.
2. Removal from oce
When a method for removal from oce is not otherwise provided by the Florida Constitution
or by law, the Governor may suspend an elected or appointed public ocer who is indicted or
informed against for any misdemeanor arising directly out of his or her ocial duties. Section
112.52(1), F.S. If convicted, the ocer may be removed from oce by executive order of the
Governor. Section 112.52(3), F.S. A person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere or who is found
guilty is, for purposes of s. 112.52, F.S., deemed to have been convicted, notwithstanding the
suspension of sentence or the withholding of adjudication. Id. Cf. s. 112.51, F.S. (municipal
ocers) and Art. IV, s. 7, Fla. Const. (state and county ocers).
3. Noncriminal infractions
Section 286.011(3)(a), F.S., imposes noncriminal penalties for violations of the Sunshine
Law by providing that any public ocer violating the provisions of the Sunshine Law is guilty of
a noncriminal infraction, punishable by a ne not exceeding $500. It has been held that the state
attorney may pursue such actions on behalf of the state. State v. Foster, 12 F.L.W. Supp. 1194a (Fla.
54
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Broward Co. Ct. September 26, 2005). Accord AGO 91-38. Cf. State v. Foster, 13 F.L.W. Supp. 385a
(Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. January 25, 2006), in which the circuit court found that no right to a jury trial is
triggered when an individual faces a noncriminal charge of violating the Sunshine Law.
If a nonprot corporation is subject to the Sunshine Law, its board of directors constitute
“public ocers” for purposes of s. 286.011(3)(a), F.S. AGO 98-21. See Goosby v. State, No. GF05-
(001122-001130,001135)-BA (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. December 22, 2006), available online in the
Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (members of the Polk County
Opportunity Council, which had assumed and exercised a delegated governmental function, were
“public ocers” for purposes of the Sunshine Law and subject to the imposition of the noncriminal
infraction ne). Compare, State v. Dorworth, No. 14-MM-5841 (Fla. Orange Co. Ct. October 21,
2014), armed, No. 14-AP-48 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. August 19, 2015), available online in the Cases
database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, dismissing a misdemeanor charge
against a lobbyist who was accused of violating the Sunshine Law by relaying information between
board members and thereby aiding the members to meet without complying with the Sunshine
Law. e trial judge determined that by charging the lobbyist, the state attorney “expanded the
reach of the Sunshine Law to private citizens; and, the Legislature did not intend for the statute to
apply to private citizens.”
4. Attorney’s fees
Reasonable attorney’s fees will be assessed against a board or commission found to have
violated the Sunshine Law. Section 286.011(4), F.S. See Indian River County Hospital District v.
Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., 766 So. 2d 233, 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), concluding that
the trial court erred by failing to assess attorney’s fees against a nonprot hospital corporation
found to have violated the Sunshine Law. And see s. 286.011(5), F.S., authorizing the assessment
of attorney fees if a board appeals an order nding the board in violation of the Sunshine Law
and the order is armed.
While s. 286.011(4), F.S., authorizes an award of appellate fees if a person successfully
appeals a trial court order denying access, the statute “does not supersede the appellate rules,
nor does it authorize the trial court to make an initial award of appellate attorney’s fees.” School
Board of Alachua County v. Rhea, 661 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), review denied, 670 So. 2d
939, 332 (Fla. 1996). us, a person prevailing on appeal must le an appropriate motion in the
appellate court in order to receive appellate attorney’s fees. Id. If a board appeals an order nding
the board in violation of the Sunshine Law, and the order is armed, “the court shall assess a
reasonable attorney’s fee for the appeal” against the board. Section 286.011(5), F.S.
Attorney’s fees may be assessed against the individual members of the board except in those
cases where the board sought, and took, the advice of its attorney. Section 286.011(4) and (5),
F.S.
If a member of a board or commission charged with a violation of s. 286.011, F.S., is
subsequently acquitted, the board or commission is authorized to reimburse that member for any
portion of his or her reasonable attorney’s fees. Section 286.011(7), F.S. Cf. AGO 86-35, stating
that this subsection does not authorize the reimbursement of attorney’s fees incurred during an
investigation of alleged sunshine violations when no formal charges were led, although common
law principles may permit such reimbursement.
Reasonable attorney’s fees may be assessed against the individual ling an action to enforce
the provisions of s. 286.011, F.S., if the court nds that it was led in bad faith or was frivolous.
Section 286.011(4), F.S. e fact that a plainti may be unable to prove that a secret meeting
took place, however, does not necessarily mean that attorney’s fees will be assessed. See Bland
v. Jackson County, 514 So. 2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), concluding that although the
plainti was unable to prove that a meeting in violation of the Sunshine Law took place, the
evidence showed that the county commission unanimously voted on the issue in an open public
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
55
meeting without identifying what they were voting on and without any discussion and under
these circumstances an inference might reasonably be drawn that the commissioners had no need
to discuss the action being taken because they had already discussed and decided the issue before
the public meeting.
5. Civil actions for injunctive or declaratory relief
Section 286.011(2), F.S., states that the circuit courts have jurisdiction to issue injunctions
upon application by any citizen of this state. See Allen v. United Faculty of Miami-Dade College,
197 So. 3d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (Public Employees Relations Commission [PERC] properly
dismissed unfair labor practice charge alleging a violation of the Sunshine Law, as s. 286.011,
F.S., is enforceable only by the courts, not by PERC). Cf. Godheim v. City of Tampa, 426 So. 2d
1084, 1088 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), rejecting an argument that Godheim lacked standing to raise
a Sunshine Law violation, and nding that the Sunshine Law on its face gives him standing
without regard to whether he suered a special injury. Accord Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc. v.
School Board of Collier County, 328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (‘e School Board concedes
on appeal that the trial court erred in ruling that the Plaintis lacked standing,” citing Godheim).
While normally irreparable injury must be proved by the plainti before an injunction
may be issued, in Sunshine Law cases the mere showing that the law has been violated constitutes
“irreparable public injury.” Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974); and
Times Publishing Company v. Williams, 222 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969), disapproved in part
on other grounds, Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985). e
plainti’s burden is to “establish by the greater weight of the evidence” that a meeting which
should have been held in the sunshine took place on the date alleged. Lyon v. Lake County, 765
So. 2d 785, 789 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
A complaint for injunctive relief must allege by name or sucient description the identity
of the public ocial with whom the defendant public ocial has violated the Sunshine Law.
Deereld Beach Publishing, Inc. v. Robb, 530 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). And see Forehand
v. School Board of Gulf County, Florida, 600 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (plainti was not
denied a fair and impartial hearing because the board only briey deliberated in public before a
vote was taken as there was no evidence that the board had privately deliberated on this issue);
and Law and Information Services v. City of Riviera Beach, 670 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 4th DCA
1996) (patent speculation, absent any allegation that a nonpublic meeting in fact occurred, is
insucient to state a cause of action).
Although a court cannot issue a blanket order enjoining any violation of the Sunshine
Law based upon a nding that the law was violated in particular respects, a court may enjoin a
future violation that bears some resemblance to the past violation. See Board of Public Instruction
of Broward County v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693, 699-700 (Fla. 1969), Port Everglades Authority v.
International Longshoremen’s Association, Local 1922-1, 652 So. 2d 1169, 1173 (Fla. 4th DCA
1995), and Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. Martin County School Board, 125 So. 3d 184 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2013). See also Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983) (trial court’s permanent
injunction armed). Compare Leach-Wells v. City of Bradenton, 734 So. 2d 1168, 1170n. 1
(Fla. 2d DCA 1999), in which the court noted that had a citizen appealed the trial court’s denial
of her motion for temporary injunction based on a selection committee’s alleged violation of
the Sunshine Law, the appellate court “would have had the opportunity to review this matter
before the project was completed and to direct that the City be enjoined from entering into a
nal contract with the developer until after such time as the ranking of the proposals could be
accomplished in compliance with the Sunshine Law.”
e future conduct must be “specied, with such reasonable deniteness and certainty
that the defendant could readily know what it must refrain from doing without speculation and
conjecture.” Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen’s Association, Local 1922-
1, supra, quoting from Board of Public Instruction v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693, 699 (Fla. 1969).
56
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
And see Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, No. 502007CA007552XXXXMB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct.
June 9, 2009), per curiam armed, 46 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), available online in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (injunctive relief against
future violations of city to record minutes of certain meetings appropriate in light of city’s past
conduct and consistent refusal to record such minutes even after being advised to do so by the city
attorney and because the city “has continuously taken the legal position that local governments
are not required by the Sunshine Law to record minutes”).
Declaratory relief is not appropriate where no present dispute exists but where governmental
agencies merely seek judicial advice dierent from that advanced by the Attorney General and
the state attorney or an injunctive restraint on the prosecutorial discretion of the state attorney.
Askew v. City of Ocala, 348 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1977).
6. Validity of action taken in violation of the Sunshine Law and subsequent corrective
action
Section 286.011, F.S., provides that no resolution, rule, regulation or formal action shall
be considered binding except as taken or made at an open meeting.
Recognizing that the Sunshine Law should be construed so as to frustrate all evasive devices,
the courts have held that action taken in violation of the law is void ab initio. Town of Palm Beach
v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974). Accord Sarasota Citizens For Responsible Government v.
City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755, 762 (Fla. 2010), noting that “where ocials have violated section
286.011, the ocial action is void ab initio.” See Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower
Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (selection committee rankings resulting
from a meeting held in violation of the Sunshine Law are void ab initio and agency enjoined
from entering into contract based on such rankings); TSI Southeast, Inc. v. Royals, 588 So. 2d 309
(Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (contract for sale and purchase of real property voided because board failed
to properly notice the meeting under s. 286.011, F.S.); Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193
(Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (by failing to open its minutes
to public inspection and copying in a timely and reasonable manner, prejudice is presumed and
therefore city’s approval of minutes is null and void ab initio); and Brown v. Denton, 152 So. 3d 8
(Fla. 1st DCA 2014), (upholding trial court ruling that voided an agreement reached after closed-
door mediation sessions which resulted in changes to pension benets of city employees in certain
unions). Compare s. 286.0114(8), F.S. (an action taken by a board or commission which is found
to be in violation of s. 286.0114, F.S. [providing a right to be heard on a proposition before a state
or local board or commission] “is not void as a result of that violation”).
Similarly, a circuit judge found that where two members of civil service board held a private
discussion about a pending case during a recess, the board’s subsequent ndings in the case were
“null and void” and the city must reconvene the board and hear the evidence de novo. Citizens
for Sunshine, Inc. v. City of Sarasota, No. 2010CA4387NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. February 27, 2012),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com. And
see Ribaya v. Board of Trustees of City Pension Fund for Fireghters and Police Ocers in City of
Tampa, 162 So. 3d 348, 356 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (although there appears to be no case law
“squarely resolving” whether a wrongful exclusion of one person would void all actions taken at
the meeting, “there is legal support for that proposition”).
A violation need not be “clandestine” in order for a contract to be invalidated because “the
principle that a Sunshine Law violation renders void a resulting ocial action does not depend
upon a nding of intent to violate the law or resulting prejudice.” Port Everglades Authority v.
International Longshoremen’s Association, Local 1922-1, 652 So. 2d 1169, 1171 (Fla. 4th DCA
1995). But see Killearn Properties, Inc. v. City of Tallahassee, 366 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979),
cert. denied, 378 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1979) (city which had received benets under contract was
estopped from claiming contract invalid as having been entered into in violation of the Sunshine
Law).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
57
Where, however, a public board or commission does not merely perfunctorily ratify or
ceremoniously accept at a later open meeting those decisions which were made at an earlier secret
meeting but rather takes “independent nal action in the sunshine,” the decision of the board or
commission will not be disturbed. Tolar v. School Board of Liberty County, 398 So. 2d 427, 429
(Fla. 1981). Accord Bruckner v. City of Dania Beach, 823 So. 2d 167, 171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
(Sunshine violations “can be cured by independent, nal action completely in the Sunshine”).
And see Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857, 861 (Fla. 3d DCA
1994) (adoption of the open government constitutional amendment, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., did
not overrule the Tolar “standard of remediation”). Cf. Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota
County v. Webber, 658 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (no evidence suggesting that board
members met in secret during a recess to reconsider and deny a variance and then perfunctorily
ratied this decision at the public hearing held a few minutes later); B.M.Z. Corporation v. City
of Oakland Park, 415 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (where no evidence that any decision was
made in private, subsequent formal action in sunshine was not merely perfunctory ratication of
secret decisions or ceremonial acceptance of secret actions).
us, in a case involving the validity of a lease approved by a board of county commissioners
after an advisory committee held two unnoticed meetings regarding the lease, a court held that
the Sunshine Law violations were cured when the board of county commissioners held open
public hearings after the unnoticed meetings, an eort was made to make available to the public
the minutes of the unnoticed meetings, the board approved a lease that was markedly dierent
from that recommended by the advisory committee, and most of the lease negotiations were
conducted after the advisory committee had concluded its work. Monroe County v. Pigeon Key
Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857, 860-861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).
Similarly, a school board remedied an inadvertent violation of the Sunshine Law when it
subsequently held full, open and independent public hearings prior to adopting a redistricting
plan. Finch v. Seminole County School Board, 995 So. 2d 1068, 1073 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). And
see Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2010)
(any possible violations that occurred when county commissioners circulated e-mails among each
other were cured by four subsequent public meetings involving discussion of multiple proposals);
Jackson v. City of Tallahassee, 265 So. 3d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (public city commission
meeting to ll a vacancy on the commission, which included a full discussion of the appointment,
candidate presentations, more than an hour of public comment, and numerous speakers, cured
any purported violation that may have occurred during the application process). Cf. Anderson
v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d 548, 553-554 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014), noting that “even when
an illicit action is ‘cured’ it does not absolve a public body of its responsibility for violating the
Sunshine Law in the rst instance; it simply provides a way to salvage a void act by reconsidering
it in Sunshine.”
It must be emphasized, however, that only a full open hearing will cure the defect; a
violation of the Sunshine Law will not be cured by a perfunctory ratication of the action taken
outside of the sunshine. Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc. v. Centrust Savings Bank, 535 So. 2d 694
(Fla. 3d DCA 1988). See also Anderson v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d at 553 (city failed
to cure Sunshine Law violation since it merely perfunctorily ratied in public session what had
already been decided in closed meetings).
For example, in Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d 891, 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998),
review denied, 735 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 1999), the Fourth District explained why a subsequent city
council meeting did not cure the council’s prior violation of the Sunshine Law:
It is evident from the record that the meeting was not a full
reexamination of the issues, but rather, was merely the perfunctory
acceptance of the City’s prior decision. is was not a full, open
public hearing convened for the purpose of enabling the public to
express its views and participate in the decision-making process.
58
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Instead, this was merely a Council meeting which was then
opened to the public for comment at the City’s request. ere
was no signicant discussion of the issues or a discourse as to
the language sought to be included. e City Councilmen were
provided with transcripts of the hearings, but none reviewed the
language previously approved, and the Council subsequently
voted to deny reconsideration of the wording.
More recently, the Fourth District reversed an order granting summary judgment in favor
of a city which claimed that a special meeting cured an alleged Sunshine Law violation arising
from approval of a separation agreement for the departing city manager. e court observed
that the entire proceeding lasted less than 15 minutes and “no one mentioned the terms of
the agreement, nor did they discuss at length the reasons for the termination.” Transparency for
Florida, Inc. v. City of Port St. Lucie, 240 So. 3d 780, 786 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). According to
the court, “[t]he meeting may be more perfunctory . . . than the meeting in Zorc.” Id. And see
Linares v. District School Board of Pasco County, No. 17-00230 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 10,
2018), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(minutes of school board meeting did not go into enough depth to carry the school district’s
burden of proving a cure of an advisory committee’s violation of the Sunshine Law; the violation
can be remedied only when all matters previously considered by the advisory committee are
brought by independent action into the sunshine). Cf. AGO 12-31 (audit committee’s statutorily
prescribed function to create a request for proposals may not be delegated to a subordinate entity;
the committee may not, therefore, ratify a defective request for proposals which was created and
issued by the county’s nancial ocer contrary to the requirements of the law).
Similarly, a school board’s argument that it had cured Sunshine violations committed
by its textbook committees because it held two public board meetings on the textbook
recommendations, and also posted all the materials online, was rejected based on a nding that
the board had failed to hold “a full and open hearing” on the recommendations. Florida Citizens
Alliance, Inc. v. School Board of Collier County, 328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). e court
found it signicant that under a school board policy, the board could not choose a textbook
on its own by considering other alternatives from the textbooks previously considered by the
committee. Instead, if the board rejected a textbook, the matter would go back to the textbook
committee for a new review and recommendation.
Moreover, an appellate court warned that while subsequent public board meetings may
have “cured” a Sunshine Law violation, “if a pattern of Sunshine Law violations existed before this
violation, then perhaps we may have found that any subsequent school board actions were merely
‘perfunctory ratication[s] of secret actions and decisions.’” Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. Martin
County School Board, 125 So. 3d 184, 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). See Bert Fish Foundation v.
Southeast Volusia Hospital District, No. 2010-20801-CINS (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. February 24, 2011),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (series
of public meetings did not “cure” Sunshine Law violations that resulted from 21 closed door
meetings over 16 months; “[t]here was so much darkness for so long, that a giant infusion of
sunshine might have been too little or too late”).
7. Damages
e only remedies provided for in the Sunshine Law are a declaration of the wrongful
action as void and reasonable attorney fees. Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 988 So. 2d 47 (Fla.
4th DCA 2008), review denied, 6 So. 3d 51 (Fla. 2009) (equitable recovery of back pay not
authorized for employment termination conducted in violation of Sunshine Law).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
59
PART II
PUBLIC RECORDS
A. SCOPE OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
Florida’s Public Records Law, Ch. 119, F.S., provides a right of access to the records of the
state and local governments as well as to private entities acting on their behalf. In the absence of
a statutory exemption, this right of access applies to all materials made or received by an agency in
connection with the transaction of ocial business which are used to perpetuate, communicate
or formalize knowledge. Access to public records has been described as a “cornerstone of our
political culture.” In re Report & Recommendations of Judicial Mgmt. Council of Fla. on Privacy &
Elec. Access to Court Records, 832 So. 2d 712, 713 (Fla. 2002).
Section 119.011(2), F.S., denes “agency” to include:
any state, county, district, authority, or municipal ocer,
department, division, board, bureau, commission, or other separate
unit of government created or established by law including, for the
purposes of this chapter, the Commission on Ethics, the Public
Service Commission, and the Oce of Public Counsel, and any
other public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation,
or business entity acting on behalf of any public agency.
A right of access to records is also recognized in Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., which applies to
virtually all state and local governmental entities, including the legislative, executive and judicial
branches of government. e only exceptions are those established by law or by the Constitution.
Section 119.011(12), F.S., denes “public records” to include:
all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs,
lms, sound recordings, data processing software, or other
material, regardless of the physical form, characteristics, or means
of transmission, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance
or in connection with the transaction of ocial business by any
agency.
e Florida Supreme Court has interpreted this denition to encompass all materials
made or received by an agency in connection with ocial business which are used to perpetuate,
communicate or formalize knowledge. Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, Inc.,
379 So. 2d 633, 640 (Fla. 1980). All such materials, regardless of whether they are in nal form,
are open for public inspection unless the Legislature has exempted them from disclosure. Wait v.
Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979). Exemption summaries are found
in Appendix D.
e term “public record” is not limited to traditional written documents. As the statutory
denition states, “tapes, photographs, lms, sound recordings, data processing software, or
other material, regardless of the physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission” can all
constitute public records. And see National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18
So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (“public records law
is not limited to paper documents but applies, as well, to documents that exist only in digital
form”). Cf. Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir.
Ct. February 27, 1997), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (physical specimens relating to an autopsy are not public records because in
order to constitute a “public record” for purposes of Ch. 119, “the record itself must be susceptible
of some form of copying . . . .”).
60
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Clearly, as technology changes the means by which agencies communicate, manage, and
store information, public records will take on increasingly dierent forms. Yet, the comprehensive
scope of the term “public records” will continue to make the information open to public
inspection unless exempted by law.
Article I, s. 24, Fla. Const., establishes a constitutional right of access to any public record
made or received in connection with the ocial business of any public body, ocer, or employee
of the state, or persons acting on their behalf, except those records exempted pursuant to Art. I,
s. 24, Fla. Const., or specically made condential by the Constitution. See State ex rel. Clayton
v. Board of Regents, 635 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 1994) (“[O]ur Constitution requires that public ocials
must conduct public business in the open and that public records must be made available to all
members of the public.”); and Rhea v. District Board of Trustees of Santa Fe College, 109 So. 3d 851,
855 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“A citizen’s access to public records is a fundamental constitutional
right in Florida”). e complete text of Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., the Public Records and Meetings
Amendment, may be found in Appendix A.
B. WHAT ENTITIES ARE COVERED? APPLICATION OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT TO:
1. Advisory boards
e denition of “agency” for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S., is not limited to governmental
entities. A “public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or business entity acting
on behalf of any public agency” is also subject to the requirements of the Public Records Act. See
also Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const., providing that the constitutional right of access to public records
extends to “any public body, ocer, or employee of the state, or persons acting on their behalf . .
. .” (e.s.)
us, the Attorney General’s Oce has concluded that the records of an employee
advisory committee, established pursuant to special law to make recommendations to a public
hospital authority, are subject to Ch. 119, F.S., and Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const. AGO 96-32.
And see Inf. Op. to Nicoletti, November 18, 1987, stating that the Loxahatchee Council of
Governments, Inc., formed by eleven public agencies to study and make recommendations on
local governmental issues was an “agency” for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S.
2. Private organizations
A more complex question is presented when a private corporation or entity provides
services for, or receives funds from, a governmental body. e term “agency,” as used in the
Public Records Act, includes private entities “acting on behalf of any public agency.” Section
119.011(2), F.S. e Florida Supreme Court has stated that this broad denition of “agency”
ensures that a public agency cannot avoid disclosure by contractually delegating to a private
entity that which would otherwise be an agency responsibility. News and Sun-Sentinel Company
v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 1992). Cf. Booksmart
Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227, 229n.4 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1998) (private company operating state university bookstores is an “agency” as dened
in s. 119.011[2], F.S., “[n]otwithstanding the language in its contract with the universities that
purports to deny any agency relationship”); and Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire
Department, 352 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 358 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1978)
(private nonprot volunteer re department, which had been given stewardship over reghting,
which conducted its activities on county-owned property, and which was funded in part by
public money, was an “agency” for purposes of the Public Records Act, and its membership les,
minutes of its meetings and charitable activities were subject to disclosure).
While the mere act of contracting with, or receiving public funds from, a public agency is
not sucient to subject a private entity to Ch.119, F.S., the following discussion considers when
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
61
the statute has been held applicable to private entities.
a. Private entities created pursuant to law or by public agencies
e fact that a private entity is incorporated as a nonprot corporation is not dispositive as
to its status under the Public Records Act, but rather the issue is whether the entity is “acting on
behalf of” a public agency. e Attorney General’s Oce has issued numerous opinions advising
that if a private entity is created by law or by a public agency, it is subject to Ch. 119 disclosure
requirements. e following are some examples of such entities: Pace Property Finance Authority,
Inc., created as a Florida nonprot corporation by Santa Rosa County to provide assistance in
the funding and administration of certain governmental programs, AGO 94-34; South Florida
Fair and Palm Beach County Expositions, Inc., created pursuant to Ch. 616, F.S., AGO 95-17;
rural health networks established as nonprot legal entities to plan and deliver health care services
on a cooperative basis pursuant to s. 381.0406, F.S., Inf. Op. to Ellis, March 4, 1994. And see s.
20.41(8), F.S., providing that area agencies on aging, described as “nongovernmental, independent,
not-for-prot corporations” are “subject to [the Public Records Act], and, when considering any
contracts requiring the expenditure of funds, are subject to ss. 286.011-286.012, relating to public
meetings.”
b. Private entities contracting with public agencies or receiving public funds
ere is no single factor which is controlling on the question of when a private corporation,
not otherwise connected with government, becomes subject to the Public Records Act. However,
the courts have held that the mere act of contracting with a public agency is not dispositive. See,
e.g., News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., supra
(private corporation does not act “on behalf of” a public agency merely by entering into a contract
to provide architectural services to the agency); Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade
County, 429 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Staneld v. Salvation Army, 695 So. 2d 501, 503
(Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (contract with county to provide services does not in and of itself subject
the organization to Ch. 119 disclosure requirements). And see Weekly Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough
County Aviation Authority, 829 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (fact that private development is
located on land the developer leased from a governmental agency does not transform the leases
between the developer and other private entities into public records).
Similarly, the receipt of public funds, standing alone, is not dispositive of the organization’s
status for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S. See Sarasota Herald-Tribune Company v. Community Health
Corporation, Inc., 582 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (mere provision of public funds to the
private organization is not an important factor in this analysis, although the provision of a
substantial share of the capitalization of the organization is important); and Times Publishing
Company v. Acton, No. 99-8304 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. November 5, 1999), available online in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (attorneys retained by
individual commissioners in a criminal matter were not “acting on behalf of ” a public agency for
purposes of Ch. 119, F.S., even though county commission subsequently voted to pay the legal
expenses in accordance with a county policy providing for reimbursement of legal expenses to
ocers successfully defending charges led against them arising out of the performance of their
ocial duties). Cf. Inf. Op. to Cowin, November 14, 1997 (fact that nonprot medical center
is built on property owned by the city would not in and of itself be determinative of whether the
medical center’s meetings and records are subject to open government requirements).
e courts have relied on “two general sets of circumstances” in determining when a
private entity is “acting on behalf of” a public agency and must therefore produce its records
under Ch. 119, F.S. See Weekly Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, 829 So.
2d 970, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); B & S Utilities, Inc. v. Baskerville-Donovan, Inc., 988 So.
2d 17 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review denied, 4 So. 3d 1220 (Fla. 2009); and County of Volusia v.
Emergency Communications Network, Inc., 39 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). Each of these
circumstances or tests is discussed below.
62
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(1) “Totality of factors” test
Recognizing that “the statute provides no clear criteria for determining when a private
entity is ‘acting on behalf of’ a public agency,” the Supreme Court adopted a “totality of factors”
test to serve as a guide for evaluating whether a private entity is subject to Ch. 119, F.S. News
and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029,
1031 (Fla. 1992). See New York Times Company v. PHH Mental Health Services, Inc., 616 So. 2d
27 (Fla. 1993); Wells v. Aramark Food Service Corporation, 888 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
Accordingly, when a public agency contracts with a private entity to provide goods or
services to facilitate the agency’s performance of its duties, the courts have considered the “totality
of factors” in determining whether there is a signicant level of involvement by the public agency
so as to subject the private entity to Ch. 119, F.S. See Weekly Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough County
Aviation Authority, supra at 974.
e factors listed by the Supreme Court in Schwab include the following:
1) the level of public funding;
2) commingling of funds;
3) whether the activity was conducted on publicly owned property;
4) whether the contracted services are an integral part of the public agency’s chosen
decision-making process;
5) whether the private entity is performing a governmental function or a function which
the public agency otherwise would perform;
6) the extent of the public agency’s involvement with, regulation of, or control over the
private entity;
7) whether the private entity was created by the public agency;
8) whether the public agency has a substantial nancial interest in the private entity;
9) for whose benet the private entity is functioning.
us, the application of the totality of factors test will often require an analysis of the
statutes, ordinances or charter provisions which establish the function to be performed by the
private entity as well as the contract, lease or other document between the governmental entity
and the private organization.
For example, in AGO 92-37 the Attorney General’s Oce, following a review of the
Articles of Incorporation and other materials relating to the establishment and functions of the
Tampa Bay Performing Arts Center, Inc., concluded that the center was an “agency” subject to
the Public Records Act, noting that the center was governed by a board of trustees composed
of a number of city and county ocials or appointees of the mayor, utilized city property in
carrying out its goals to benet the public, and performed a governmental function. See also
AGOs 97-27 (documents created or received by the Florida International Museum after the date
of its purchase/lease/option agreement with city subject to disclosure under Ch. 119, F.S.), 92-53
(John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art Foundation, Inc., subject to Public Records Act), and
11-01. Cf. Inf. Op. to Goodman, September 26, 2016 (in the absence of a request from the chief
of the volunteer re department or additional information making the relationship between the
town and the re department clearer, the Attorney General’s Oce may not respond formally to
town attorney’s inquiry about the application of the Public Records Act to the town’s volunteer
re department).
By contrast, an architectural rm providing architectural services associated with
construction of school facilities was found to be outside the scope of the Public Records Act. See
News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., supra. See
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
63
also Sipkema v. Reedy Creek Improvement District, No. CI96 114 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. May 29, 1996),
per curiam armed, 697 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review dismissed, 699 So. 2d 1375 (Fla.
1997), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(private security force providing services on Walt Disney World property, including trac control
and accident reports is not subject to Ch. 119), Trepal v. State, 704 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1997)
(soft drink company cooperating with law enforcement in the testing of soda bottles during
an investigation of a poisoning death is outside the scope of the Public Records Act); and Inf.
Op. to Michelson, January 27, 1992 (telephone company supplying cellular phone services to
city ocials for city business is not an “agency” since the company was not created by the city,
did not perform a city function, and did not receive city funding except in payment for services
rendered). Cf. National Council on Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 182 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2017) (trial court conclusion that insurance rating organization violated Public Records
Act was erroneous because the court “expressly declined to apply the Schwab factors” prior to
making this determination).
Stated another way, “[a] private entity does not act on behalf of a public agency merely by
entering a contract to provide professional services to the agency.” Holield v. Big Bend Cares,
Inc., 326 So. 3d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) [Emphasis supplied by the court]. us, the Public
Records Act did not apply to a private corporation providing health care services pursuant
to a contract with a state agency because the private corporation was not created pursuant
to any governmental action, the amounts paid were all paid in consideration for professional
services already rendered, and the agency did not delegate any decision-making authority to the
corporation, nor did it control or regulate the corporation’s professional activity or judgment. Id.
And see National Council on Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172, 182 (Fla. 1st DCA
2017) (trial court conclusion that insurance rating organization violated Public Records Act was
erroneous because the court “expressly declined to apply the Schwab factors” prior to making this
determination).
(2) Delegation of function test
While the mere act of contracting with a public agency is not sucient to bring a private
entity within the scope of the Public Records Act, there is a dierence between a party contracting
with a public agency to provide services to the agency and a contracting party which provides
services in place of the public body. News-Journal Corporation v. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia,
Inc., 695 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), approved, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999). And see Weekly
Planet, Inc. v. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, 829 So. 2d 970, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).
For example, if a private entity contracts to relieve the public body from the operation of a
public obligation such as operating a jail or providing re protection, the open government laws
apply. News-Journal Corporation v. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc., 695 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1997), approved, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999). And see Dade Aviation Consultants v. Knight
Ridder, Inc., 800 So. 2d 302, 307 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (consortium of private businesses created to
manage a massive renovation of an airport was an “agency” for purposes of the Public Records Act
because it was created for and had no purpose other than to work on the airport contract; “when
a private entity undertakes to provide a service otherwise provided by the government, the entity
is bound by the Act, as the government would be”); and Fox v. News-Press Publishing Company,
545 So. 2d 941, 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (upholding a trial court decision nding that business
records maintained by a towing company in connection with its contract with a city were public
records, as the company “was clearly performing what is essentially a governmental function, i.e.,
the removal of wrecked and abandoned automobiles from public streets and property”). See also
AGOs 08-66 (Public Records Act applies to not-for-prot corporation contracting with city to
carry out aordable housing responsibilities and screening applicant les for such housing); 99-53
(while not generally applicable to homeowners associations, Ch. 119 applies to an architectural
review committee of a homeowners association which is required by county ordinance to review
and approve applications for county building permits as a prerequisite to consideration by the
county building department); and 07-44 (property owners association, delegated performance
64
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
of services otherwise performed by municipal services taxing unit, subject to Public Records Act
when acting on behalf of the taxing unit). Compare AGO 87-44 (records of a private nonprot
corporation pertaining to a fund established for improvements to city parks were not public
records since the corporation raised and disbursed only private funds and had not been delegated
any governmental responsibilities or functions).
us, in Staneld v. Salvation Army, 695 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), the Fifth District
recognized that the delegation of function test was the appropriate standard to use to determine
that records generated by the Salvation Army in performing a contract to provide misdemeanor
services for a county were subject to Ch. 119, F.S. As stated by the court: “Because we nd the
statutory and contractual delegation of governmental responsibility so compelling in this case,
it is unnecessary to engage in the factor-by-factor analysis outlined in Schwab.” Staneld, 695
So. 2d at 503. B & S Utilities v. Baskerville-Donovan Inc., 988 So. 2d. 17, 21 (Fla. 1st DCA
2008), citing to Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corp., 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla.
1999). In Baskerville, the court recognized that while the “totality of factors” test favored a private
engineering rm’s position that it was not an agency, “the fact that the City delegated its municipal
engineering functions” to [the rm] “is dispositive.” Baskerville, 988 So. 2d at 22. (e.s.)
e following are other examples of private businesses and nonprot entities which were
delegated a governmental function and thus determined to be subject to the Public Records Act
in carrying out that function:
Corrections company operating county jail: Times Publishing
Company v. Corrections Corporation of America, No. 91-429 CA
01 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct. December 4, 1991), armed per curiam, 611
So. 2d 532 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), available online in the Cases
database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com.
And see Prison Health Services, Inc. v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing
Company, 718 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), review denied, 727
So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) (medical services).
Employment search rm: Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid
and Associates, Inc. 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980). Accord AGO 92-
80 (materials made or received by recruitment company in the
course of its contract with a public agency to seek applicants and
make recommendations to the board regarding the selection of an
executive director, subject to Ch. 119).
Humane society investigating animal abuse for county: Putnam
County Humane Society, Inc. v. Woodward, 740 So. 2d 1238 (Fla.
5th DCA 1999).
However, the “delegation of function” test should not be used unless there is a “clear,
compelling, complete delegation of a governmental function” to the private entity. Economic
Development Commission v. Ellis, 178 So. 3d 118, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). In Ellis, the Fifth
District found that the trial judge should not have used the delegation test to determine whether a
private economic development entity (EDC) under contract with the county to provide services
was an “agency.” e appellate court explained that the EDC was the county’s “primary” but
not its “sole” agency for economic development activity. Id. e county “continued to carry out
economic development activities itself through its own paid county employees and in conjunction
with other entities to the exclusion of EDC.” Id. In other words, “EDC did not take over the
county’s role or completely assume the county’s provision of economic development services.”
Id. Because “EDC provided services to, not in place of, the county,” the trial judge should have
applied the “totality of factors” test instead of the “delegation of function” test. Id.
c. Private company delegated authority to keep certain records
If a public agency has delegated its responsibility to maintain records necessary to perform
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
65
its functions, such records have been deemed to be accessible to the public. See, e.g., Harold v.
Orange County, 668 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (where county hired a private company to
be the construction manager on a county project and delegated to the company the responsibility
of maintaining records necessary to show compliance with a “fairness in procurement ordinance,”
the company’s records for this purpose were public records). See also Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v.
Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), review denied, 729 So.
2d 389 (Fla. 1999) (private company operating a campus bookstore pursuant to a contract with a
state university is the custodian of public records made or received by the store in connection with
university business).
d. Subcontractors
A circuit court has addressed whether a subcontractor may be subject to the Public Records
Act if both the subcontractor and contractor have been delegated a public function. In Multimedia
Holdings Corporation v. CRSPE, Inc., No 03-3474-G (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. December 3, 2003),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, the
court required a consulting rm to disclose its timesheets and internal billing records generated
pursuant to a subcontract with another rm (CRSPE) which had entered into a contract with
a town to prepare a trac study required by the Department of Transportation. Rejecting the
subcontractor’s argument that Ch. 119, F.S., did not apply to it because it was a subcontractor,
not the contractor, the court found that the study was prepared and submitted jointly by both
consultants; both rms had acted in place of the town in performing the tasks required by the
department: “[T]he Public Records Act cannot be so easily circumvented simply by CRSPE
delegating its responsibilities to yet another private entity.”
e. Other statutory provisions governing records of private entities
(1) Contract requirements
Section 119.0701, F.S., mandates that all agency contracts for services must contain specic
provisions requiring the contractor to comply with public records laws, including retention
and public access requirements. e term “contractor” is dened to mean “an individual,
partnership, corporation or business entity that enters into a contract for services with a public
agency and is acting on behalf of the public agency as provided under s. 119.011(2), [F.S.].”
Section 119.0701(1)(a), F.S. (e.s.). “us, based on the terms of section 119.0701(1)(a), Florida
Statutes, the nature and scope of the services provided by a private contractor determine whether
he or she is ‘acting on behalf of’ an agency and thus, would be subject to the requirements of the
statute.” AGO 14-06. For more information on when a private entity is determined to be “acting
on behalf of” a public agency for purposes of s. 119.011(2), F.S., please refer to the preceding
discussion on pages 61-65.
In addition, contracts entered into or amended after July 1, 2016, must contain a
statement, in the form prescribed by the statute, providing the contact information for the public
agency’s custodian of public records in the event that the contractor has questions about its
duty to provide public records relating to the contract. Section 119.0701(2)(a), F.S. A request
for records for records relating to the contract must be made directly to the public agency.
Section 119.0701(3)(a), F.S. If the public agency does not possess the requested records, the
public agency shall immediately notify the contractor of the request, and the contractor must
provide the records to the public agency or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a
reasonable time. Id. Sections 119.0701(3) and (4), F.S., establish consequences in the event of a
contractor’s noncompliance.
Section 287.058(1)(c), F.S., provides, with limited exceptions, that every procurement for
contracted services by a state agency be evidenced by a written agreement containing a provision
allowing unilateral cancellation by the agency for the contractor’s refusal to allow public access
to “all documents, papers, letters, or other material made or received by the contractor in
conjunction with the contract, unless the records are exempt” from disclosure.
66
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(2) Legislative appropriation
Section 11.45(3)(e), F.S., states that all records of a nongovernmental agency, corporation,
or person with respect to the receipt and expenditure of an appropriation made by the Legislature
to that entity “shall be public records and shall be treated in the same manner as other public
records are under general law.” Cf. AGO 96-43 (Astronauts Memorial Foundation, a nonprot
corporation, is subject to the Sunshine Law when performing those duties funded under the
General Appropriations Act).
(3) Public funds used for dues
Section 119.01(3), F.S., provides that if an agency spends public funds in payment of
dues or membership contributions to a private entity, then the private entity’s nancial, business
and membership records pertaining to the public agency are public records and subject to the
provisions of s. 119.07, F.S.
3. Judiciary
a. Public Records Act inapplicable to judicial records
Relying on separation of powers principles, the courts have consistently held that the
judiciary is not an “agency” for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S. See, e.g., Times Publishing Company
v. Ake, 660 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1995) (the judiciary, as a coequal branch of government, is not
an “agency” subject to supervision or control by another coequal branch of government); State
v. Wooten, 260 So. 3d 1060, 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (“Access to judicial branch records is
governed by the rules and decisions of the Florida Supreme Court, not Chapter 119, Florida
Statutes.”); and Locke v. Hawkes, 595 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1992). Cf. s. 119.0714(1), F.S., stating that
“[n]othing in this chapter shall be construed to exempt from [s. 119.07(1), F.S.] a public record
that was made a part of a court le and that is not specically closed by order of court . . . .” (e.s.)
And see Tampa Television, Inc. v. Dugger, 559 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (Legislature has
recognized the distinction between documents sealed under court order and those not so sealed,
and has provided for disclosure of the latter only).
However, the Florida Supreme Court has expressly recognized that “both civil and criminal
proceedings in Florida are public events” and that it will “adhere to the well established common
law right of access to court proceedings and records.” Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, 531
So. 2d 113, 116 (Fla. 1988). See also Russell v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 570 So. 2d 979,
982 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), in which the court stated: “[W]e recognize that the press has a general
right to access of judicial records.” And see C.H.-C v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 262 So. 3d
226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (trial court did not abuse its discretion in nding that newspaper had
proper interest in access to redacted transcript of judicial review dependency hearing involving
minor children).
b. Public access to and protection of judicial branch records, Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud.
Admin. 2.420
(1) Scope of the rule
Although the judiciary is not an “agency” for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S., there is a constitutional
right of access to judicial records established by Art. I, s. 24, of the Florida Constitution. In
accordance with this directive, access to records of the judicial branch is governed by Florida Rule
of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.420, entitled “Public Access to and Protection
of Judicial Branch Records.” See 2.420(a), Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin., providing that
“[t]he public shall have access to all records of the judicial branch of government except as provided
[in the rule].” Cf. Morency v. State, 223 So. 3d 439 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017), noting that “electronic
records, videotapes, or stenographic tapes of depositions or other proceedings led with the clerk,
and electronic records, videotapes or stenographic tapes of court proceedings” are included within
the scope of the rule; and Wright v. State, 324 So. 3d 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (defendant
entitled to obtain electronic records of plea hearing to the extent that such records exist).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
67
According to the Florida Supreme Court, rule 2.420 is “intended to reect the judiciary’s
responsibility to perform both an administrative function and an adjudicatory function.” In
re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration--Public Access to Judicial Records,
608 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 1992). In its administrative role, the judiciary is a governmental entity
expending public funds and employing government personnel. us, “records generated while
courts are acting in an administrative capacity should be subject to the same standards that
govern similar records of other branches of government.” Id. at 472-473. See also Media General
Convergence, Inc. v. Chief Judge of the irteenth Judicial Circuit, 840 So. 2d 1008, 1016 (Fla.
2003) (when an individual complains to a chief circuit judge about judicial misconduct involving
sexual harassment or sexually inappropriate behavior by a judge, the records made or received
by the chief judge “constitute ‘judicial records’ subject to public disclosure absent an applicable
exemption”).
An online version of Fla. R. Gen. Prac & Jud. Admin. 2.420 is also available at:
www.oridabar.org.
(2) Condential judicial records
Rule 2.420(c)(1) through (6) lists condential judicial branch records. Examples include
trial and appellate court memoranda, complaints alleging misconduct against judges and other
court personnel until probable cause is established, periodic evaluations implemented solely to
assist judges in improving their performance, information (other than names and qualications)
about persons seeking to serve as unpaid volunteers unless made public by the court based upon
a showing of materiality or good cause, and copies of arrest and search warrants until executed or
until law enforcement determines that execution cannot be made.
Rule 2.420(d)(1) states that except as provided in subdivision(d)(1)(C), the clerk of
court shall designate and maintain the condentiality of any information contained within a
court record that is described in subdivision (d)(1)(A) or (d)(1)(B) of the rule. Subdivision (A)
references “information described by any of the subdivisions (c)(1) through (c)(6).” Subdivision
(B) contains a list of specic statutory exemptions. Subdivision (d)(1)(C) states that in “civil
cases” as that term is dened in the rule, the clerk shall not be required to designate and maintain
information as condential unless the ler follows the notice procedures set forth in subdivision
(d)(2), the ler les a Motion to Determine Condentiality of Court Records as set forth in
subdivision (d)(3), the ling is deemed condential by court order, or the case itself is condential
by law. Cf. s. 119.0714(2)(g), F.S., providing that the clerk of court is not liable for the release
of information that is required by the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration to be identied
by the ler as condential if the ler fails to make the required identication of the condential
information to the clerk.
Although rule 2.420(c)(1)-(6) lists specic condential records, subdivision (c)(8) of the
rule provides a general exemption from disclosure for records presently deemed to be condential
by court rule, Florida Statutes, prior Florida case law, and by rules of the Judicial Qualications
Commission. See State v. Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714, 718 (Fla. 1998). In addition, Fla. R. Gen.
Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420(c)(7) provides an exemption for “all records made condential under
the Florida and United States Constitutions and Florida and federal law.”
Subdivision (c)(9)(A) of rule 2.420 establishes the grounds for determining condentiality
of a court record. e degree, duration, and manner of condentiality ordered by the court shall
be no broader than necessary to protect the interests set forth in subdivision (c)(9)(A). Fla. R.
Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420(c)(9)(B). Cf. Bareld v. Doe, 47 F.L.W. D1924 (Fla. 4th DCA
September 21, 2022) (while 2.420(c)(9)(A)(vi) allows a court to shield a record from public
view when condentiality is required to “avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of
matters protected by a common law or privacy right not generally inherent in the specic type
of proceeding sought to be closed,” litigants cannot have a reasonable expectation of privacy
concerning matters that are inherent to their civil proceeding).
68
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Procedures for judicial determinations of requests for condentiality of court records and
for obtaining access to condential court records are referenced in rule 2.420(e)-(j). For example,
rule 2.420(f)(3) states that “any motion to determine whether a court record that pertains to a
plea agreement, substantial assistance agreement, or other court record that reveals the identity
of a condential informant or active criminal investigative information is condential under
subdivision (c)(9)(A)(i), (c)(9)(A)(iii), (c)(9)(A)(v), or (c)(9)(A)(vii) of this rule may be made
in the form of a written motion captioned ‘Motion to Determine Condentiality of Court
Records.’”
(3) Procedures for accessing judicial branch records under rule 2.420
“Requests and responses to requests for access to records under this rule shall be made in a
reasonable manner.” Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420(m). Requests must be in writing
and directed to the custodian. Id. See Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 13 So. 3d 120 (Fla.
1st DCA 2009), in which the court denied a Florida newspaper’s records request for an audio
tape related to a shooting since the request was made orally instead of in writing as required by
the rule. In a commentary to the decision incorporating the written request provision, the Court
cautioned that the “writing requirement is not intended to disadvantage any person who may
have diculty writing a request; if any diculty exists, the custodian should aid the requestor in
reducing the request to writing.” Commentary, In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on
Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla. 2002).
A public records request “shall provide sucient specicity to enable the custodian to
identify the requested records. e reason for the request is not required to be disclosed.” Fla. R.
Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420(m)(1).
e custodian “is required to provide access to or copies of records but is not required
either to provide information from records or to create new records in response to a request.”
Commentary, In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889, 898
(Fla. 2002).
e custodian shall determine whether the requested records are subject to the rule,
whether there are any exemptions, and the form in which the record is provided. Fla. R. Gen.
Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420(m)(2). If the request is denied, the custodian shall state in writing
the basis for the denial. Id.
Expedited review of denials of access to administrative records of the judicial branch shall
be provided through an action for mandamus, or other appropriate relief. Fla. R. Gen. Prac. &
Jud. Admin. 2.420(l). See Jacobs Keeley, PLLC v. Chief Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,
169 So. 3d 192 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). And see C.H.-C v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 262 So. 3d
226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (trial court did not abuse its discretion in nding that newspaper had
proper interest in access to redacted transcript of judicial review dependency hearing involving
minor children).
c. Discovery material
e Florida Supreme Court has ruled that there is no First Amendment right of access
to unled discovery materials. Palm Beach Newspapers v. Burk, 504 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 1987)
(discovery in criminal proceedings); and Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Gridley, 510 So. 2d
884 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S.Ct. 1224 (1988) (civil discovery). Cf. Lewis v. State, 958 So.
2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (Burk applies to a request for unled depositions made during an
ongoing, active criminal prosecution but does not extend to a defendant’s request for deposition
transcripts after the conviction becomes nal; such transcripts must be produced in accordance
with Ch. 119, F.S.). And see SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796, 798
(Fla. 4th DCA 2002), noting that even though there is no constitutional right of access to preled
discovery materials, “it does not necessarily follow that there is a constitutional right to prevent
access to discovery.” (emphasis supplied by the court).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
69
Even though unled discovery material is not accessible under the First Amendment, it
may be open to inspection under Ch. 119, F.S., if the document is a public record which is
otherwise subject to disclosure under that law. See, e.g., Tribune Company v. Public Records, 493
So. 2d 480, 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503
So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987), in which the court reversed a trial judge’s ruling limiting inspection
of police records produced in discovery to those materials which were made part of an open
court le because “this conicts with the express provisions of the Public Records Act.” And see
Smithwick v. Television 12 of Jacksonville, Inc., 730 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (trial court
properly required defense counsel to return discovery documents once it realized that its initial
order permitting removal of the documents from the court le had been entered in error because
the requirements of rule 2.420 had not been met).
us, in Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, 520 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1988), the Court
noted that where pretrial discovery material developed for the prosecution of a criminal case
had reached the status of a public record under Ch. 119, F.S., the material was subject to public
inspection as required by that statute in the absence of a court order nding that release of the
material would jeopardize the defendant’s right to a fair trial. See also Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29
So. 3d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (government not precluded from asserting applicable statutory
exemptions to public records that have been disclosed during discovery to a criminal defendant).
And see Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida, Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992) (public’s statutory
right of access to pretrial discovery information in a criminal case must be balanced against a
nonparty’s constitutional right to privacy).
d. Florida Bar
“Given that e Florida Bar is ‘an ocial arm of the court,’ see R. Regulating Fla. Bar,
Introduction, [the Florida Supreme] Court has previously rejected the Legislature’s power to
regulate which Florida Bar les were subject to public records law . . . .” e Florida Bar v.
Committee, 916 So. 2d 741, 745 (Fla. 2005). See also e Florida Bar, In re Advisory Opinion
Concerning the Applicability of Ch. 119, Florida Statutes, 398 So. 2d 446, 448 (Fla. 1981) (Ch.
119, F.S., does not apply to unauthorized practice of law investigative les maintained by the
Bar). Cf. Florida Board of Bar Examiners Re: Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court of
Florida Relating to Admissions to the Bar, 676 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1996) (no merit to argument that
under Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., all records in possession of Board of Bar Examiners should be
open for inspection by applicant and the public).
e. Judicial Qualications Commission and judicial nominating commissions
Proceedings by or before the Judicial Qualications Commission are condential until
formal charges against a justice or judge are led by the Commission with the clerk of the Florida
Supreme Court; upon a nding of probable cause and the ling of formal charges with the clerk,
the charges and all further proceedings before the Commission are public. See Art. V, s. 12(a)(4),
Fla. Const; Media General Convergence, Inc. v. Chief Judge of the irteenth Judicial Circuit, 840
So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 2003).
With regard to judicial nominating commissions, Art. V, s. 11(d), Fla. Const., provides
that “[e]xcept for deliberations of the . . . commissions, the proceedings of the commissions and
their records shall be open to the public.” See Inf. Op. to Frost, November 4, 1987, concluding
that correspondence between a member of a judicial nominating commission and persons
wishing to obtain an application for a vacant seat on a District Court of Appeal is a public record
subject to disclosure.
However, records pertaining to voting, including vote sheets, ballots, and ballot tally sheets
“are clearly part of the deliberation process” and, therefore, are not subject to public disclosure.
Justice Coalition v. e First District Court of Appeal Judicial Nominating Commission, 823 So.
2d 185, 192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). In addition, personal notes of individual commission
70
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
members made during the deliberation process are not subject to disclosure because they are
mere “precursors” of governmental records, and thus fall outside the denition of “public record.”
Id., citing Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980).
f. Jury records
(1) Grand jury
Proceedings before a grand jury are secret; therefore, records prepared for use of the
grand jury during the regular performance of its duties are not subject to s. 119.07(1), F.S.
See Buchanan v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 206 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968),
modied, 230 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1969) (grand jury proceedings are “absolutely privileged”); and
In re Grand Jury, Fall Term 1986, 528 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), arming a trial court
order barring public disclosure of motions led in accordance with s. 905.28, F.S., to repress
or expunge stemming from a grand jury presentment not accompanied by a true bill or
indictment. See also AGO 90-48 (as an integral part of the grand jury proceeding to secure
witnesses, grand jury subpoenas would fall under the “absolute privilege” of the grand jury
and not be subject to disclosure under Ch. 119, F.S.).
us, a letter written by a city ocial to the grand jury is not subject to public
inspection. AGO 73-177. Similarly, a circuit court held that the list of grand jurors is
condential. Wood v. Childers, No. 13-CA-000877 (Fla. 1st Cir. Ct. April 16, 2013), per
curiam armed, 130 So. 3d 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) available online in the case database
at myoridalegal.com. Accord Inf. Op. to Alexander, September 8, 1995. However, the
clerk of court is not authorized to redact the name of a grand jury foreperson or the acting
foreperson from an indictment after it has been made public. AGO 99-09.
It is important to emphasize, however, that the exemption from disclosure for grand
jury records does not apply to those records which were prepared by a public agency
independent of a grand jury investigation. us, public records which are made or received
by an agency in the performance of its ocial duties do not become condential simply
because they are subsequently viewed by the grand jury as part of its investigation. As the
court stated in In re Grand Jury Investigation, Spring Term 1988, 543 So. 2d 757, 759 (Fla.
2d DCA 1989):
Nor can we allow the grand jury to become a sanctuary for
records which are otherwise accessible to the public. e mere
fact that documents have been presented to a grand jury does
not, in and of itself, cloak them in a permanent state of secrecy.
Accordingly, a state attorney and sheri must provide public access to investigative
records regarding a judge that were compiled independently of and prior to a grand jury’s
investigation of the judge. In re Grand Jury Investigation, Spring Term 1988, supra. See also
In re Subpoena To Testify Before Grand Jury, 864 F.2d 1559 (11th Cir. 1989) (trial court’s
authority to protect grand jury process enabled court to prevent disclosure of materials
prepared for grand jury proceedings; however, court not empowered to prohibit disclosure
of documents assembled independent of grand jury proceedings).
ere are a number of statutes which relate to secrecy of grand jury proceedings. See
ss. 905.24-905.28, F.S., and s. 905.395, F.S. (statewide grand jury). But see Butterworth v.
Smith, 110 S.Ct. 1376 (1990) (provisions of s. 905.27, F.S., which prohibit “a grand juror
. . . reporter . . . or any other person” appearing before a grand jury from ever disclosing
testimony before the grand jury except pursuant to a court order were unconstitutional
insofar as they prohibit a grand jury witness from disclosing his own testimony after the term
of the grand jury has ended). Cf. In re: Final Report of the 20th Statewide Grand Jury, 343 So.
3d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (s. 905.395 F.S., does not prohibit statewide grand jury from
including witness testimony in the report it intends to release).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
71
(2) Trial jury
In Kever v. Gilliam, 886 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), the appellate court ruled that
the clerk of court was required to comply with appellant’s public records request for names and
addresses of trial court jurors empanelled in his trial. Accord AGO 05-61 (statute requiring
Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to provide driver license information to
courts for purposes of establishing jury selection lists does not operate to exempt from public
disclosure jurors’ names and addresses appearing on a jury list compiled by the clerk of court).
Cf. Sarasota Herald-Tribune v. State, 916 So. 2d 904, 909 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (while “[t]here are
unquestionably times when it might be necessary for a trial judge to impose media restrictions
on the publication of juror information, . . .” trial court order prohibiting news media from
publishing names and addresses of prospective or seated jurors in the high prole murder trial
constituted a prior restraint on speech); and WPTV-TV v. State, 61 So. 3d 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA
2011) (given exceptional media coverage and public interest in upcoming criminal trial, trial
court’s decision to withhold location of jury selection until a time proximate to the start of the
trial was not a material departure from essential requirements of law).
g. Sunshine in Litigation Act
e Sunshine in Litigation Act, s. 69.081, F.S., provides, with limited exceptions, that
no court shall enter an order or judgment which has the purpose or eect of concealing a
public hazard or which has the purpose or eect of concealing any information which may be
useful to members of the public in protecting themselves from injury which may result from
a public hazard. See State v. American Tobacco Company, No. CL 95-1466-AH (Fla. 15th
Cir. Ct. July 28, 1997), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (upholding constitutionality of Sunshine in Litigation Act).
Additionally, s. 69.081(8), F.S., provides, subject to certain exceptions, that any portion of
an agreement which has the purpose or eect of concealing information relating to the settlement
or resolution of any claim or action against an agency is void, contrary to public policy, and may
not be enforced. Settlement records must be maintained in compliance with Ch. 119, F.S. See
Inf. Op. to Barry, June 24, 1998 (agency not authorized to enter into a settlement agreement
authorizing the concealment of information relating to an adverse personnel decision from the
remainder of a personnel le.
A governmental entity, except a municipality or county, settling a claim in tort which
requires the expenditure of more than $5,000 in public funds, is required to provide notice
pursuant to Ch. 50, F.S., of the settlement in the county in which the claim arose within 60 days
of entering into the settlement. No notice is required if the settlement has been approved by a
court of competent jurisdiction. Section 69.081(9), F.S.
4. Legislature
e Public Records Act does not apply to the legislative branch. Locke v. Hawkes, 595
So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1992) (denition of “agency” in the Public Records Act does not include the
Legislature or its members). ere is, however, a constitutional right of access to legislative
records provided in Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., which provides that “[e]very person has the right
to inspect or copy any public record made or received in connection with the ocial business
of any public body . . . .” is right of access specically includes the legislative branch. Article
I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const. e Legislature, however, may provide by general law for the exemption
of records provided that such law must state with specicity the public necessity justifying the
exemption and be no broader than necessary to accomplish the stated purpose of the law. Article
I, s. 24(c), Fla. Const. Each house of the Legislature is authorized to adopt rules governing the
enforcement of this section for records of the legislative branch. Id. Any statutes providing
limitations on access which were in eect on July 1, 1993, continue in force and apply to records
of the legislative branch until repealed. Article I, s. 24(d), Fla. Const.
72
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
In accordance with Art. I, s. 24(c), Fla. Const., the Senate and House of Representatives
have adopted rules relating to records of the legislative branch. ese rules may be accessed
online at www.senate.gov (Florida Senate) and www.myoridahouse.gov (Florida House of
Representatives).
In addition, s. 11.0431(2), F.S., lists legislative records which are exempt from inspection
and copying. e text of s. 11.0431, F.S., is set forth in Appendix E. See League of Women Voters v.
Florida House of Representatives, 132 So. 3d 135, 153 (Fla. 2013) (“We agree that the rst issue to
be decided is whether the draft [apportionment] plans fall within the scope of the public records
exemption in section 11.0431[2][e], Florida Statutes [2012], and that this exemption should
be strictly construed in favor of disclosure”). And see s. 11.26(1), F.S. (legislative employees are
forbidden from revealing to anyone outside the area of their direct responsibility the contents or
nature of any request for services made by any member of the Legislature except with the consent
of the legislator making the request); and s. 15.07, F.S. (the journal of the executive session of the
Senate shall be kept free from inspection or disclosure except upon order of the Senate itself or
some court of competent jurisdiction).
5. Governor and Cabinet
e Governor and Cabinet have duties which derive from both the Constitution and the
Legislature. Because of separation of powers principles, the legislatively created Public Records
Act does not apply to records gathered in the course of carrying out a specic duty or function
which has been assigned to the Governor and Cabinet by the Constitution rather than by statute.
See AGO 86-50, stating that materials collected by the former Parole and Probation Commission
[now known as the Florida Commission on Oender Review] pursuant to direction of the
Governor and Cabinet for pardons or other forms of clemency authorized by Art. IV, s. 8(a), Fla.
Const., are not subject to Ch. 119, F.S.
e Public Records Act, however, does apply to the Governor and Cabinet when sitting
in their capacity as a board created by the Legislature or whose powers are prescribed by the
Legislature, such as the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. In such
cases, the Governor and Cabinet are not exercising powers derived from the Constitution but are
subject to the “dominion and control” of the Legislature.
In addition, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., establishes a constitutional right of access by
providing that “every person” shall have a right of access to public records of the executive branch
and of “each constitutional ocer, board, and commission, or entity created pursuant to law or
this Constitution” except as otherwise provided in this section or specically made condential
in the Constitution.
6. Commissions created by the Constitution
A board or commission created by the Constitution is not subject to Ch. 119, F.S.,
inspection requirements when such board or commission is carrying out its constitutionally
prescribed duties. Cf. Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (judicial
nominating commissions are not subject to s. 286.011, F.S.); and AGO 77-65 (Ch. 120, F.S.,
is inapplicable to Constitution Revision Commission established by Art. XI, s. 2, Fla. Const.,
because the commission is authorized in that section to adopt its own rules of procedure).
Accordingly, the Public Records Act does not apply to the clemency investigative les
and reports produced by the Florida Commission on Oender Review [formerly the Parole
Commission] on behalf of the Governor and Cabinet relating to the granting of clemency; release
of such materials is governed by the Rules of Executive Clemency adopted by the Governor and
Cabinet, sitting as the clemency board. Parole Commission v. Lockett, 620 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1993).
Accord Jennings v. State, 626 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1993). And see AGO 86-50.
ere is, however, a dierence between the status of a commission created by the
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
73
Constitution which exercises constitutional duties and a commission whose creation is merely
authorized by the Constitution and whose duties are established by law. While the former is
not subject to the Public Records Act, it has been held that a commission performing duties
assigned to it by the Legislature must comply with the open government laws. See Turner v.
Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), armed and remanded, 389 So. 2d 1181 (Fla.
1980), holding that the Parole Commission [now known as the Florida Commission on Oender
Review] which Art. IV, s. 8(c), Fla. Const., recognizes may be created by law, is subject to s.
286.011, F.S., in carrying out its statutory duties and responsibilities relating to parole.
Moreover, Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., provides a constitutional right of access for public
records of each branch of government, and “each constitutional ocer, board, and commission,
or entity created pursuant to law or this Constitution.” e only exceptions to the right of
access are those records exempted pursuant to s. 24 or specically made condential by the
Constitution. Article I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const. See King v. State, 840 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 2003)
(clemency records exempt pursuant to s. 14.28, F.S., providing that records made or received
by any state entity pursuant to a Board of Executive Clemency investigation are not subject to
public disclosure).
C. WHAT RECORDS ARE COVERED? APPLICATION OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT TO:
is section discusses the application of the Public Records Act to various records made
or received by agencies in the course of ocial business. Many, but not all of the statutory
exemptions to disclosure for particular records or information are also referenced. For a more
complete listing of statutory exemptions, please refer to Appendices C and D and the Index.
1. Adoption and birth records
Except for birth records over 100 years old which are not under seal pursuant to court order,
all birth records are considered to be condential documents and exempt from public inspection;
such records may be disclosed only as provided by law. Section 382.025(1), F.S.; AGO 74-70.
Cf. s. 383.51, F.S. (the identity of a parent who leaves a newborn infant at a hospital, emergency
medical services station, or re station in accordance with s. 383.50, F.S., is condential).
Adoption records are also condential and may not be disclosed except as provided in s.
63.162, F.S. And see s. 63.165(1), F.S. (state adoption registry); and s. 63.0541, F.S. (putative
father registry).
An unadopted individual, however, has the right to obtain his or her birth records which
include the names of the individual’s parents from the hospital in which he or she was born.
Atwell v. Sacred Heart Hospital of Pensacola, 520 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 1988).
2. Autopsy and death records
a. Autopsy reports
Autopsy reports made by a district medical examiner pursuant to Ch. 406, F.S., are public
records and are open to the public for inspection in the absence of an exemption. AGO 78-23.
And see Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775, 777 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985),
review denied, 488 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1986), noting that a former statutory exemption precluding
release of autopsy reports had been repealed. Cf. Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v.
Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27, 1997), available online in the Cases
database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (physical specimens relating to an
autopsy are not public records).
Although autopsy reports are subject to Ch. 119, F.S., “[d]ocuments or records made
condential by statute do not lose such status upon receipt by the medical examiner.” AGO 78-
74
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
23. See Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, supra (predeath medical records in
the possession of the medical examiner are not subject to public inspection).
In addition, statutory exemptions from disclosure, such as the exemption for active
criminal investigative information, may apply to an autopsy report. AGO 78-23. See Williams
v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991),
noting the application of the active criminal investigative information exemption to information
contained in autopsy records.
b. Autopsy photographs and recordings
Section 406.135(2), F.S., provides that a photograph or video or audio recording of an
autopsy held by a medical examiner is condential and may not be released except as provided by
court order or as otherwise authorized in the exemption. See AGOs 03-25 and 01-47, discussing
the circumstances under which autopsy photographs and recordings may be viewed or copied.
And see Inf. Op. to Lynn, July 25, 2007 (exemption applies to photographs and recordings taken
or made by the medical examiner as a part of the autopsy process, including those taken before,
during, and after the medical examiner performs the actual autopsy procedure). Cf. Campus
Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), review denied, 848 So.
2d 1153 (Fla. 2003) (upholding trial court nding that newspaper failed to establish good cause
for release of autopsy photographs of race car driver). Compare Sarasota Herald-Tribune v. State,
924 So. 2d 8, 14 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), review denied, 918 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 2005), cert. dismissed,
126 S. Ct. 1139 (2006), in which the district court reversed a trial court order that had barred
the media from viewing autopsy photographs that were admitted into evidence in open court
during a murder trial; according to the appellate court, s. 406.135, F.S., “does not render these
court exhibits condential.” (e.s.)
c. Photographs, video and audio recordings that depict or record the killing of a law
enforcement ocer or the killing of a victim of mass violence
A photograph or video or audio recording that depicts or records the killing of a law
enforcement ocer acting in accordance with his or her ocial duties or the killing of a victim of
mass violence is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., and may not be disclosed except
as authorized in the exemption. Section 119.071(2)(p), F.S. For more information please refer
to the discussion on page 125.
d. Death certicates
Information relating to cause of death in all death and fetal death records, and the parentage,
marital status, and medical information of fetal death records are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), F.S., except for health research purposes as approved by the Department of
Health. Section 382.008(6), F.S. And see s. 28.2221(5)(a), F.S. (clerk of court not authorized
to place certain records, including death certicates, on a publicly available Internet website);
s. 382.008(8), F.S. (condential information in nonviable birth certicates). Cf. Department of
Health v. Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills, LLC, 259 So. 3d 979, 982 (Fla. 1st DCA
2018), overturning the lower court’s order holding the agency in contempt for failing to produce
death certicates of all Floridians who died within a specied time period because, among other
things, the nal judgment “failed to take into account the condential or exempt status of
information in the death certicates it ordered the Department to produce”).
Section 382.025(2)(a), F.S., provides for the Department of Heath to authorize the issuance
of a certied copy of all or part of a death or fetal death certicate, excluding the portion that
is condential pursuant to s. 382.008, F.S., upon payment of the fee prescribed by that section.
e statute also species those persons and governmental agencies authorized to receive a copy of
a death certicate that includes the condential portions. All portions of a death certicate cease
to be exempt 50 years after the death. Section 382.025(2)(b), F.S.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
75
3. Child and vulnerable adult abuse and protection records
a. Department of Children and Families abuse records
(1) Condentiality of abuse records
Generally, reports of abused children or vulnerable adults which are received by the
Department of Children and Families (DCF) are condential and exempt from disclosure, except
as expressly provided by statute. See ss. 39.202(1) and 415.107(1), F.S.
us, a union representative may not attend that portion of an investigatory interview
between the DCF inspector general and an employee requiring the discussion of information
taken from a child abuse investigation that is condential under s. 39.202, F.S. AGO 99-42. And
see s. 383.412(2)(b), F.S., providing that any information held by the State Child Abuse Death
Review Committee or a local committee which reveals the identity of a deceased child whose
death has been reported to the central abuse hotline but determined not to be the result of abuse
or neglect, or which reveals the identity of the surviving siblings, family members, or others living
in the home of such deceased child is condential and exempt from disclosure requirements. In
addition, the identity of the surviving siblings of a deceased child whose death occurred as the
result of a veried report of abuse or neglect is condential. Section 383.412(2)(a), F.S.
All records and reports of the Child Protection Team of the Department of Health are
condential and exempt, and shall not be disclosed, except, upon request, to the state attorney,
law enforcement, DCF, and necessary professionals in furtherance of the treatment or additional
evaluative needs of the child, by court order, or to health plan payors, limited to that information
used for insurance reimbursement purposes. Section 39.202(6), F.S.
(2) Release of abuse records
Section 39.2021(1), F.S., authorizes any person or organization, including DCF, to petition the
court to make public DCF records relating to its investigation into alleged abuse, neglect, exploitation
or abandonment of a child. e court shall determine if good cause exists for public access to the
records and is required to balance the best interest of the child and the interests of the child’s siblings,
together with the privacy rights of other persons identied in the reports against the public interest.
Id.
is “balancing process” thus “requires the trial court to weigh the harm to the child against
the benet to the public that would potentially result from the disclosure of the records at issue.”
In re Records of the Department of Children and Family Services, 873 So. 2d 506, 513 (Fla. 2d DCA
2004). To perform this function, the trial court must conduct an in camera review because “[i]t is
impossible to judge the potential impact of the disclosure of information contained in records without
knowing what that information is.” Id. at 514. But see Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Company, 582 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), holding that the
trial court was not required to hold a hearing before nding good cause to release the department’s
records relating to a child abuse investigation, where shortly after the department’s investigation, the
individual who had been investigated killed the victim, the victim’s family, and himself.
In cases involving serious bodily injury to a child, DCF may petition the court for immediate
public release of records pertaining to the protective investigation. Section 39.2021(2), F.S. e court
has 24 hours to determine if good cause exists for public release of the records. If no action is taken
by the court in that time, DCF may, subject to specied exceptions, release summary information
including a conrmation that an investigation has been conducted concerning the victim, the dates
and a brief description of procedural activities undertaken in the investigation, and information
concerning judicial proceedings. Id.
Similar procedures are established in Ch. 415, F.S., for access to DCF records relating to
investigations of alleged abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. See s. 415.1071, F.S.
76
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
e petitioner seeking public access to the records must formally serve DCF with the petition.
Florida Department of Children and Families v. Sun-Sentinel, 865 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2004). A “very
narrow” exception to the home venue privilege applies when a petition is led seeking to make DCF
records public. See Sun-Sentinel, supra, at 1289, adopting the exception in cases “where a party
petitions the court for an order to gain access to public records, and where the records sought are by
law condential and cannot be made public without a determination by the court, pursuant to the
petition, that good cause exists for public access.”
Section 39.202(2)(o), F.S., provides that access to child abuse records shall be granted to
any person in the event of the child’s death due to abuse, abandonment, or neglect. However, any
information identifying the person reporting abuse, abandonment, or neglect, or any information
that is otherwise made condential or exempt by law shall not be released. Id. Section 415.107(3)
(l), F.S., provides for similar release of records in the event of the death of a vulnerable adult. And
see s. 39.202(4), F.S., authorizing DCF and the investigating law enforcement agency to release
certain identifying information to the public in order to help locate or protect a missing child under
investigation or supervision of the department or its contracted service providers. Cf. s. 39.202(7), F.S.
(duties of custodians of records made condential under s. 39.202 to provide access as requested by
legislative committee acting under s. 11.43, F.S.).
In addition, “it is the intent of the Legislature to provide prompt disclosure of the basic facts
of all deaths of children from birth through 18 years of age which occur in this state and which are
reported to the [DCF] central abuse hotline.” Section 39.2022(1), F.S. Disclosure shall be posted
on the DCF public website. Id. Section 39.2022(2), F.S., lists the information about the child which
must be posted.
b. Foster home, licensure and quality assurance records
Records relating to licensure of foster homes, or assessing how the Department of Children and
Families is carrying out its duties, including references to incidents of abuse, abandonment, or neglect,
contained in such records, do not fall within the parameters of s. 39.202, F.S. AGO 01-54. Such reports
are in the nature of quality assurance reports that do not substitute for the protective investigation of
child abuse, abandonment, or neglect; to the extent that such incident reports reference an occurrence
of abuse, abandonment, or neglect, identifying information that reveals the identity of the victim
contained in the reference should be redacted. Id. Cf. s. 409.175(16), F.S., providing an exemption
for certain personal information about licensed foster parents, foster parent applicants, and their
families. And see Boyles v. Mid-Florida Television Corp., 431 So. 2d 627, 637 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983),
approved, 467 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1985) (summary report compiled during a licensing investigation of
a residential facility for developmentally disabled persons, subject to disclosure pursuant to statute
[now found at s. 393.067(9), F.S.] providing for public access to inspection reports of such facilities).
c. Guardians ad litem and court monitors
Section 39.0132(4)(a)2., F.S., establishes condentiality for specied information held by a
guardian ad litem. And see s. 744.2104(2), F.S. (condentiality of records held by the Oce of Public
and Professional Guardians relating to the medical, nancial, or mental health of vulnerable adults,
persons with a developmental disability, or persons with a mental illness); s. 744.1076(1)(b), F.S.
(except as provided in the exemption, reports of court monitors or emergency court monitors which
relate to the medical condition, nancial aairs, or mental health of the ward are condential); s.
744.2103 (2), F.S. (no disclosure of the personal or medical records of a ward of a public guardian
shall be made, except as authorized by law); and s. 744.3701, F.S. (court records relating to settlement
of a ward or minor’s claim).
d. Status of abuse records held by law enforcement agencies
For information regarding the status of abuse records held by law enforcement agencies in the
course of a criminal investigation, please refer to the discussion in s. C. 15 relating to law enforcement
records.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
77
4. Direct-support organizations
Direct-support organizations established by or pursuant to law to support the eorts of
public agencies have been found to be subject to the open government laws. See AGOs 92-53
(John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art Foundation, Inc., established pursuant to statute as a
not-for-prot corporation to assist the museum in carrying out its functions must comply with
open government laws), 11-01 (nonprot corporation created by municipality and described
as its “fundraising arm” subject to open government laws); and 05-27 (Sunshine Law applies to
Florida College System institution [formerly community college] direct-support organization
as dened in s. 1004.70, F.S.). Cf. s. 20.058, F.S., requiring that citizen support organizations
or direct-support organizations created or authorized by law or executive order and created,
approved, or administered by an agency must submit specied information to the agency which
shall then post the information on the agency’s website.
However, the Legislature has enacted exemptions for information identifying donors to
certain direct-support organizations. For example, the identity of donors to a direct-support
organization of a district school board, and all information identifying such donors and
prospective donors, are condential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), F.S.; that
anonymity is required to be maintained in the auditor’s report. See s. 1001.453(4), F.S.
More commonly, however, the statutory exemption applies only to the identity of donors
who wish to remain anonymous. See, e.g., s. 570.691(6), F.S. (identity of a donor or prospective
donor to the direct-support organizations authorized to support programs in the Department
of Agriculture and Consumer Services “who desires to remain anonymous and all information
identifying such donor or prospective donor” is condential). Cf. s. 265.7015, F.S. (if the donor
or prospective donor of a donation made for the benet of a publicly owned performing arts
center desires to remain anonymous, information that would identify the name, address, or
telephone number of that donor or prospective donor is condential and exempt).
e identity of donors to a university direct-support organization who wish to remain
anonymous shall be protected, and that anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report
of the organization. Section 1004.28(5)(a), F.S. Other than the auditor’s report, management
letter, any records related to the expenditure of state funds, and any nancial records related to
the expenditure of private funds for travel, all records of a university direct-support organization
and any supplemental data requested by the Board of Governors, the Auditor General, board of
trustees, and the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability [OPPAGA]
are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. Section 1004.28(5)(b), F.S.
By contrast, s. 1004.70(6), F.S., provides that records of the Florida College System
institution direct-support organizations other than the auditor’s report, any information
necessary for the auditor’s report, any information related to the expenditure of funds, and any
supplemental data requested by the board of trustees, the Auditor General, and OPPAGA, are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. See Palm Beach Community College Foundation,
Inc. v. WFTV, 611 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (direct-support organization’s expense records
are public records subject to deletion of donor-identifying information).
For more information on exemptions for particular direct-support or citizen-support
organizations, please consult Appendix D or the Index.
5. Domestic violence and stalking records
Information about clients received by the Department of Children and Families or by
authorized persons employed by or volunteering services to a domestic violence center, through
les, reports, inspection or otherwise, is condential and exempt from disclosure except as
provided by statute. Section 39.908, F.S. Information about the location of domestic violence
centers and facilities is also condential. Id.
78
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
A petitioner seeking an injunction for protection against domestic violence may furnish
the petitioner’s address to the court in a separate condential ling for safety reasons. Section
741.30(3)(b), F.S. And see ss.784.046 (4) (b) (repeat violence, sexual violence or dating violence)
and s. 784.0485(3)(b) (stalking). In addition, a petition for an injunction for protection against
domestic violence, repeat violence, dating violence, sexual violence, stalking, or cyberstalking that
is dismissed without a hearing, dismissed at an ex parte hearing due to a failure to state a claim or
lack of jurisdiction, or dismissed for any reason having to do with the suciency of the petition
itself without an injunction being issued on or after July 1, 2017, is exempt from disclosure.
Section 119.0714(1)(k)1., F.S. Prior to July 1, 2017, the petition is exempt only upon request
by an individual named in the petition as a respondent. Section 119.0714(1)(k)2., F.S. And see
s. 119.0714(1)(k)3., F.S., providing condentiality for information that can be used to identify
the petitioner or respondent until the respondent has been personally served with a copy of the
petition for injunction, adavits, notice of hearing, and temporary injunction.
A victim of domestic violence or aggravated stalking may le a written request, accompanied
by ocial verication that a crime has occurred, to have his or her home or employment address,
home or employment telephone number, or personal assets exempted from disclosure. Section
119.071(2)(j)1., F.S. For more information on this exemption, please refer to the discussion on
page 122. And see s. 741.313(7), F.S. (personal identifying information contained in records
documenting an act of domestic violence or sexual violence that is submitted to an agency by
an employee seeking to take leave under the requirements of s. 741.313, F.S., is condential and
exempt; a written request for leave submitted by an employee and an agency time sheet reecting
such request are condential and exempt until 1 year after the leave has been taken). See also s.
787.03(6)(c), F.S. (current address and telephone number of the person taking the minor or
incompetent person when eeing from domestic violence and the current address and telephone
number of the minor or incompetent person which are contained in the report made to a sheri
or state attorney under s. 787.03[6][b], F.S., are condential and exempt from disclosure).
e addresses, telephone numbers, and social security numbers of participants in the
Address Condentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence Program [Program] are
exempt from disclosure, except as provided in the exemption. Section 741.465(1), F.S. A similar
exemption is provided for the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of program participants
contained in voter registration and voting records. Section 741.465(2), F.S. And see s. 741.4651,
F.S. (names, addresses, and telephone numbers of persons who are victims of stalking or
aggravated stalking are exempt from public disclosure requirements in the same manner that
the names, addresses and telephone numbers of participants in the Program which are held by
the Attorney General under s. 741.465, F.S, are exempt, provided that the victim les a sworn
statement of stalking with the Oce of the Attorney General and otherwise complies with the
procedures in ss. 741.401-741.409. F.S.).
Any information in a record created by a domestic violence fatality review team that reveals
the identity of a domestic violence victim or the identity of the victim’s children is condential
and exempt from disclosure. Section 741.3165, F.S.
6. Drafts and notes
ere is no “unnished business” exception to the public inspection and copying
requirements of Ch. 119, F.S. As the Florida Supreme Court stated in Shevin v. Byron, Harless,
Schaer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633, 640 (Fla. 1980), the term “public record”
means “any material prepared in connection with ocial agency business which is intended to
perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge of some type.” Such material is a “public
record” regardless of whether it is in nal form or the ultimate product of an agency. Id.
us, “[i]nteroce memoranda and intra-oce memoranda communicating information
from one public employee to another or merely prepared for ling, even though not a part of an
agency’s later, formal public product, would nonetheless constitute public records in as much
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
79
as they supply the nal evidence of knowledge obtained in connection with the transaction of
ocial business.” 379 So. 2d at 640. See also Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes & Noble College
Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227, 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (book selection forms completed by
state university instructors and furnished to campus bookstore “are made in connection with
ocial business, for memorialization and communication purposes” and are public records);
and National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201, 1207 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (transcript and response prepared as part
of NCAA disciplinary proceeding involving state university were public records because the
“the purpose of the transcript was to perpetuate the information presented to the infractions
committee” and the response “was designed to communicate information to the body that would
hear the appeal within the NCAA”). Compare Rogers v. Hood, 906 So. 2d 1220, 1223 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2005), review denied, 919 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 2005) (unused or unvoted Florida punch card
ballots from 2000 election do not constitute public records because they do not “perpetuate,
communicate, or formalize knowledge,” but a ballot becomes a public record once it is voted
because at that point “the voted ballot, as received by the supervisor of elections in a given county,
has memorialized the act of voting”).
Accordingly, any agency record, if circulated for review, comment or information, is a
public record regardless of whether it is an ocial expression of policy or marked “preliminary”
or “working draft” or similar label. Examples of such materials include interoce memoranda,
preliminary drafts of agency rules or proposals which have been submitted for review to anyone
within or outside the agency, and working drafts of reports which have been furnished to a
supervisor for review or approval.
In each of these cases, the fact that the records are part of a preliminary process does not
remove them from the denition of “public record.” When material falls within the statutory
denition of “public record” in s. 119.011(12), F.S., and has been prepared to “perpetuate,
communicate or formalize knowledge,” the record is subject to disclosure even if the agency
believes that release of the nonnal product could be detrimental. See, e.g., Gannett Corporation,
Inc. v. Goldtrap, 302 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (county’s concern that premature disclosure
of a report could be harmful to the county does not make the document condential). As with
other public records, only the Legislature has the authority to exempt preliminary or draft public
records from disclosure. Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979).
See, e.g., s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., providing a limited work product exemption for agency attorneys.
While the broad denition of the term “public record” ensures that the public’s right of
access includes preliminary and nonnal records, the Shevin decision recognizes that not every
record made or received in the course of ocial business is prepared to “perpetuate, communicate
or formalize knowledge.” Accordingly, preliminary drafts or notes prepared for the personal use
of the writer may constitute mere “precursors” of public records if they are not intended to be
the nal evidence of the knowledge recorded. See Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and
Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633, 640 (Fla.1980). And see the discussion of “attorney notes” on
pages 131-132.
us, public employees’ notes to themselves “which are designed for their own personal use
in remembering certain things do not fall within the denition of ‘public record.’” (e.s.) Justice
Coalition v. e First District Court of Appeal Judicial Nominating Commission, 823 So. 2d 185,
192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Accord Coleman v. Austin, 521 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988),
holding that preliminary handwritten notes prepared by agency attorneys and intended only
for the attorneys’ own personal use are not public records. See also AGO 10-55 (handwritten
personal notes taken by city manager to assist in remembering matters discussed during manager’s
interviews of city employees are not public records “if the notes have not been transcribed or
shown to others and were not intended to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge”);
and Inf. Op. to Trovato, June 2, 2009 (to the extent city commissioner has taken notes for his
own personal use and such notes are not intended to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize
80
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
knowledge, personal notes taken at a workshop or during a commission meeting would not be
considered public records). Compare Bareld v. City of Sarasota, 21 F. L.W. Supp 874 (Fla. 12th
Cir. Ct. May 5, 2014), in which the circuit judge ruled that those portions of police ocer’s
notes containing his research on homeless shelters became a public record when he made multiple
references to them while answering questions during a presentation at a city commission meeting;
however the unread portions of the notes did not become a public record because they were not
disseminated.
e relevant test is whether the records have been prepared to “perpetuate, communicate,
or formalize knowledge of some type.” See AGO 05-23, stating that “it is only uncirculated
materials that are not in and of themselves intended to serve as the nal evidence of the
knowledge to be recorded that fall outside of the denition of a public record.” Accord AGOs
10-55 (“nonnal documents need not be communicated to anyone in order to constitute a public
record”) and 04-15 (tape recordings of sta meetings made at the request of the executive director
by a secretary for use in preparing minutes of the meeting are public records because “they are
made at the request of the executive director as an independent record of the proceedings, and,
unlike tapes or notes taken by a secretary as dictation, are intended to perpetuate the discussion
at a sta meeting”). See also Inf. Op. to Yoder, November 10, 2014 (video recording of a school
board meeting which was made at the direction of a school board member “appears to be a record
intended to perpetuate the discussion at the meeting”).
For example, in Miami Herald Media Co. v. Sarno, 971 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA
2007), the court held that a memorandum prepared by a city commissioner after a meeting
with a former city ocial, summarizing details of what was said and containing alleged factual
information about possible criminal activity, was a public record subject to disclosure. e court
determined that the memorandum was not a draft or a note containing mental impressions that
would later form a part of a government record, but rather formalized and perpetuated his nal
knowledge gained at the meeting. See also Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193, 197 (Fla.
1st DCA 2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (canvassing board minutes constitute
“nal work product of the [b]oard, not a preliminary draft or note”); City of Pinellas Park,
Florida v. Times Publishing Company, No. 00-008234CI-19 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 3, 2001),
available online at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (rejecting city’s argument that
employee responses to survey are “notes” which are not subject to disclosure because “as to each of
the employees, their responses were prepared in connection with their ocial agency business and
they were ‘intended to perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge’ that they had about
their department”); and AGO 05-23 (handwritten notes taken by an assistant city labor attorney
during her interviews with city personnel that were reviewed by the city’s labor attorney, used to
prepare a disciplinary action form, and then led, constituted a public record).
7. Education records
a. Charter schools
Section 1002.33(16)(b), F.S., provides that charter schools are subject to the Public
Records Act and the Sunshine Law. e open government laws apply regardless of whether the
charter school operates as a public or private entity. AGO 98-48. e records and meetings of
a not-for-prot corporation granted charter school status are subject to the requirements of Ch.
119, F.S., and s. 286.011, F.S., even though the charter school has not yet opened its doors to
students. AGO 01-23. And see AGO 2010-14 (records of team created by charter school to
review personnel decisions subject to Ch. 119, F.S.).
b. Student records
Public access to student records is limited by statute. In 2009, the Legislature amended the
state statutes relating to student records to incorporate the federal Family Education Rights and
Privacy Act (FERPA). Section 1002.221(1), F.S., provides that “[e]ducation records as dened in
[FERPA], and the federal regulations issued pursuant thereto, are condential and exempt” from
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
81
public disclosure and may be released only as authorized in the exemption. “Education records”
are dened by FERPA to mean “those records, les, documents, and other materials which
contain information directly related to a student; and are maintained by an educational agency
or institution or by a person acting for such agency or institution.” 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g(a)(4)
(A). Cf. AGO 10-04 (school board meeting at which student records may be discussed may not
be closed to the public in the absence of a statutory exemption from the Sunshine Law; however,
“school board should be sensitive to condential student records that may be reviewed during
such a meeting and protect these records to the extent that is possible to protect the privacy
of the student involved . . . .”). Compare s. 1003.57(1)(c), F.S., providing an exemption from
the Sunshine Law for hearings on exceptional student identication, evaluation, and eligibility
determination; and s. 1006.07(1)(a), F.S. (student expulsion hearings exempted).
Public postsecondary educational institutions are also required to comply with FERPA
with respect to the education records of students. Section 1002.225(2), F.S. Section 1006.52(1),
F.S., authorizes a public postsecondary educational institution to prescribe the content and
custody of records the institution maintains on its students and applicants for admission. A
student’s education records and applicant records are condential and exempt. Id. See Knight
News, Inc. v. University of Central Florida, 200 So. 3d 125, 128 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (personally
identiable information contained within records regarding alleged hazing incidents qualies
as condential student disciplinary records; however, the names of student government ocers
charged with malfeasance in the performance of student government duties or alleged to have
engaged in misconduct with regard to their election or appointment to their position are not
condential under FERPA because “given the statutory scheme [relating to university student
government ocers] student government ocers know or reasonably should know” that they
could be disciplined for misconduct in connection with their student government duties).
In National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201, 1211 (Fla.
1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010), the court construed FERPA and the
2009 amendments to the Florida Statutes. Recognizing that under FERPA a record “qualies as
an educational record only if it ‘directly’ relates to a student,” the court found that a transcript
of an NCAA hearing and an NCAA committee response pertained to allegations of misconduct
by the university athletic department, and only tangentially related to students. erefore, since
the transcript and the response had been redacted to remove student-identifying information
and thus did not disclose education records, they were not exempt from disclosure. And see Rhea
v. District Board of Trustees of Santa Fe College, 109 So. 3d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (student’s
unredacted email which criticized instructor’s classroom performance constituted an exempt
education record). Compare WFTV v. School Board of Seminole County, Florida, 874 So. 2d
48 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), review denied, 892 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2004), concluding that under
prior student condentiality laws (which did not incorporate FERPA), a school bus surveillance
videotape was a condential student record and could not be released to the media even with
student-identifying information redacted).
In AGO 01-64 the Attorney General, in interpreting the former statutes, stated that a
felony complaint/arrest adavit created and maintained by school police ocers for a juvenile
or adult who is a student in the public schools is a law enforcement record subject to disclosure,
provided that exempt information such as active criminal investigative information is deleted
prior to release. See now 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g(a)(4)(B)(ii) excluding “records maintained by a
law enforcement unit of the educational agency or institution that were created by that law
enforcement unit for the purpose of law enforcement” from the denition of “education records.”
c. Children in government-sponsored recreation programs
Section 119.071(5)(c), F.S., exempts information that would identify or locate a child or
the parent or guardian of a child, participating in a government-sponsored recreation program.
A government-sponsored recreation program means “a program for which an agency assumes
responsibility for a child participating in that program, including, but not limited to, after-school
82
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
programs, athletic programs, nature programs, summer camps, or other recreational programs.”
Id.
d. School system security—Please see page 157.
e. Testing materials
Testing materials are generally exempt from the disclosure provisions of s. 119.07(1), F.S.
See, e.g., s. 1008.23(1)(2), F.S. (examination and assessment instruments, including developmental
materials and workpapers directly related to such instruments, which are prepared or administered
pursuant to cited statutes). See AGO 09-35, concluding that student assessment tests developed
by teachers to measure student preparedness for college board advanced placement exams are
condential and exempt from the inspection and copying requirements of Ch. 119, F.S. Cf.
s. 1008.24(4)(b), F.S. (identity of a school or postsecondary educational institution, personal
identifying information of personnel of a school district or postsecondary educational institution,
or specic allegations of misconduct obtained or reported in connection with an investigation of
a testing impropriety conducted by the Department of Education are condential and exempt
from disclosure until the investigation is concluded or becomes inactive).
8. Election records
a. Ballots
Election records are generally open to public inspection. An individual or group is entitled
to inspect the ballots and may take notes regarding the number of votes cast. AGO 93-48. See
also Rogers v. Hood, 906 So. 2d 1220, 1223 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), review denied, 919 So. 2d
436 (Fla. 2005) (voted ballots are public records because they have “memorialized the act of
voting”). Cf. Trout v. Bucher, 205 So. 3d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016), stating that the supervisor of
elections was not required to charge the hourly rate of the lowest paid person capable of providing
ballots for inspection because s. 119.07(4)(d), F.S., authorizes the agency to impose a reasonable
charge based on labor costs “actually incurred by the agency or attributable to the agency” when
extensive clerical or supervisory assistance is required).
Section 119.07(5), F.S., prohibits any person other than the supervisor of elections or the
supervisor’s employees from touching the ballots. And see s. 101.572, F.S. (no persons other than
the supervisor, supervisor’s employees, or the county canvassing board shall handle any ocial
ballot or ballot card). However, this restriction does not prohibit the supervisor from producing
copies of optically scanned ballots which were cast in an election in response to a public records
request. AGO 04-11. And see AGO 01-37.
Information regarding requests for vote-by-mail ballots that is recorded by the supervisor
of elections pursuant to s. 101.62(3), F.S., is condential and exempt and shall be made available
to or reproduced only for the individuals and entities set forth in the exemption, for political
purposes only. Section 101.62(3), F.S.
b. Voter registration and voter records
Section 97.0585(1), F.S., states that the following information is condential and exempt
from public disclosure requirements and may be used only for purposes of voter registration:
declinations to register to vote; information relating to the place where a person registered to vote
or updated a voter registration; the social security number, driver license number, and the Florida
identication number of a voter registration applicant or voter; and all information concerning
preregistered voter registration applicants who are 16 or 17 years old. e signature of a voter
registration applicant or a voter is exempt from copying requirements. Section 97.0585(2), F.S..
See also ss. 741.465(2), F.S. (identifying information concerning participants in the Oce of the
Attorney General Address Condentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence contained
in voter registration and voting records is exempt); and 741.4651, F.S. (exemption for identifying
information of stalking victims who have led a sworn statement of stalking with the Oce
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
83
of the Attorney General and otherwise comply with the procedures set forth in ss. 741.401-
741.409, F.S.). And see AGO 04-18 (specied ocers and employees who are authorized to le
a request for exempt status of certain personal information pursuant s. 119.071(4)(d)3., F.S., may
request that the supervisor of elections maintain the exempt status of such information contained
in petitions or campaign papers).
Section 98.075(2)(b), F.S., allows the Department of State to join a nongovernmental
entity composed of state and District of Columbia election ocials whose sole purpose is to
share and exchange information in order to verify voter registration information. Information
received by the department from another state or the District of Columbia which is condential
or exempt pursuant to the laws of that state or the District of Columbia is exempt from disclosure.
Section 98.075(2)(c), F.S.
9. Electronic and computer records
a. Electronic databases and les
Information stored in a public agency’s computer “is as much a public record as a written
page in a book or a tabulation in a le stored in a ling cabinet . . . .” Seigle v. Barry, 422 So. 2d 63,
65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), review denied, 431 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1983). And see National Collegiate
Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37
So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (public records law is not limited to paper documents but applies to
documents that exist only in digital form); AGO 98-54 (application and disciplinary reports
maintained in a computer system operated by a national securities dealers association which are
received electronically by state agency for use in licensing and regulating securities dealers doing
business in Florida are public records); AGO 91-61 (agency must provide copy of computer disk
in response to Ch. 119 request); and AGO 85-03 (computer tape subject to disclosure).
us, information such as electronic calendars, databases, and word processing les stored
in agency computers, can all constitute public records because records made or received in the
course of ocial business and intended to perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge of
some type, fall within the scope of Ch. 119, F.S. AGO 89-39. Compare AGO 85-87 (to the
extent that “machine-readable intermediate les” may be intended to “communicate” knowledge,
any such communication takes place completely within the data processing equipment and
in such form as to render any inspection pursuant to Ch. 119, F.S., unintelligible and, except
perhaps to the computer itself, meaningless; therefore, these les are analogous to notes used
to prepare some other documentary material, and are not public records). And see Grapski v.
Machen, No. 01-2005-CA-4005 J (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. May 9, 2006), armed per curiam, 949 So.
2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), available online in the Cases database at the open government
site at myoridalegal.com (spam or bulk mail received by a public agency does not necessarily
constitute a public record).
Moreover, the denition of “public records” specically includes “data processing
software” and establishes that a record made or received in connection with ocial business is
a public record, regardless of physical form, characteristics, “or means of transmission.” See s.
119.011(12), F.S. “Automation of public records must not erode the right of access to [public
records].” Section 119.01(2)(a), F.S.
Accordingly, electronic public records are governed by the same rule as written documents
and other public records--the records are subject to public disclosure unless a statutory exemption
exists which removes the records from disclosure. Cf. AGO 90-04, stating that a county ocial
is not authorized to assign the county’s right to a public record (a computer program developed
by a former employee while he was working for the county) as part of a settlement compromising
a lawsuit against the county. And see the discussion on pages 132-134 noting that in evaluating
whether a public ocial’s records were made or received in the course of ocial business for
purposes of Ch. 119, the determining factor is the nature of the record, and not whether the
record is located in a private or a government computer or communications device.
84
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
b. Consideration of public access in design of electronic recordkeeping system
When an agency is designing or acquiring an electronic recordkeeping system, the agency
must consider whether the proposed system is capable of providing data in some common format
such as, but not limited to, the American Standard Code for Information Interchange. Section
119.01(2)(b), F.S. Cf. Inf. Op. to Moore, October 19, 1993, noting that an agency considering
the acquisition of computer software should be responsive to the need for preserving public access
to the information through use of the computer’s software and that “[t]he design and development
of the software, therefore, should ensure that the system has the capability of redacting condential
or exempt information when a public records request is made.”
Similarly, an agency may not enter into a contract for the creation or maintenance of a
public records database if that contract impairs the ability of the public to inspect or copy the
public records of that agency, including public records that are online or stored in an electronic
recordkeeping system used by the agency. Section 119.01(2)(c), F.S. And see s. 287.042(3)(h), F.S.
(Department of Management Services responsible for development of procedures to be used by
state agencies when procuring information technology commodities and contractual services that
ensure compliance with public records and records retention requirements). Cf. Rule 1B-26.003,
F.A.C., adopted by the Department of State and providing standards for electronic recordkeeping.
Providing access to public records “is a duty of each agency.” Section 119.01(1), F.S. Section
119.01(2)(a), F.S., states that “[a]utomation of public records must not erode the right of access to
those records.” A circuit judge found that an agency violated both policies when it established an
automated anti-SPAM system that quarantined the requester’s “entirely legitimate public records
request” and allowed it to be deleted and purged a week later, because the agency “altogether failed
to establish any procedural safeguards to ensure that legitimate public records requests were not
inadvertently sent to SPAM.” Bracci v. School Board of Lee County, No. 20-CA-5205 (Fla. 20th
Cir. Ct. January 12, 2021), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com.
c. E-Mail
E-mail messages made or received by agency ocers and employees in connection with
ocial business are public records and subject to disclosure in the absence of an exemption. AGOs
96-34 and 01-20. See Rhea v. District Board of Trustees of Santa Fe College, 109 So. 3d 851, 855
(Fla. 1st DCA 2013), noting that “electronic communications, such as e-mail, are covered [by the
Public Records Act] just like communications on paper.” Cf. s. 668.6076, F.S., requiring agencies
that operate a website and use electronic mail to post the following statement in a conspicuous
location on the agency website: “Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you
do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this oce by phone or in writing.”
Similarly, e-mails sent by city commissioners in connection with the transaction of ocial
business are public records subject to disclosure even though the e-mails contain undisclosed or
“blind” recipients and their e-mail addresses. AGO 07-14. Cf. Butler v. City of Hallandale Beach,
68 So. 3d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (arming a trial court order nding that a list of recipients
of a personal e-mail sent by mayor from her personal computer was not a public record).
Like other public records, e-mail messages are subject to the statutory restrictions on
destruction of public records. See s. 257.36(6), F.S., stating that a public record may be destroyed
or otherwise disposed of only in accordance with retention schedules established by the Division
of Library and Information Services (division) of the Department of State. us, an e-mail
communication of “factual background information” from one city council member to another is
a public record and should be retained in accordance with the retention schedule for other records
relating to performance of the agency’s functions and formulation of policy. AGO 01-20.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
85
d. Social media postings
e Attorney General’s Oce has stated that the placement of material on a city’s Facebook
page presumably would be in connection with the transaction of ocial business and thus subject
to Ch. 119, F.S., although in any given instance, the determination would have to be made based
upon the denition of “public record” contained in s. 119.011(12), F.S. AGO 09-19. To the
extent that the information on the city’s Facebook page constitutes a public record, the city is under
an obligation to follow the public records retention schedules established in accordance with s.
257.36(6), F.S. Id. And see AGO 08-07 (city council members who post comments and emails
relating to the transaction of city business on a privately owned and operated website “would be
responsible for ensuring that the information is maintained in accordance with the Public Records
Law”).
e determination as to whether a list or record of accounts which have been blocked from
posting to or accessing an elected ocial’s personal Twitter feed is a public record involves mixed
questions of law and fact which cannot be resolved by the Attorney General’s Oce. Inf. Op.
to Shalley, June 1, 2016. However, “if the tweets the public ocial is sending are public records
[because they were sent in connection with the transaction of ocial business] then a list of blocked
accounts, prepared in connection with those public records ‘tweets,’ could well be determined by
a court to be a public record.” Id. Cf. Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump, No. 18-1691
(2d Cir. July 9, 2019) (public ocial engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination by
blocking certain users from access to his Twitter account, which is otherwise open to the public at
large and “used for all manner of ocial duties,” because he disagreed with their speech)
e. Text messages
A public ocial or employee’s use of a private cell phone to conduct public business via text
messaging “can create an electronic written public record subject to disclosure” if the text message
is “prepared, owned, used, or retained . . . within the scope of his or her employment or agency.”
O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 257 So. 3d 1036, 1040-1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). Accord City of
Sunny Isles Beach v. Gatto, 338 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), noting that a “city commissioner’s
text messages may be a public record,” although a private communication by a municipal ocial
“falls outside the denition of public record.” For more information on personal records created
and or received by public ocials on government or private devices, please see the discussion of that
topic on page 134.
In order to comply with the requirements of the Public Records Act, “the governmental
entity must proceed as it relates to text messaging no dierently than it would when responding
to a request for written documents and other public records in the entity’s possession—such as
emails—by reviewing each record, determining if some or all are exempted from production, and
disclosing the unprotected records to the requester.” O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, at 1041. And
see the discussion on page 164 regarding the entity’s responsibility to conduct a reasonable search to
locate text messages that have been requested from the governmental entity, including those located
on private accounts or devices.
e retention periods for text messages and other electronic messages or communications “are
determined by the content, nature, and purpose of the records, and are set based on their legal, scal,
administrative, and historical values, regardless of the format in which they reside or the method by
which they are transmitted.” See General Records Schedule GS1-SL for State and Local Government
Agencies, Electronic Communications, available online at dos.myorida.com/library-archives.
Stated another way, it is the content, nature and purpose of the electronic communication that
determines how long it is retained, not the technology that is used to send the message. See also
Inf. Op. to Browning, March 17, 2010, advising that the same[ retention] rules that apply to
e-mail should be considered for electronic communications including SMS communications (text
messaging), MMS communications (multimedia content), and instant messaging conducted by
government agencies.
86
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
f. Cybersecurity
Please see the discussion on that topic on pages 156-157.
10. Emergency records
a. Emergency “911” records
Section 365.171(12)(a), F.S., provides that any record, recording, or information,
or portions thereof, obtained by a public agency for the purpose of providing services in an
emergency which reveals the name, address, or telephone number or personal information
about, or information which may identify any person requesting emergency service or reporting
an emergency by accessing an emergency communications E911 system is condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. However, disclosure of the location of a coronary emergency
to a private person or entity that owns an automated external debrillator is authorized in some
circumstances, as set forth in the exemption. Section 365.171(12)(b), F.S.
e exemption applies only to the name, address, telephone number or personal
information about or information which may identify any person requesting emergency services
or reporting an emergency while such information is in the custody of the public agency or
public safety agency providing emergency services. Section 365.171(12)(a), F.S. See AGO 93-
60. ere is no clear indication that the Legislature intended to include the sound of a person’s
voice as information protected from disclosure. AGO 15-01. Moreover, identifying information
obtained or created independently of the 911 call, for example from a criminal investigation or
oense report created as a result of such investigation, is not exempt under s. 365.171(12)(a),
F.S. AGO 11-27.
A tape recording of a “911” call is a public record which is subject to disclosure after
the deletion of the exempt information. AGO 93-60. is does not, however, preclude the
application of another exemption to such records. us, if the “911” calls are received by a law
enforcement agency and the county emergency management department, information which is
determined by the law enforcement agency to constitute active criminal investigative information
may also be deleted from the tape prior to public release. AGO 95-48. See also Inf. Op. to
Fernez, September 22, 1997 (while police department is not prohibited from entering into an
agreement with the public to authorize access to its radio system, the department must maintain
condentiality of exempt personal information contained in “911” radio transmissions).
Moreover, an audio recording that records the killing of a law enforcement ocer acting in
accordance with his or her ocial duties or the killing of a victim of mass violence is condential
and exempt and may not be listened to or copied except as authorized in the exemption. Section
119.071(2)(p), F.S. For more information on this exemption, please refer to the discussion on
page 125.
Building plans, blueprints and related records which depict the structural elements
of 911, E911 or public safety radio communication system infrastructure owned or operated
by an agency, are exempt from disclosure. Section 119.071(3)(e)1.a., F.S. Geographical maps
indicating actual or proposed locations, including towers, antennae, equipment, and facilities are
also exempt. Section 119.071(3)(e)1.b., F.S.
b. Emergency evacuation plans and special needs registry
Section 119.071(3)(a), F.S., provides an exemption from disclosure for a security or
resafety system plan of a private or public entity that is held by an agency. e term “security
or resafety system plan” includes emergency evacuation plans and sheltering arrangements. And
see s. 119.071(2)(d), F.S., providing an exemption from disclosure for “[a]ny comprehensive
inventory of state and local law enforcement resources compiled pursuant to Part I, chapter 23
[Florida Mutual Aid Act], and any comprehensive policies or plans compiled by a criminal justice
agency pertaining to the mobilization, deployment, or tactical operations involved in responding
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
87
to emergencies as dened in s. 252.34, F.S.; and s. 395.1056, F.S., providing an exemption for
those portions of a comprehensive emergency management plan that address the response of a
public or private hospital to an act of terrorism.
Section 252.355(1), F.S., states that the Division of Emergency Management, in
coordination with each local emergency management agency in the state, shall maintain a registry
of persons with special needs (i.e., persons who would need assistance during evacuations and
sheltering because of physical, mental, cognitive impairment, or sensory disabilities), located
within the jurisdiction of the local agency. Records relating to the registration of persons
with special needs are condential and exempt, except such information is available to other
emergency response agencies, as determined by the local emergency management director.
Section 252.355(4), F.S. Local law enforcement agencies shall be given complete shelter roster
information upon request. Id.
c. Emergency medical services records
Please refer to the discussion of this topic found on pages 96.
d. Emergency notication
Any information furnished by a person to any agency for the purpose of being provided
with emergency notication by the agency is exempt from disclosure requirements. Section
119.071(5)(j)1., F.S. e e-mail addresses and corresponding home, school, and other “watched
addresses of concern” provided for participation in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement
Oender Alert System come within the scope of this exemption. AGO 11-16. And see s.
119.0712(2)(d)1. and 2., F.S. (emergency contact information contained in a motor vehicle record
issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles is condential and exempt, and,
without the express consent of the person to whom such emergency contact information applies,
may be released only to law enforcement agencies for purposes of contacting those listed in the
event of an emergency or to a receiving facility, hospital, or licensed detoxication or addictions
receiving facility pursuant to cited statutes for the sole purpose of informing a patient’s emergency
contacts of the patient’s whereabouts).
e. Emergency planning information furnished to Division of Emergency Management
e Division of Emergency Management (Division) manages a statewide public awareness
program which encourages individuals, families, and businesses to develop disaster plans in
preparation for and in response to natural or manmade disasters. See s. 2, Ch. 14-188, Laws of
Florida. Any information furnished by a person or a business to the Division for the purpose of
being provided assistance with emergency planning is exempt. Section 252.905, F.S.
f. Emergency shelter and disaster recovery assistance
e address and telephone number of a person provided public emergency shelter during
a storm or catastrophic event and held by the agency, as dened in s. 119.011, F.S., that provided
the emergency shelter is exempt. Section 252.385(5), F.S.
Property photographs and personal identifying information of an applicant for or a
participant in a federal, state, or local housing assistance program for the purpose of disaster
recovery assistance for a presidentially declared disaster are condential and exempt. Section
119.071(5)(f)1.b., F.S. e exemption authorizes access under specied conditions. Section
119.071(5)(f)2. and 3., F.S.
11. Financial records
Many agencies prepare or receive nancial records as part of their ocial duties and
responsibilities. As with other public records, these materials are generally open to inspection
unless a specic statutory exemption exists. See AGO 96-96 (nancial information submitted
88
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
by harbor pilots in support of a pilotage rate increase application is not exempt from disclosure
requirements).
a. Audit reports
(1) Auditor General audits
e audit report prepared by the Auditor General is a public record once nalized.
Section 11.45(4)(c), F.S. e audit workpapers and notes are not a public record; however, those
workpapers necessary to support the computations in the nal audit report may be made available
by a majority vote of the Legislative Auditing Committee after a public hearing showing proper
cause. Id. And see AGO 79-75 (“the term ‘audit work papers and notes’ should be construed
narrowly and limited to such ‘raw data’ as is commonly considered to constitute the work papers
of an accountant”). Cf. s. 11.51(4), F.S. (work papers held by the Oce of Program Policy
Analysis and Government Accountability which relate to an authorized project or a research
product are exempt from disclosure).
At the conclusion of the audit, the Auditor General provides the head of the agency being
audited with a list of the ndings so that the agency head may explain or rebut them before the
report is nalized. Section 11.45(4)(d), F.S. e list of audit ndings is a public record. AGO
79-75.
(2) Local government audits
e audit report of an internal auditor prepared for or on behalf of a unit of local government
becomes a public record when the audit becomes nal. Section 119.0713(2)(b), F.S. e audit
becomes nal when the audit report is presented to the unit of local government; until the audit
becomes nal, the audit workpapers and notes related to such audit report are condential. Id.
us, a draft audit report of a county legal department prepared by the clerk of court, acting
in her capacity as county auditor, did not become subject to disclosure when the clerk submitted
copies of her draft report to the county administrator for review and response. Nicolai v. Baldwin,
715 So. 2d 1161, 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). According to the exemption, the report would
become “nal,” and hence subject to disclosure, when presented to the county commission. Id.
Similarly, draft audit reports relating to city towing companies did not become subject
to disclosure even though the towing companies, who had reviewed the reports pursuant to city
policy, shared the reports with a news organization which subsequently published an article about
them. e court said its decision was compelled by the plain language of the statute, concluding
that because the draft audit reports were not nal, they were not subject to disclosure. City of
Miami Beach v Miami New Times, LLC, 314 So. 3d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020). And see Rushing v.
Bareld, No. 2011-CA-5864-NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. August 4, 2011), per curiam armed, 83 So.
3d 718 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (even though an audit has been completed with regard to some matters, clerk
authorized to redact those portions of workpapers and notes relating to additional matters under
investigation until the audit relating to the additional matters is concluded).
e term “internal auditor” is not dened for purposes of this exemption. However, the
term would appear to encompass an ocial within county government who is responsible under
the county code for conducting an audit. AGO 99-07. Compare AGO 04-33 (exemption does not
apply to audit of guardianship les prepared by clerk of court because that audit “is not an internal
audit performed by or on behalf of any of the specied units of local government”).
(3) State agency inspector general audits
Section 20.055(2), F.S., establishes the Oce of Inspector General in each state agency.
Pursuant to s. 20.055(6), F.S., the inspector general is required to conduct audits of the agency and
prepare audit reports of the ndings. Such audit reports and workpapers are public records to the
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
89
extent that they do not include information which has been made condential and exempt from
disclosure. Section 20.055(6)(b), F.S.
b. Bids, proposals and nancial statements
Section 119.071(1)(b)2., F.S., provides an exemption for “sealed bids, proposals, or replies
received by an agency pursuant to a competitive solicitation” until such time as the agency
provides notice of an intended decision or until 30 days after opening “the bids, proposals, or nal
replies,” whichever is earlier. Cf. s. 255.0518, F.S., providing that notwithstanding s. 119.071(1)
(b), F.S., agencies receiving sealed bids pursuant to a competitive solicitation for construction or
repairs of a public building or public work, must open the bids at a public meeting conducted
in compliance with the Sunshine Law, and must also announce bidder and price information at
that meeting.
e term “competitive solicitation” means “the process of requesting and receiving sealed
bids, proposals, or replies in accordance with the terms of a competitive process, regardless of the
method of procurement.” Section 119.071(1)(b)1., F.S.
If an agency rejects all bids, proposals, or replies submitted in response to a competitive
solicitation and the agency concurrently provides notice of its intent to reissue the competitive
solicitation, the rejected bids, proposals, or replies remain exempt until such time as the agency
provides notice of an intended decision concerning the reissued competitive solicitation or until
the agency withdraws the reissued competitive solicitation. A bid, proposal, or reply is not
exempt for longer than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all bids, proposals, or
replies. Section 119.071(1)(b)3., F.S. And see s. 286.0113(2)(c), F.S., providing an exemption for
the recording of, and records presented at, an exempt meeting held pursuant to s. 286.0113(2)
(b), F.S. For more information on this exemption, please refer to the discussion on page 35-36.
Any nancial statement that an agency requires a prospective bidder to submit in
order to prequalify for bidding or for responding to a proposal for a road or any other public
works project is exempt from disclosure requirements. Section 119.071(1)(c), F.S. See also s.
119.0713(3), F.S., limiting access to materials used by municipal utilities to prepare bids; s.
339.55(10), F.S., providing an exemption for nancial information of a private entity applicant
which the Department of Transportation requires as part of the application process for loans or
credit enhancements from the state-funded infrastructure bank; and s. 337.168, F.S., providing
restrictions on disclosure of Department of Transportation cost estimates, persons requesting bid
packages, and the bid analysis and monitoring system.
c. Budgets
Budgets and working papers used to prepare them are normally subject to inspection. Bay
County School Board v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 382 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA
1980); Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); and City of Gainesville v. State
ex. rel. International Association of Fire Fighters Local No. 2157, 298 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA
1974). Accord Inf. Op. to Pietrodangelo, Nov. 29, 1972 (nancial operating budget of athletic
department of state university constitutes a public record). Cf. News-Press Publishing Company,
Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546, 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), holding that the preponderant interest
in allowing public participation in the budget process justied the inclusion of an agency’s
internal budget committee within the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Law.
e exemption aorded by s. 447.605(3), F.S., for work products developed by the public
employer in preparation for collective bargaining negotiations does not remove the working
papers used in preparing an agency budget from disclosure. Warden v. Bennett, supra. See also
AGO 92-56 (budget of a public hospital would not, in and of itself, appear to constitute either
a trade secret or marketing plan for purposes of a statutory exemption for documents revealing a
hospital’s marketing plan or trade secrets).
90
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
d. Economic development records
(1) Business location or expansion plans
If a private entity requests in writing before an economic incentive agreement is signed that
an economic development agency maintain the condentiality of information concerning the
entity’s interest in or plans to locate or expand its business activities in Florida, the information is
condential and exempt from disclosure for 12 months after the date an economic development
agency receives a request for condentiality or until the information is otherwise disclosed,
whichever occurs rst. Section 288.075(2)(a)1., F.S. Condentiality may be extended for up
to an additional 12 months upon the written request of the private entity if the agency nds
that the private entity is still actively considering locating or expanding its business activities in
Florida. Section 288.075(2)(a)2., F.S. If a nal project order for a signed economic development
agreement is issued, then the information remains condential for 180 days after the nal project
order is issued, until a date specied in the nal project order, or until the information is otherwise
disclosed, whichever occurs rst. However, such period of condentiality may not extend beyond
the period of condentiality specied in s. 288.075(2)(a)1. or s. 288.075(2)(a)2., F.S. And see s.
288.075(2)(b), F.S., restricting public ocials from entering into binding agreements with the
private entity requesting condentiality until 90 days after the information has been made public,
unless certain conditions are met.
e term “economic development agency” means the state Department of Economic
Opportunity, an industrial development authority, Space Florida, the public economic
development agency of a county or municipality, or a research and development authority. Also
included are the county or municipal ocers or employees assigned the duty to promote the
general business interests or industrial interests of that county or municipality or the related
responsibilities, if the county or municipality does not have a public economic development
agency. e term also includes private persons or agencies authorized by the state, a county or a
municipality to promote the general business interests of the state or that municipality or county.
Section 288.075(1)(a), F.S.
e Legislature’s designation of those entities which are considered economic development
agencies for purposes of s. 288.075, F.S., precludes any other entities from falling under the denition.
See AGO 12-36 (St. Augustine-St. Johns County Airport Authority is not an “economic development
agency” as dened in s. 288.075, F.S.). Cf. Inf. to Rooney, June 8, 2011 (if by amendment of the
county charter, the voters made the county commission a part of the county economic development
agency by placing the executive director of the agency under the direct supervision of the county
commission, then the provisions of s. 288.075, F.S., would apply to the county commission).
A written request for condentiality under s. 288.075(2), F.S., may constitute or contain
information required to be held condential under that statute; however, such a determination
must be made by the custodian on a case-by-case basis as to whether a particular record or
portion of a record falls within the scope of the exemption. AGO 07-15. e section, however,
may be cited by the records custodian as statutory authority for withholding information from
public disclosure without violating the required condentiality provisions of the statute. Id. Cf.
AGO 80-78 (county industrial development authority permitted to withhold access only to those
records “clearly falling” within the exemption provided in s. 288.075; “policy considerations” do
not justify nondisclosure of public records).
Development plans, nancial records, nancial commitment letters and draft memoranda
of understanding between the city and a developer considering expansion or relocation within
the city appear to come within the scope of the exemption. AGO 04-19. However, the burden
is on the economic development agency “to carefully and in good faith distinguish between those
documents clearly covered by the exemption and those not covered.” Id.
Trade secrets, as dened in s. 688.002, F.S., contained in the records held by an economic
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
91
development agency are condential and exempt from disclosure. Section 288.075(3), F.S.
Proprietary condential business information held by an economic development agency is
condential and exempt until such information is otherwise publicly available or is no longer
treated by the proprietor as proprietary condential business information. Section 288.075(4),
F.S. Federal employer identication numbers, reemployment assistance account numbers, or
Florida sales tax registration numbers held by an economic development agency are condential
and exempt. Section 288.075(5), F.S. In addition, certain information held pursuant to the
administration of an economic incentive program is condential and exempt for limited periods
as specied in the exemption. Section 288.075(6), F.S. And see s. 288.075(7), F.S. (tax returns,
nancial information, and credit history information held by a state or federally funded small
business loan program).
(2) Convention center booking business records
Booking business records of a public convention center, sports facility, or auditorium
are exempt from public disclosure. Section 255.047(2), F.S. e statute denes “booking
business records” to include “client calendars, client lists, exhibitor lists, and marketing les.”
Section 255.047(1)(a), F.S. e term does not include “contract negotiation documents, lease
agreements, rental rates, event invoices, event work orders, ticket sales information, box oce
records, attendance gures, payment schedules, certicates of insurance, accident reports,
incident reports, or correspondence specic to a conrmed event.” Id. And see s. 125.0104(9)
(d)1., F.S. (providing an exemption for information given to a county tourism promotion agency,
which, if released, would reveal the identity of those who provide information in response to
a sales promotion, advertisement, or research project or whose names, addresses, meeting or
convention plan information or accommodations or other visitation needs become booking or
reservation list data).
e. Ownership records for registered public obligations
Records regarding ownership of, or security interests in, registered public obligations are
not open to inspection. Section 279.11, F.S.
f. Personal nancial records
In the absence of a statutory exemption, nancial information prepared or received by an
agency is subject to Ch. 119, F.S. See Wallace v. Guzman, 687 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
(personal income tax returns and nancial statements submitted by housing nance authority
members as part of the authority’s application to organize a bank are subject to disclosure). See
also Inf. Op. to Lovelace, April 3, 1992 (records identifying mortgage recipients held by a bank
acting as agent of a housing nance authority in granting mortgages funded by the authority are
public records).
(1) Bank account, debit and credit card numbers
Bank account numbers, and debit, charge, and credit card numbers held by an agency are
exempt from public disclosure. Section 119.071(5)(b), F.S. See also s. 119.0714(1)(j), (2)(e) and
3(b), F.S., regarding condentiality of bank account numbers and debit, charge, and credit card
numbers contained in court and ocial records.
(2) Consumer nancial information
ere are statutes which exempt consumer nancial information received by certain
agencies. For example, s. 624.23, F.S., provides condentiality for personal nancial information
held by the Department of Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance Regulation relating to
a consumer’s complaint or inquiry regarding a matter or activity regulated under the Florida
Insurance Code. See State, Department of Financial Services v. Danahy & Murray, 246 So. 3d
466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), upholding the constitutionality of the statute. See also s. 717.117(8),
F.S. (property identiers contained in unclaimed property reports held by the Department of
92
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Financial Services are condential); s. 627.351(6)(x)1., F.S. (claims and underwriting les of the
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, except as provided in the exemption); s. 119.071(5)
(f), F.S. (health or property insurance information provided by applicants or participants
in government housing assistance programs); and s. 655.057(1)(c), F.S. (personal nancial
information contained in investigation records of the Oce of Financial Regulation).
(3) Financial information submitted by state licensure applicants
In the absence of statutory exemption, nancial information in a licensing le is subject
to disclosure. See AGO 04-16. However, the Legislature has enacted exemptions for nancial
information held by certain licensing agencies. For example, credit history information and
credit scores held by the Oce of Financial Regulation for purposes of licensing loan originators,
mortgage brokers and mortgage lenders are condential. Section 494.00125(3) F.S. Financial
information submitted by license applicants to the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation is also condential. Section 455.229(1), F.S. And see s. 456.014(1), F.S. (Department
of Health license applicants). Cf. Surterra Florida, LLC v. Florida Department of Health, 223
So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (arming trial court nding that identities of investors and
partners listed in applications to dispense medical cannabis were not condential trade secrets).
For more information on disclosure issues relating to trade secrets, please refer to the discussion
of that topic in pages 159-160.
(4) Temporary cash assistance program participant
Except as provided in the exemption, personal identifying information of a temporary cash
assistance program participant is condential. Section 414.295(1), F.S.
(5) Toll payment personal identifying information
Section 338.155(6), F.S. provides an exemption for personal identifying information held
by the Department of Transportation, a county, a municipality, or an expressway authority for
the purpose of paying, prepaying, or collecting tolls and associated charges due for the use of toll
facilities.
(6) Utility payment records
Agency records of payments for utility services are subject to disclosure. See AGOs 88-
57 (county records of payments made by individuals for waste collection services are public
records), and 92-09 (customer delinquency information held by a utilities commission is subject
to disclosure). Cf. s. 119.0713(5)(a), F.S., providing an exemption for customer meter-derived
data and billing information in increments less than one billing cycle.
g. Taxpayer records
ere are a number of statutes providing for condentiality of taxpayer records held by the
Department of Revenue. See, e.g., s. 213.053(2)(a), F.S. (all information contained in returns,
reports, accounts, or declarations received by the Department of Revenue, including investigative
reports and information and letters of technical advice, is condential except for ocial purposes
and exempt from s. 119.07[1], F.S.); s. 213.21(3), F.S. (records of compromises of taxpayer
liability not subject to disclosure); and s. 213.27(6), F.S. (condential information shared by
the Department of Revenue with debt collection or auditing agencies under contract with the
department is exempt from public disclosure and such debt collection or auditing agencies are
bound by the same condentiality requirements as the department). Cf. Wallace v. Guzman, 687
So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (personal income tax returns submitted by housing nance
authority members to state banking agency as part of the authority’s application to organize a
bank are subject to disclosure).
In addition, s. 193.074, F.S., provides for condentiality of certain taxpayer information.
In light of the position taken by the Department of Revenue that its form entitled “Original
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
93
Application for Ad Valorem Tax Exemption” constitutes a “return,” such form should be treated
as a “return” that is condential pursuant to s. 193.074, F.S. AGO 05-04. Accord AGO 95-07.
And see NYT Management Services, Inc. v. Florida Department of Revenue, No. 2006-CA-0896
(Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. April 25, 2006), available online in the Cases database at the open government
site at myoridalegal.com (declarations or written statements led with the Department of
Revenue pursuant to the state’s revenue laws would be a return and thus condential under s.
193.074, F.S.).
A taxpayer’s e-mail address held by a tax collector for purpose of sending certain tax
notices or obtaining the consent of a taxpayer for electronic transmission of certain tax notices,
as provided in cited statutes, is exempt from public disclosure requirements. Section 197.3225,
F.S. Cf. s. 288.075(7), F.S. (tax returns held by an economic development agency pursuant
to its administration of a state or federally funded small business loan program is exempt from
public disclosure).
However, taxpayer information that is condential in the hands of certain specied ocers
under s. 193.074, F.S., is subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act when it has been
submitted by a taxpayer to a value adjustment board as evidence in an assessment dispute. AGO
01-74. Cf. Inf. Op. to Echeverri, April 30, 2010 (while property appraiser may use condential
records submitted to the value adjustment board by the taxpayer, it is not clear whether property
appraiser may independently submit condential material to the board in the absence of a
taxpayer’s submission although board may order production of condential records). Similarly,
absent a specic statutory exemption for assessment rolls and public information cards, such
documents made or received by the property appraiser are public records subject to the Public
Records Act, regardless of the condentiality of a return that may contain information used in
their creation. AGO 05-04.
12. Firearms records
Personal identifying information of an individual who has applied for or received a license
to carry a concealed weapon or rearm pursuant to s. 790.06, F.S., held by the Department
of Agriculture and Consumer Services is condential and exempt from public disclosure
requirements. Section 790.0601(1), F.S. e same information is also condential when held
by a tax collector appointed by the Department. Sections 790.0601(2), and 790.0625(4), F.S.
Information made condential by s. 790.0601, F.S., shall be disclosed with the express
written consent of the applicant or licensee or his or her legally authorized representative, by
court order upon a showing of good cause, or upon request by a law enforcement agency in
connection with the performance of lawful duties. Section 790.0601(3), F.S. Cf. Times
Publishing Company v. City of Pensacola, No. 2002-2053 (Fla. 1st Cir. Ct. November 13, 2002),
per curiam armed, 869 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), available online in the Cases database
at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, concluding that police department records
of weapons assigned to law enforcement ocers and described as “specialty weapons utilized
for surveillance and defensive purposes, by surveillance personnel” were exempt from disclosure
under s. 119.071(3)(a), F.S., relating to security system plans and terrorist threat assessments,
and the exemption for surveillance personnel, techniques, and procedures, now found at s.
119.071(2)(d), F.S.
13. Hospital and medical records
a. Communicable or infectious disease reports
A number of exemptions exist for communicable or infectious disease reports. See, e.g.,
s. 381.0031(6), F.S. (information submitted in public health reports to Department of Health
is condential and is to be made public only when necessary to public health); s. 384.29, F.S.
(sexually transmissible diseases). See Ocala Star-Banner v. State, 697 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 5th DCA
1997) (upholding court order sealing portions of a battery prosecution case le pertaining to
94
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
transmission of sexually transmissible diseases to victims due to s. 384.29, F.S., condentiality
requirements). However, notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the
Department of Health, the Department of Children and Families, and the Agency for Persons
with Disabilities may share condential information on any individual who is or has been the
subject of a program within the jurisdiction of each agency. Section 402.115, F.S. e shared
information remains condential or exempt as provided by law. Id. See AGO 98-52.
Results of screenings for sexually transmissible diseases conducted by the Department of
Health in accordance with s. 384.287, F.S., may be released only to those persons specied in the
exemption. Section 384.287(5), F.S.
Notication to an emergency medical technician, paramedic or other person that a
patient they treated or transported has an infectious disease must be done in a manner to protect
the condentiality of patient information and shall not include the patient’s name. Section
395.1025, F.S.
ere are strict condentiality requirements for test results for HIV infection; such
information may be released only as expressly prescribed by statute. See ss. 381.004, and
384.287(6), F.S. Any person who violates the condentiality provisions of s. 381.004, F.S.,
and s. 951.27, F.S., is guilty of a rst degree misdemeanor. Section 381.004(5)(b), F.S. And see
s. 381.004(5)(c), F.S., establishing felony penalties for disclosure in certain circumstances. us,
information received by the clerk of court indicating that an individual has complied with an
order to be tested for HIV and the attendant test results “would appear to be condential and
should be maintained in that status.” AGO 00-54. Cf. Florida Department of Corrections v. Abril,
969 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 2007) (an entity that negligently violates a patient’s right of condentiality
in disclosing the results of HIV testing may be held responsible in a negligence action).
Results of HIV and hepatitis tests performed on persons charged with certain oenses
may not be disclosed except as authorized in the exemption. Section 960.003, F.S. See also s.
951.27, F.S. (limited disclosure of infectious disease test results, including HIV testing pursuant
to s. 775.0877, F.S., of inmates as provided in statute).
b. Hospital records
(1) Public hospitals
Like other governmental agency records, public hospital records are subject to disclosure
in the absence of a statutory exemption. For example, the court in Tribune Company v. Hardee
Memorial Hospital, No. CA 91-370 (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. August 19, 1991), available online in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, held that a settlement
agreement entered in a lawsuit against the public hospital alleging that the hospital had swapped
babies was a public record. e court held that the agreement was subject to disclosure despite
a condentiality provision contained within the agreement and claims by the hospital that it
constituted work product. Cf. Bert Fish Foundation, Inc. v. Southeast Volusia Hospital District, No.
10-20801-CINS (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. December 22, 2010), available online in the Cases database
at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (governing boards of hospital district and
medical center violated the Sunshine Law when they held numerous closed meetings to discuss an
aliation or merger with a healthcare corporation). For information on exemptions applicable
to public hospitals, please refer to Appendix D and the Index. Cf. AGO 14-10, noting that an
exemption in s. 395.3035(5), F.S., for certain records and meetings relating to a “strategic plan”
for operation of a hospital must be narrowly construed and would not apply to an evaluation
conducted pursuant to s. 155.40(5), F.S., for purposes of the sale or lease of a public hospital.
(2) Private hospitals/private organizations operating public hospitals
A private organization leasing the facilities of a public hospital is acting on behalf of a
public agency and thus constitutes an agency subject to open records requirements in the absence
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
95
of statutory exemption. See Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation,
729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999).
Section 395.3036, F.S., however, provides that records of a private entity that leases a public
hospital or other public health care facility are condential and exempt from disclosure when the
public lessor complies with the public nance accountability provisions of s. 155.40(18), F.S.,
with respect to the transfer of any public funds to the private lessee and when the private lessee
meets at least three of ve criteria set forth in the exemption. See Indian River County Hospital
District v. Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., 766 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (nonprot
corporation leasing hospital from hospital district). And see Baker County Press, Inc. v. Baker County
Medical Services, Inc., 870 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), upholding the constitutionality of
the exemption. Cf. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 927 So.
2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (private corporation that purchased hospital from public hospital
authority not subject to Public Records Act); and s. 155.40(21), F.S., describing and construing
the term “complete sale” as applied to a purchase of a public hospital by a private entity.
c. Patient and clinical records
(1) Patient and clinical records generally
Patient records are generally protected from disclosure. For example, patient records
in hospitals and surgical facilities licensed under Ch. 395, F.S., are condential and may not
be disclosed without the consent of the patient, or the patient’s legal representative, except as
provided in the statute. Section 395.3025(4), (5), (7) and (8), F.S. And see s. 119.0712(1), F.S.
(personal identifying information contained in records relating to an individual’s personal health
or eligibility for health-related services held by the Department of Health); and s. 400.022(1)
(m), F.S. (nursing home residents’ medical and personal records).
Patient clinical records are also protected. See, e.g., s. 393.13(4)(i)1., F.S. (central client
records of persons with developmental disabilities); s. 394.4615(1), F.S. (clinical records of
persons subject to “e Baker Act”); and s. 397.501(7), F.S. (individuals receiving services from
substance abuse service providers). And see ss. 397.6760(1), F.S. (petitions for involuntary
assessment and stabilization and related court records led with a court under Part V of Ch.
397, F.S.[substance abuse]); and 394.464(1) (petitions for voluntary and involuntary admission
for mental health treatment, courts orders and related records led with or by a court under
the Baker Act). Cf. s. 381.987, F.S. (patient or caregiver identifying information in the medical
marijuana use registry).
(2) Disclosure of patient records
Patient medical records made by health care practitioners may not be furnished to any
person other than the patient, his or her legal representative or other health care practitioners
and providers involved in the patient’s care and treatment without written authorization, except
as provided by ss. 440.13(4)(c) and 456.057, F.S. Section 456.057(7)(a), F.S. See State v.
Johnson, 814 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2002) (state attorney’s subpoena power under s. 27.04, F.S.,
cannot override notice requirements of s. 395.3025[4][d], F.S., which provides for disclosure of
condential patient records upon issuance of subpoena and upon proper notice to the patient
or the patient’s legal representative). Cf. s. 408.051(3), F.S., permitting a health care provider to
release or access an identiable health record of a patient without the patient’s consent for use
in the treatment of the patient for an emergency medical condition, as dened in s. 395.002(8),
F.S., when the health care provider is unable to obtain the patient’s consent or the consent of
the patient representative due to the patient’s condition or the nature of the situation requiring
immediate medical attention.
e recipient of patient records, if other than the patient or the patient’s representative,
may use such information only for the purpose provided and may not disclose any information
to any other person or entity, unless expressly permitted by the written consent of the patient.
96
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
See ss. 395.3025(7) (hospital patient records) and 456.057(11), F.S. (health care practitioner
patient records). us, predeath medical records in the possession of the medical examiner are
not subject to public inspection. Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-
688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27, 1997), available online in the Cases database at the
open government site at myoridalegal.com.
Similarly, clinical records maintain their condentiality even when disclosed to another
agency such as the clerk of the circuit court. AGO 91-10. And see Sarasota Herald-Tribune v.
Department of Children and Families, No. 2001-CA-002445 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. April 8, 2002),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(condentiality of clinical record is maintained even though Department of Children and
Families may have led portions of the records in court proceedings throughout the state;
department has no authority to waive condentiality of clinical records). Cf. AGO 01-69
(documents submitted to the statewide provider and managed care organization claim dispute
resolution program pursuant to s. 408.7057, F.S., found to be subject to disclosure after
redaction of patient-identifying information).
d. Emergency medical services
With limited exceptions, s. 401.30(4), F.S., provides, in relevant part, that “[r]ecords of
emergency calls which contain patient examination or treatment information are condential
and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) and may not be disclosed without the consent of
the person to whom they pertain.” Such records may be released only in certain circumstances
and only to the persons and entities specied in the statute. AGO 86-97. us, a city
commissioner is not authorized to review records of an emergency call by the city’s re-rescue
department when those records contain patient examination and treatment information, except
with the consent of the patient. AGO 04-09. See Lee County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile
Insurance Company, 634 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), upholding the county’s right to require
the patient’s notarized signature on all release forms, to ensure that these condential records
are not improperly released. And see AGO 09-30 (entire record of emergency call containing
patient examination and treatment information which is maintained as required by s. 401.30[1],
F.S., is condential and exempt; reports containing statistical data, required by the Department
of Health, are public records and must be made available for inspection and copying following
redaction of any patient-identifying information).
However, s. 401.30(4), is not violated by the city attorney, or an attorney under contract
to the city, and other city ocials having access to the city re-rescue department’s records of
emergency calls that contain patient information when such access is granted to such individuals
in carrying out their ocial duties to advise and defend, or assess the liability of, the city in a
possible or anticipated claim against the city arising out of the provision of such care. AGO 95-
75. And see AGO 08-20 (s. 401.30[4], F.S., permits emergency medical services transportation
licensee to release records of emergency calls including patient’s name, address, and pertinent
medical information to local law enforcement agency that does not provide regulatory or
supervisory responsibility over licensee).
e. Hospital employees
Section 395.3025(10), F.S., establishes that the home addresses, telephone numbers, and
photographs of hospital or surgical center employees who provide direct patient care or security
services, as well as specied information about the spouses and children of such employees, are
condential and exempt from disclosure requirements. e same information must also be held
condential by the facility upon written request by other employees who have a reasonable belief,
based upon specic circumstances that have been reported in accordance with the procedure
adopted by the facility, that release of the information may be used to threaten, intimidate,
harass, inict violence upon, or defraud the employee or any member of the employee’s family.
Section 395.3025(11), F.S.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
97
14. Investigative records of non-law enforcement agencies
a. Investigative records generally
In the absence of a specic legislative exemption, investigative records made or received by
public agencies are open to public inspection pursuant to Ch. 119, F.S. See State ex rel. Veale v. City
of Boca Raton, 353 So.2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 360 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1978)
(report prepared by assistant city attorney for the city council concerning suspected irregularities
in the city’s building department is a public record). See also Caswell v. Manhattan Fire and Marine
Insurance Company, 399 F.2d 417 (5th Cir. 1968) (ordering that certain investigative records of
the state insurance agency be produced for inspection under Ch. 119, F.S.). Accord AGO 91-75
(documents containing information compiled by school board employees during an investigation
of school district departments are open to inspection in the absence of statutory exemption);
AGO 85-79 (interoce memoranda, correspondence, inspection reports of restaurants, grocery
stores and other such public premises, nuisance complaint records, and notices of violation of
public health laws maintained by county public health units are subject to disclosure in the
absence of any statutory exemption); and AGO 71-243 (inspection reports made or received by a
school board in connection with its ocial investigation of the collapse of a school roof constitute
public records). Cf. Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla.
1973) (Sunshine Law applies to boards acting in a “quasi-judicial” capacity).
Disclosure of records of investigative proceedings upon completion of a preliminary
investigation is not violative of privacy rights arising under the state or federal Constitutions.
See Garner v. Florida Commission on Ethics, 415 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), review denied,
424 So. 2d 761 (Fla. 1983) (public’s right to view commission les prepared in connection with
investigation of alleged violations of the Code of Ethics outweighs an individual’s disclosural
privacy rights).
e investigative exemptions now found in paragraphs (2)(c) through (f), (h) and (i) of s.
119.071(2), F.S., limit disclosure of specied law enforcement records, and thus do not apply to
investigations conducted by agencies outside the criminal justice system. See Douglas v. Michel,
410 So. 2d 936, 939 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), questions answered and approved, 464 So. 2d 545
(Fla. 1985) (exemption for “information revealing surveillance techniques or procedures or
personnel” [now found at s. 119.071(2)(d)] does not apply to a hospital’s personnel les). See
also AGO 91-75, stating that the active criminal investigation and intelligence exemption does
not apply to information compiled in a school board investigation into the conduct of certain
school departments; and AGO 87-51, concluding that complaints from state labor department
employees relating to departmental integrity and eciency do not constitute criminal intelligence
information or criminal investigative information.
us, the contents of an investigative report compiled by the Inspector General for a state
agency in carrying out his or her duty to determine program compliance are not converted into
criminal intelligence information merely because the Florida Department of Law Enforcement
also conducts an investigation or because such report or a copy thereof has been transferred to the
department. Inf. Op. to Slye, August 5, 1993.
b. Statutory exemptions
A number of exemptions exist for investigative records. For a more complete listing, please
refer to Appendix D and the Index.
(1) Discrimination investigations
Complaints and other records in the custody of any agency which relate to a complaint of
discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, handicap, or marital status
in connection with hiring practices, position classications, salary, benets, discipline, discharge,
employee performance evaluation, or related activities are exempt from 119.07(1), F.S., until a
probable cause nding is made, the investigation becomes inactive, or the complaint or other
98
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
record is made part of the record of a hearing or court proceeding. Section 119.071(2)(g)1., F.S.
See AGO 96-93 (prior to completion of an investigation and a nding of probable cause, records
of a county equal opportunity board are exempt from disclosure). Cf. s. 119.071(2)(k), F.S.,
providing for condentiality of complaints and investigative records of employee misconduct
until the investigation is no longer active or has been concluded as set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(g)1., F.S., was found to be inapplicable to a complaint led against
a county commissioner which listed many examples of alleged abusive behavior that would be
inappropriate for one in the commissioner’s position, because the complaint did not assert any
form of discrimination based upon race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap or marital
status. Schweickert v. Citrus County Florida Board, 193 So. 3d 1075, 1080 (Fla. 5th DCA
2016). e appellate court also rejected the county’s argument that it could delay producing
the complaint until after the investigation was completed because the investigator might have
discovered or generated records during her investigation that could have related to discrimination
based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap or marital status which would have
qualied for the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(g)2., F.S., provides that when the alleged victim chooses not to le
a complaint and requests that the records of the complaint remain condential, all records
relating to an allegation of employment discrimination are condential. But see AGO 09-
10, stating that when an agency has reached a settlement with an individual who has led a
discrimination complaint, the claimant is considered to have pursued the claim and may not
request condentiality pursuant to the exemption.
Complaints and other records in the custody of any unit of local government which
relate to a complaint of discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age,
handicap, marital status, sale or rental of housing, the provision of brokerage services, or the
nancing of housing, are exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., until a probable cause nding is made,
the investigation becomes inactive, or the complaint or other record is made part of the record of
any hearing or court proceeding. Section 119.0713(1), F.S.
Personal identifying information of the alleged victim in an allegation of sexual harassment
or the victim of sexual harassment is condential and exempt if such information identies
that person as an alleged victim or as a victim of sexual harassment. Condentiality may be
waived in writing by the alleged victim or the victim. e information may be disclosed to
another governmental entity in the furtherance of its ocial duties and responsibilities. Section
119.071(2)(n), F.S. C F. s. 284.45, F.S.
(2) Employee misconduct investigations
For information about the exemption for complaints and active investigations of employee
misconduct contained in s. 119.071(2)(k), F.S., please refer to the discussion on page 135.
(3) Ethics investigations
e complaint and records relating to the preliminary investigation conducted by the
Commission on Ethics or other specied entities are condential and exempt until the complaint
is dismissed as legally insucient, the alleged violator requests in writing that the records be made
public, or until the Commission or other listed entity determines whether probable cause exists to
believe that a violation has occurred. Section 112.324(2)(a) and (e), F.S. See also s. 112.3215(8)
(b) and (d), F.S. (providing condentiality for certain records relating to Ethics Commission
investigation of alleged violations of lobbying laws).
However, a police report of an investigation of a public employee that has been concluded
and is in the possession of the police department is not made condential by the fact that the
same issue and the same individual are the subject of an ethics complaint pursuant to Part III,
Ch. 112, F.S., or because a copy of the police report may be included in information obtained
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
99
by the Ethics Commission pursuant to its powers to investigate ethics complaints. AGO 96-05.
And see Gay v. City of Madeira Beach, No. 16-004836 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. May 26, 2017), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (city must permit
inspection and copying of complaints led with the Ethics Commission and received by the
City Attorney). Cf. s. 112.324(2)(b), F.S. (written referrals to the Ethics Commission submitted
pursuant to s. 112.324[1][b], F.S., records relating to such referrals held by the commission, the
Governor, the Department of Law Enforcement, or a state attorney, and records relating to any
preliminary investigation of such referrals held by the commission, are condential and exempt
except as provided in s. 112.324[2][e], F.S.)
(4) Local government inspector general investigations
e investigative report of the inspector general prepared for or on behalf of a unit of local
government becomes a public record when the investigation becomes nal. Section 119.0713(2)
(b), F.S. An investigation becomes nal when the investigative report is presented to the unit
of local government, as dened in the exemption. Id. Cf. Nicolai v. Baldwin, 715 So. 2d 1161,
1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), noting that a draft audit report prepared by the clerk of court did not
become “nal” when it was reviewed by the county administrator; the report became “nal” and
subject to disclosure when presented to the county commission. Information received, produced,
or derived from an investigation is condential and exempt until the investigation is complete or
when the investigation is no longer active, as dened in the exemption. Id.
(5) State inspector general investigations
Audit workpapers and reports of state agency inspectors general appointed in accordance
with s. 20.055, F.S., are public records to the extent that they do not include information which
has been made condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. Section 20.055(6)(b), F.S.
However, when the inspector general or a member of the sta receives from an individual a
complaint or information that falls within the denition provided in s. 112.3187(5), F.S. [whistle-
blower], the name or identity of the individual shall not be disclosed to anyone else without the
written consent of the individual, unless the inspector general determines that such disclosure is
unavoidable during the course of the audit or investigation. Id. And see page 135, discussing the
exemption for complaints alleging employee misconduct found in s. 119.071(2)(k), F.S.
Section 112.31901(2), F.S., authorizes the Governor, in the case of the Chief Inspector
General, or agency head, in the case of an employee designated as the agency inspector general
under s. 112.3189, F.S., to certify that an investigatory record of the Chief Inspector General
or an agency inspector general requires an exemption in order to protect the integrity of the
investigation or avoid unwarranted damage to an individual’s good name or reputation. If so
certied, the investigatory records are exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., until the investigation
ceases to be active, or a report detailing the investigation is provided to the Governor or the
agency head, or 60 days from the inception of the investigation for which the record was made
or received, whichever rst occurs. Section 112.31901(1), F.S. e provisions of this section do
not apply to whistle-blower investigations conducted pursuant to the whistle-blower act. Section
112.31901(3), F.S.
(6) State licensing investigations
Pursuant to s. 455.225(10), F.S., complaints against a licensed professional led with the
state licensing board or the Department of Business and Professional Regulation are condential
and exempt from disclosure until 10 days after probable cause has been found to exist by the
probable cause panel of the licensing board or by the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation, or the professional waives his or her privilege of condentiality, whichever occurs
rst. A similar exemption applies to complaints and investigations conducted by the Department
of Health and licensing boards within that department as provided in s. 456.073(10), F.S. See
Salameh v. Florida Department of Health, 325 So. 3d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (pursuant to s.
456.073[10], records of administrative complaint made public after probable cause panel found
100
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
probable cause but failed to consider Dr. Salameh’s exculpatory materials as required by statute,
could not be maintained as condential even though panel subsequently reconsidered the case,
reviewed Salameh’s submission, found no probable cause and withdrew the complaint).
Complaints led by a municipality against a licensed professional are included within the
condentiality provisions. AGO 02-57. However, while the complaint led by the municipality
with the state licensing agency is exempt, the exemption aorded by the statute does not extend
to other records held by the city related to the nature of the alleged oense by the licensed
professional. Id.
(7) Whistle-blower investigations
(a) Whistle-blower identity
e Whistle-blower’s Act, ss. 112.3187-112.31895, F.S., “is intended to prevent agencies,
or independent contractors of agencies, from taking retaliatory action against an employee who
reports violations of law on the part of a public employer or an independent contractor.” AGO 12-
20. It provides, with limited exceptions, for the condentiality of the identity of a whistle-blower
who discloses in good faith to the Chief Inspector General, an agency inspector general, a local
chief executive ocer, or other appropriate local ocial information that alleges that an employee
or agent of an agency or independent contractor has violated or is suspected of having violated
any federal, state, or local law, rule or regulation, thereby creating and presenting a substantial and
specic danger to the public’s health, safety, or welfare; or has committed or is suspected of having
committed an act of gross mismanagement, malfeasance, misfeasance, gross waste of public funds,
or gross neglect of duty. Section 112.3188(1), F.S. See also s. 20.055(6)(b), F.S.
A complainant may waive the right to condential treatment of his or her name or identity.
AGO 95-20. However, an individual may not be required to sign a waiver of condentiality as a
condition of processing a complaint. AGO 96-40.
In order to qualify as a whistle-blower complaint, particular information must be disclosed
to an “appropriate local ocial” or other statutorily designated ocials; a general complaint of
wrongdoing or a complaint to ocials other than those specically named in s. 112.3188(1),
F.S., does not entitle the complainant to whistle-blower protection. AGO 98-37. And see AGO
99-07 (county inspector general qualies as an “appropriate local ocial” for purposes of the
whistle-blower law); and AGO 96-40 (town ethics commission may constitute “appropriate local
ocial” for purposes of processing complaints under the whistle-blower law). Cf. AGO 12-20
(while county transportation board may be designated as an “appropriate local ocial” under s.
112.3188, F.S., such designation “may not be advisable” because board must comply with the
Sunshine Law and, “[a]bsent a statutory exemption, the handling of condential information or
records during the course of public meetings does not otherwise allow meetings of the board to
be closed”).
(b) Active investigations
Section 112.3188(2)(a), F.S., states that except as specically authorized in s. 112.3189,
F.S., all information received by the Chief Inspector General or an agency inspector general or
information produced or derived from fact-nding or other investigations conducted by the
Florida Commission on Human Relations or the Department of Law Enforcement is condential
and exempt if the information is being received or derived from allegations as set forth in s.
112.3188(1)(a) or (b), F.S., and an investigation is “active” as dened s. 112.3188(2)(c), F.S.
“us, the act protects the identity of employees and persons who disclose information that can
serve as the basis for a whistle-blower complaint, as well as information received in the course of
a whistle-blower investigation.” AGO 10-48.
Information received by an appropriate local ocial or local chief executive ocer
or produced or derived from fact-nding or investigations by local government pursuant to
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
101
s. 112.3187(8)(b), F.S. [authorizing administrative procedures for handling whistle-blower
complaints led by local public employees] is condential and exempt, provided that the
information is being received or derived from allegations set forth in s. 112.3188(1) and an
investigation is “active” as dened in the section. Section 112.3188(2)(b), F.S. A complaint
initiating an investigation into alleged mismanagement and overpayment of contractors
constitutes “information received by” a proper local ocial and is not subject to disclosure until
the investigation is no longer active. McLendon v. Palm Beach County Oce of Inspector General,
286 So. 3d 375 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). See also s. 119.071(2)(k), F.S., providing that complaints
alleging “employee misconduct” are condential until the investigation is no longer active or has
concluded as provided in the exemption.
e exemption applies whether the allegations of wrongdoing were received from an
anonymous source or a named individual; in either case information received or generated during
the course of the investigation is subject to the exemption. AGO 99-07. And see AGO 10-48
(condential information received by the county’s inspector general pursuant to the county’s
whistle-blower act may be shared with the county’s ethics commission only for the purpose of
carrying out the commission’s whistle-blower functions).
15. Law enforcement records
a. Arrest and crime reports and the exemption for active criminal investigative and active
criminal intelligence information
(1) Arrest and crime reports
Arrest and crime reports are generally considered to be open to public inspection. AGOs
91-74 and 80-96. And see AGO 08-23 (ocer trip sheets revealing identity of ocer, location and
hours of work and locations to which ocers have responded for emergency and non-emergency
purposes are public records); and AGO 12-07, discussing requirements for recording telephone
conversations set forth in Ch. 934, F.S., Florida’s Security of Communications law, but noting
that “any recordings of telephone conversations made by [a police department] in the usual course
of business would be public records,” subject to the access and condentiality provisions of the
Public Records Act. Cf. s. 901.43(1), F.S., prohibiting a person or entity engaged in publishing
or disseminating arrest booking photographs through a publicly accessible print or electronic
medium from soliciting or accepting a fee or other payment to remove the photographs.
However, statutory exemptions for active criminal investigative and intelligence
information, confessions, juvenile oender records and certain victim information may apply to
crime reports and other law enforcement records. A discussion of these and other exemptions
pertaining to law enforcement records follows; for additional information regarding exemptions,
please refer to Appendix D and the Index, infra.
(2) Purpose and scope of exemption
Section 119.071(2)(c)1., F.S., exempts active criminal intelligence information and active
criminal investigative information from public inspection. To be exempt, the information
must be both “active” and constitute either “criminal investigative” or “criminal intelligence”
information. See Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765, 768 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), review denied,
786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2001).
us, if a crime report contains active criminal investigative information, the criminal
investigative information may be excised from the report. AGO 91-74. See also Palm Beach Daily
News v. Terlizzese, No. CL-91-3954-AF (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. April 5, 1991), available online in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, holding that a newspaper
was not entitled under Ch. 119, F.S., to inspect the complete and unredacted incident report
(prepared following a reported sexual battery but prior to the arrest of a suspect), including the
investigating ocer’s narrative report of the interview with the victim, since such information
was exempt from inspection as active criminal investigative information and as information
102
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
identifying sexual battery victims. See s. 119.071(2)(c) and (h), F.S. See also the discussion on
Marsy’s Law on page 121.
e active criminal investigative and intelligence exemption is limited in scope; its purpose
is to prevent premature disclosure of information when such disclosure could impede an ongoing
investigation or allow a suspect to avoid apprehension or escape detection. See Tribune Company v.
Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480, 483 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune
Company, 503 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987). And see Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce v. Sun-Sentinel
Co., LLC, 226 So. 3d 969, 973 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), noting that the exemption furthers “the
critical importance” of preserving the condentiality of police records compiled during an ongoing
investigation being conducted in good faith by criminal justice agencies.
Moreover, the active criminal investigative and intelligence information exemption does
not prohibit the disclosure of the information by the criminal justice agency; the information
is exempt from and not subject to the mandatory inspection requirements in s. 119.07(1), F.S.,
which would otherwise apply. As the court stated in Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d
683, 687 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991), “[t]here are many situations
in which investigators have reasons for displaying information which they have the option not to
display.” And see AGO 90-50. Cf. s. 838.21, F.S., providing that it is unlawful for a public servant,
with intent to obstruct, impede, or prevent a criminal investigation or a criminal prosecution, to
disclose active criminal investigative or intelligence information or to disclose or use information
regarding either the eorts to secure or the issuance of a warrant, subpoena, or other court process
or court order relating to a criminal investigation or criminal prosecution when such information
is not available to the general public and is gained by reason of the public servant’s ocial position.
e law enforcement agency asserting the exemption has the burden of proving that it is
entitled to it. Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri ‘s Oce, 698 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997);
and Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
(3) Denition of active criminal investigative or intelligence information
“Criminal intelligence information” means information concerning “an identiable person
or group of persons collected by a criminal justice agency in an eort to anticipate, prevent, or
monitor possible criminal activity.” Section 119.011(3)(a), F.S.
Criminal intelligence information is considered “active” as long “as it is related to intelligence
gathering conducted with a reasonable, good faith belief that it will lead to detection of ongoing
or reasonably anticipated criminal activities” or “is directly related to pending prosecutions or
appeals.” Section 119.011(3)(d), F.S.
“Criminal investigative information” is dened as information relating to “an identiable
person or group of persons compiled by a criminal justice agency in the course of conducting a
criminal investigation of a specic act or omission, including, but not limited to, information
derived from laboratory tests, reports of investigators or informants, or any type of surveillance.”
Section 119.011(3)(b), F.S. See Rose v. D’Alessandro, 380 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1980) (complaints and
adavits received by a state attorney in the discharge of his investigatory duties constitute criminal
intelligence or criminal investigative information). Similarly, an autopsy report may constitute
criminal investigative information. See AGO 78-23.
Such information is considered “active” as long “as it is related to an ongoing investigation
which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution
in the foreseeable future” or “is directly related to pending prosecutions or appeals.” Section
119.011(3)(d), F.S.
“Criminal justice agency” is dened to mean any law enforcement agency, court, prosecutor
or any other agency charged by law with criminal law enforcement duties or any agency having
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
103
custody of criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information for the purpose
of assisting such law enforcement agencies in the conduct of active criminal investigation or
prosecution or for the purpose of litigating civil actions under the Racketeer Inuenced and
Corrupt Organization Act, during the time that such agencies are in possession of criminal
intelligence information or criminal investigative information pursuant to their criminal law
enforcement duties. e term also includes the Department of Corrections. Section 119.011(4),
F.S.
(4) Information that is not considered to be criminal investigative or intelligence
information and must be released unless some other exemption applies
Section 119.011(3)(c), F.S., states that the following information is not criminal
investigative or criminal intelligence information:
1. e time, date, location and nature of a reported crime;
2. e name, sex, age, and address of a person arrested (but see pages 114-117 regarding
condentiality of certain juvenile crime records) or the name, sex, age and address of the
victim of a crime, except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h) or (o). F.S. Section 119.071(2)
(h), F.S., provides condentiality for information revealing the identity of a victim of a
sexual oense, child abuse, or a child victim of human tracking. Section 119.071(2)(o),
F.S., provides that the address of a victim of an incident of mass violence is exempt. For
more information, please refer to the discussion of exemptions pertaining to certain crime
victims found on pages 122-124 (child abuse and sexual oense victims) and page 125
(homicide victims). For information on the constitutional amendment known as Marsy’s
Law, please see the discussion on page 121;
3. e time, date and location of the incident and of the arrest;
4. e crime charged;
5. Documents given or required to be given to the person arrested, except as provided in s.
119.071(2)(h) or (m), F.S., unless the court nds that release of the information prior to
trial would be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or jeopardize the safety
of such victim or witness; and would impair the ability of the state attorney to locate or
prosecute a codefendant;
6. Informations and indictments except as provided in s. 905.26, F.S. [prohibiting disclosure
of nding of indictment against a person not in custody, under recognizance or under
arrest].
Accordingly, since the above information does not fall within the denition of criminal
intelligence or criminal investigative information, it is always subject to disclosure unless some
other specic exemption applies. For example, the “time, date, and location of the incident and
of the arrest” cannot be withheld from disclosure since such information is expressly exempted
from the denitions of criminal intelligence and criminal investigative information. See s.
119.011(3)(c)3., F.S. See also Bareld v. City of Tallahassee, 171 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
(while “active criminal investigative information” is exempt from public disclosure requirements,
the statute expressly excludes the time, date, location, and nature of a reported crime from the
exemption).
(5) Records released to the defendant
Except in limited circumstances, records which have been given or are required to be
given to the person arrested cannot be withheld from public inspection as criminal investigative
or intelligence information. See s. 119.011(3)(c)5., F.S. In other words, once the material has
been made available to the defendant as part of the discovery process in a criminal proceeding,
the material is ordinarily no longer considered to be exempt criminal investigative or criminal
intelligence information. See, e.g., Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940, 941 (Fla. 1st DCA
1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin, 605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992) (active criminal
investigation exemption does not apply to information for which disclosure was previously
104
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
required under the rules of discovery). Accord Tribune Company v. Public Records, 493 So. 2d 480,
485 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune Company, 503 So. 2d 327
(Fla. 1987) and Times Publishing Company v. State, 903 So. 2d 322, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
Cf. State v. Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 1998) (restricted access documents provided to state
attorney by federal government pursuant to a loan agreement retained their condential status
under a Florida law providing an exemption for out-of-state criminal investigative information
that is shared with Florida criminal justice agencies on a condential basis, even though the
documents erroneously had been given to the defendant and placed in the court record).
For example, in Satz v. Blankenship, 407 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), review denied,
413 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 1982), the court ruled that a newspaper reporter was entitled to access
to tape recordings concerning a defendant in a criminal prosecution where the recordings had
been disclosed to the defendant. e court concluded that a reading of the statute reected the
Legislature’s belief that once the information was released to the defendant, there was no longer
any need to exclude the information from the public. us, the tape recordings were no longer
“criminal investigative information” that could be withheld from public inspection. See also
News-Press Publishing Co. Inc. v. D’Alessandro, No. 96-2743-CA-RWP (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. April 24,
1996), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com
(once state allowed defense counsel to listen to portions of a surveillance audiotape involving
a city councilman accused of soliciting undue compensation, those portions of the audiotape
became excluded from the denition of “criminal investigative information,” and were subject to
public inspection). Cf. City of Miami v. Post-Newsweek Stations Florida, Inc., 837 So. 2d 1002,
1003 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), review dismissed, 863 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2003) (where defendant
led request for discovery, but withdrew request before state attorney provided such materials,
requested materials were not “given or required by law . . . to be given to the person arrested” and
thus did not lose their exempt status as active criminal investigative information).
Similarly, in Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 4th DCA
1985), review denied, 488 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1986), the court upheld a trial judge’s order requiring
the state attorney to release to the news media all information furnished to the defense counsel in
a criminal investigation. While the state attorney argued that the documents could be withheld
because the criminal investigation was still “active” and thus exempt from disclosure, the court
rejected this contention by concluding that once the material was given to the defendant pursuant
to the rules of criminal procedure, the material was excluded from the statutory denition of
criminal investigative information. erefore, it was no longer relevant whether the investigation
was active or not and the documents could not be withheld as active criminal investigative
information. Id. at 779n.1.
Chapter 119’s requirement of public disclosure of records made available to the defendant
does not violate the attorney disciplinary rule prohibiting extrajudicial comments about
defendants as long as the state attorney does not put an interpretation on the record that prejudices
the defendant or exposes witnesses. Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d at 780.
e only circumstances where criminal intelligence or investigative information can retain
that status even though it has been made available to the defendant are:
1) If the information would reveal identifying information of a victim of a sexual oense,
child abuse, or certain human tracking crimes pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(h), F.S.; or
identifying information of a witness to a homicide for a specied period as provided in s.
119.071(2)(m), F.S.; or the address of a victim of an incident of mass violence as provided
in s. 119.071(2)(o), F.S.; or
2) If a court order has been issued nding that release of the information prior to trial would:
a) be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or jeopardize the safety of a
victim or witness; and
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
105
b) impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant.
In all other cases, material which has been made available to the defendant cannot be
deemed criminal investigative or intelligence information and must be open to inspection unless
some other exemption applies (e.g., s. 119.071[2][e], F.S., exempting all information “revealing
the substance of a confession” by a person arrested until there is a nal disposition in the case);
or the court orders closure of the material in accordance with its constitutional authority to
take such measures as are necessary to obtain orderly proceedings and a fair trial or to protect
constitutional privacy rights of third parties. See Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis,
426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982); Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, 520 So. 2d 32 (Fla.
1988); Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992). And see Morris
Communications Company LLC v. State, 844 So. 2d 671, 673n.3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (although
documents turned over to the defendant during discovery are generally public records subject
to disclosure under Ch. 119, the courts have authority to manage pretrial publicity to protect
the defendant’s constitutional rights as described in Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis,
supra); Times Publishing Co. v. State, 903 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (while the criminal
discovery rules authorize a nonparty to le a motion to restrict disclosure of discovery materials
based on privacy considerations, where no such motion has been led, the judge is not authorized
to prevent public access on his or her own initiative). Cf. Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3d 418,
423 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (“disclosure to criminal defendant during discovery of unredacted
versions of undercover police surveillance recordings does not destroy, in a public records
context, the exemptions contained in section 119.071 for information relating to the identity
of undercover law enforcement personnel”). See also the discussion of Marsy’s Law on page 121.
(6) Active versus inactive criminal investigative or intelligence information
(a) Active criminal investigative information
Criminal investigative information is considered active (and, therefore, exempt from
disclosure pursuant to s. 119.071[2][c], F.S.) “as long as it is related to an ongoing investigation
which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution
in the foreseeable future.” Section 119.011(3)(d)2., F.S. Information in cases barred from
prosecution by a statute of limitation is not active. Id.
e denition of “active” requires “a showing in each particular case that an arrest or
prosecution is reasonably anticipated in the foreseeable future.” Bareld v. City of Fort Lauderdale
Police Department 639 So. 2d 1012, 1016 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 649 So. 2d 869 (Fla.
1994). us, “once the investigations are concluded, if no charges are led, the records would
cease to be ‘active’ and thus subject to disclosure.” Id. at 1018.
ere is no xed time limit for naming suspects or making arrests other than the applicable
statute of limitations. See Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128 (Fla.
1st DCA 1985). e fact that investigators might not yet have decided upon a suspect does not
necessarily imply that the investigation is inactive. Id. at 1131. e Legislature did not intend
that condentiality be limited to investigations where the outcome and an arrest or prosecution
was a certainty or even a probability. Bareld v. City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department at
1016-1017.
us, an investigation will be deemed to be “active,” even though there is no immediate
anticipation of an arrest, so long as the investigation is proceeding in good faith, and the state
attorney or grand jury will reach a determination in the foreseeable future. Bareld v. City of Fort
Lauderdale Police Department, supra. Accordingly, a police department’s criminal investigation
into a shooting incident involving its ocers continued to be “active” even though pursuant to
department policy, all police shooting cases were sent to the state attorney’s oce for review by
the grand jury and the department did not know if there would be an arrest in this particular
case. Id.
106
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Similarly, in News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. Sapp, 464 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985),
the court held that in view of an ongoing investigation by the state attorney and the convening
of a grand jury in the very near future to consider a shooting incident by deputy sheris during
an undercover drug transaction, documents consisting of the sheri’s completed internal
investigation of the incident constituted “active criminal investigative information” and were,
therefore, exempt from disclosure. See also Wells v. Sarasota Herald Tribune Company, Inc., 546 So.
2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (investigative les of the sheri and state attorney were not inactive
where an active prosecution began shortly after the trial judge determined that the investigation
was inactive and ordered that the le be produced for public inspection).
Additionally, a circuit court held that a criminal investigative le involving an alleged
1988 sexual battery which had been inactive for three years, due in part to the death of the
victim from unrelated causes, could be “reactivated” and removed from public view in 1992
when new developments prompted the police to reopen the case. e court found that it was
irrelevant that the 1988 le could have been inspected prior to the current investigation; the
important considerations were that the le apparently had not been viewed by the public during
its “inactive” status and the le was now part of an active criminal investigation and therefore
exempt from disclosure as active criminal investigative information. News-Press Publishing Co.,
Inc. v. McDougall, No. 92-1193CA-WCM (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. February 26, 1992), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com.
In another case, however, the appellate court upheld a court order unsealing an arrest
warrant adavit upon a showing of good cause by the subject of the adavit. e adavit
had been quashed and no formal charges were led against the subject. e court held that
the adavit did not constitute active criminal investigative information because there was no
reasonable, good faith anticipation that the subject would be arrested or prosecuted in the near
future. In addition, most of the information was already available to the subject through grand
jury transcripts, the subject’s perjury trial, or by discovery. Metropolitan Dade County v. San
Pedro, 632 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). And see Mobile Press Register, Inc. v. Witt, No. 95-
06324 CACE (13) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. May 21, 1996), available online in the Cases database at
the open government site at myoridalegal.com in which the judge ordered that les in a 1981
unsolved murder be opened to the public because, despite recent reactivation of the investigation,
the case had been dormant for many years and no arrest or prosecution had been initiated or was
imminent.
(b) Active criminal intelligence information
In order to constitute exempt “active” criminal intelligence information, the information
must “be of the type that will lead to the ‘detection of ongoing or reasonably anticipated criminal
activities.’” Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 698 So. 2d 1365, 1367 (Fla. 4th DCA
1997), quoting s. 119.011(3)(d)1., F.S. See Bareld v. Orange County, Florida, No. CI92-5913
(Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. August 4, 1992), available online in the Cases database at the open government
site at myoridalegal.com (denying a petition for writ of mandamus seeking access to gang
intelligence les compiled by the sheri’s oce). See also AGO 94-48 (information contained in
the statewide integrated violent crime information system established by the Florida Department
of Law Enforcement constitutes active criminal intelligence information; even though some
of the information may have come from closed investigations, the information is collected
to “anticipate, prevent, and monitor criminal activity and to assist in the conduct of ongoing
criminal investigations”).
By contrast, in Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, supra, the court ruled that
records generated in connection with a criminal investigation conducted 13 years earlier did not
constitute “active” criminal intelligence information. e court noted that the exemption “is not
intended to prevent disclosure of criminal les forever on the mere possibility that other potential
criminal defendants may learn something from the les.” Id.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
107
(c) Pending prosecutions or appeals
Criminal intelligence and investigative information is also considered to be “active” while
such information is directly related to pending prosecutions or direct appeals. Section 119.011(3)
(d), F.S. See News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. Sapp, supra; and Tal-Mason v. Satz, 614 So. 2d 1134
(Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 624 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1993) (contents of prosecutorial case le
must remain secret until the conclusion of defendant’s direct appeal).
Once the conviction and sentence have become nal, criminal investigative information
can no longer be considered to be “active.” See State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d 324, 326 (Fla. 1990)
and Osario v. State, 34 So. 3d 98 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2010). Accord Tribune Company v. Public
Records, 493 So. 2d 480, 483-484 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune
Company, 503 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987) (actions for postconviction relief following armance of
the conviction on direct appeal are not pending appeals for purposes of s. 119.011[3][d]2., F.S.
See also Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 698 So. 2d 1365, 1367 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
(the term “pending prosecutions or appeals” in s. 119.011[3][d], F.S., applies only to ongoing
prosecutions or appeals which have not yet become nal).
Moreover, the determination as to whether investigatory records related to pending
prosecutions or appeals are “active” is relevant only to those records which constitute criminal
intelligence or investigative information. In other words, if records are excluded from the
denition of criminal intelligence or investigative information, as in the case of records given
or required to be given to the defendant under s. 119.011(3)(c)5., F.S., it is immaterial whether
the investigation is active or inactive. See Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d
775, 779n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1986) (“Something that
is not criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information cannot be active
criminal intelligence information or active criminal investigative information.”). Accord Staton
v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940, 941 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v.
Austin, 605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992) (active criminal investigation exemption does not apply to
information for which disclosure was previously required under discovery rules even though there
is a pending direct appeal).
(7) Criminal defendant’s public records request
Section 119.07(8), F.S., states that the public access rights set forth in s. 119.07, F.S.,
“are not intended to expand or limit the provisions of Rule 3.220, Florida Rules of Criminal
Procedure, regarding the right and extent of discovery by the state or by a defendant in a criminal
prosecution or in collateral postconviction proceedings.” us, a criminal defendant’s public
records request for nonexempt law enforcement records relating to the defendant’s pending
prosecution constitutes an election to participate in discovery and triggers a reciprocal discovery
obligation. Henderson v. State, 745 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1999).
(8) Disclosure of active criminal investigative information to the public
It has been held that the criminal investigative exemption does not apply if the information
has already been made public. Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940, 941 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992),
review dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin, 605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992). See also Downs v. Austin,
522 So. 2d 931, 935 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (once state has gone public with information which
could have been previously protected from disclosure under Public Records Act exemptions,
no further purpose is served by preventing full access to the desired information). Cf. State v.
Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714, 717 (Fla. 1998) (condential documents furnished to a state attorney
by the federal government remained exempt from public inspection even though the documents
inadvertently had been given to the defendant and placed in the court record in violation of the
conditions of the federal loan agreement).
However, the voluntary disclosure of a non-public record does not automatically waive
the exempt status of other documents. Arbelaez v. State, 775 So. 2d 909, 918 (Fla. 2000).
108
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Accord Church of Scientology Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir.
Ct. February 27, 1997), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (release of the autopsy report and the medical examiner’s public comments
about the report did not mean that other records in the possession of the medical examiner
relating to an active criminal investigation into the death were public; “[i]t is not unusual for
law enforcement and criminal investigatory agencies to selectively release information relating to
an ongoing criminal investigation in an eort to enlist public participation in solving a crime”).
(9) Disclosure of active criminal investigative information to another criminal justice
agency
Exempt active criminal investigative information may be shared with another criminal justice
agency and retain its protected status; in “determining whether or not to compel disclosure of
active criminal investigative or intelligence information, the primary focus must be on the statutory
classication of the information sought rather than upon in whose hands the information rests.” City of
Riviera Beach v. Bareld, 642 So. 2d 1135, 1137 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192
(Fla. 1995). e City of Riviera Beach court held that exempt records of the West Palm Beach police
department’s active criminal investigation concerning a shooting incident involving a police ocer
from Riviera Beach could be furnished to the Riviera Beach police department for use in a simultaneous
administrative internal aairs investigation of the ocer without losing their exempt status. Accord
Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203, 206 (Fla. 1998) (applicability of a particular exemption is determined
by the document being withheld, not by the identity of the agency possessing the record).
Additionally, a police department may enter into a contract with a private company that
compiles raw police data and then provides informational reports to law enforcement. e release
of the exempt information to the corporation for this purpose would not cause such records to
lose their exempt status. AGO 96-36.
However, while the courts have recognized that active criminal investigative information
may be forwarded from one criminal justice agency to another without jeopardizing its exempt
status, “[t]here is no statutory exemption from disclosure of an ‘ongoing federal prosecution.’”
Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765, 768 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), review denied, 786 So. 2d 1186
(Fla. 2001). In Woolling, the court held that a state attorney bore the burden of establishing
that state attorney les in a nolle prossed case which were furnished to the federal government for
prosecution of a defendant constituted active criminal investigative information; the fact that the
federal government was actively prosecuting the case was not sucient, standing alone, to justify
imposition of the exemption.
Moreover, the exemption for active criminal intelligence and investigative information
does not exempt other public records from disclosure simply because they are transferred to a
law enforcement agency. See, e.g., Tribune Company v. Cannella, 438 So. 2d 516, 523 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1983), reversed on other grounds, 458 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom.,
Deperte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985) (assistant state attorney could not withdraw
public records from public scrutiny by asserting that he “compiled” the records simply because
he subpoenaed them; thus, law enforcement personnel records compiled and maintained by the
employing agency prior to a criminal investigation did not constitute criminal intelligence or
criminal investigative information); and State Attorney’s Oce of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit
v. Cable News Network, Inc., 251 So. 3d 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (surveillance video footage
created by a school district before a criminal investigation began did not constitute “criminal
investigative information” within the meaning of s. 119.011[3]b] because it was not compiled
by a criminal justice agency in the course of conducting a criminal investigation). And see New
Times, Inc. v. Ross, No. 92-5795 CIV 25 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. March 17, 1992), available online
in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (papers in a closed civil
forfeiture le which subsequently became part of a criminal investigation were open to inspection
as the materials could not be considered criminal investigative information because the le was
closed prior to the commencement of the criminal investigation).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
109
us, public records maintained and compiled by the Oce of the Capital Collateral
Representative cannot be transformed into active criminal investigative information by merely
transferring the records to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). AGO 88-25.
Accord Inf. Op. to Slye, August 5, 1993, concluding that the contents of an investigative report
compiled by a state agency inspector general in carrying out his or her duty to determine program
compliance are not converted into criminal intelligence information merely because FDLE also
conducts an investigation or because such report or a copy thereof has been transferred to that
department. And see Sun-Sentinel, Inc. v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 815 So. 2d
793 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
Similarly, in AGO 92-78, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that otherwise disclosable
public records of a housing authority are not removed from public scrutiny merely because the
records have been subpoenaed by and transferred to the state attorney’s oce. Inf. Op. to eobald,
November 16, 2006, stating that while an individual would be prohibited from obtaining records
from the internal investigation le pursuant to s. 112.533(2), F.S., while the investigation is active,
public records such as overtime slips created prior to the investigation and maintained in the law
enforcement ocer’s personnel le would not become condential simply because copies of such
records are being used in the investigation.
However, the exemption for active criminal investigative information may not be subverted
by making a public records request for all public records gathered by a law enforcement agency in
the course of an ongoing investigation; to permit such requests would negate the purpose of the
exemption. AGO 01-75.
In addition, a request made by a law enforcement agency to inspect or copy a public record
that is in the custody of another agency and the custodian’s response to the request, and any
information that would identify whether a law enforcement agency has requested or received that
public record are exempt from disclosure requirements, during the period in which the information
constitutes active criminal investigative or intelligence information. Section 119.071(2)(c)2.a.,
F.S. e law enforcement agency that made the request must give notice to the custodial agency
when the criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information is no longer
active, so that the custodian’s response to the request and information that would identify the
public record requested are available to the public. Section 119.071(2)(c)2.b., F.S.
us, while agency records are not exempt merely because they have been submitted to
FDLE, s. 119.071(2)(c)2.a., F.S., exempts FDLE’s request to inspect or copy records, as well as the
agency’s response, or any information that would identify the public record that was requested by
FDLE or provided by the agency during the period in which the information constitutes criminal
intelligence or criminal investigative information that is active. AGO 06-04. Although a request
may be made for the agency’s records, such a request may not be phrased, or responded to, in terms
of a request for the specic documents asked for and received by FDLE during the course of any
active criminal investigation. Id. Cf. Inf. Op. to eobald, November 16, 2006, stating that while
the records in a personnel department were subject to disclosure, the personnel department was
precluded from identifying which of its records had been gathered by a law enforcement agency in
the course of its active internal investigation.
(10) Records containing both active criminal investigative information and non-exempt
information
e fact that a crime or incident report may contain some active criminal investigative
or intelligence information does not mean that the entire report is exempt from disclosure.
Section 119.07(1)(d), F.S., requires the custodian of the document to redact only that portion
of the record for which an exemption is asserted and to provide the remainder of the record for
inspection and copying. See, e.g., City of Riviera Beach v. Bareld, 642 So. 2d 1135, 1137 (Fla.
4th DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1995), in which the court held that a city
was authorized to withhold exempt active criminal investigative records but “must comply with
110
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
the disclosure requirements of sections 119.07(2) [now s. 119.07(1)(d)] and 119.011(3)(c) by
making partial disclosure of certain non-exempt information contained in the records including,
inter alia, the date, time and location of the incident.”
(11) Criminal investigative or intelligence information received from other states or the
federal government
Pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(b), F.S., criminal intelligence or investigative information
received by a Florida criminal justice agency from a non-Florida criminal justice agency on a
condential or similarly restricted basis is exempt from disclosure. See State v. Wright, 803 So.
2d 793 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2002) (state not required
to disclose criminal histories of civilian witnesses which it obtained from the Federal Bureau
of Investigation). e purpose of this statute is to “encourage cooperation between non-state
and state criminal justice agencies.” State v. Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714, 717 (Fla. 1998). us,
condential documents furnished to a state attorney by the federal government remained exempt
from public inspection even though the documents inadvertently had been given to the defendant
and placed in the court record in violation of the conditions of the federal loan agreement. Id.
(12) Criminal investigative or intelligence information received prior to January 25, 1979
Criminal intelligence or investigative information obtained by a criminal justice agency
prior to January 25, 1979, is exempt from disclosure. Section 119.071(2)(a), F.S. See Satz v. Gore
Newspapers Company, 395 So. 2d 1274, 1275 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (“All criminal intelligence
and criminal investigative information received by a criminal justice agency prior to January 25,
1979, is specically exempt from the requirements of public disclosure.”).
b. “Baker Act” reports prepared by law enforcement ocers
Part I, Ch. 394, F.S., is the “Baker Act,” Florida’s mental health act. e Baker Act provides
for the voluntary or involuntary examination and treatment of mentally ill persons. Pursuant to
s. 394.463(2)(a)2., F.S., a law enforcement ocer must take a person who appears to meet the
statutory criteria for involuntary examination into custody and deliver that person, or have that
person delivered, to the nearest receiving facility for examination.
Section 394.463(2)(a)2., F.S., requires the ocer to “execute a written report detailing the
circumstances under which the person was taken into custody, and the report shall be made a part
of the patient’s clinical record.” A patient’s clinical record is condential. Section 394.4615(1),
F.S. us, the report prepared by the ocer pursuant to this statute is part of the patient’s clinical
record and is condential. Cf. Lake v. State, 193 So. 3d 932 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (Legislature
has not made records of a sexually violent predator condential in the same way as the clinical
records of a Baker Act patient).
However, in AGO 93-51, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that a separate written
incident or event report prepared after a specic crime has been committed which contains
information given during the initial reporting of the crime, is led with the law enforcement
agency as a record of that event, and is not made a part of the patient’s clinical record, is not
condential pursuant to Ch. 394, F.S. e opinion noted that the incident report in question
was not the condential law enforcement report required by s. 394.463(2)(a)2., but was a separate
written incident or event report prepared by a deputy sheri for ling with the sheri’s oce as an
independent record of the deputy’s actions. Cf. s. 394.464(1), F.S., providing condentiality for
petitions for voluntary and involuntary admission for mental health treatment, court orders, and
related records that are led with or by a court under the Baker Act and authorizing disclosure to
specied persons and entities.
c. Body camera recordings
A body camera recording is condential and exempt from public disclosure when taken
inside a private residence, inside a health care, mental health care, or social services facility, or in
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
111
a place that a reasonable person would expect to be private. Section 119.071(2)(l)2., F.S. e
term “body camera” is dened to mean a “portable electronic recording device that is worn on a
law enforcement ocer’s body and that records audio and video data in the course of the ocer
performing his or her ocial duties and responsibilities.” Section 119.071(2)(l)1.a., F.S.
A law enforcement agency may disclose the recording in furtherance of its ocial duties
and responsibilities or to another governmental agency in furtherance of that agency’s duties and
responsibilities. Section 119.071(2)(l)3., F.S.
e recording must be disclosed to certain individuals as set forth in the statute,
including the person recorded, or pursuant to court order. Section 119.071(2)(l)4., F.S. And
see s. 943.1718(2)(d), F.S. However, the exemption does not supersede any other public records
exemption that existed before or is created after the eective date of the exemption. ose
portions of a recording which are protected from disclosure by another public records exemption
shall continue to be exempt or condential and exempt. Section 119.071(2)(l)7., F.S.
A law enforcement agency must retain a body camera recording for at least 90 days.
Section 119.071(2)(l)5., F.S. e exemption applies retroactively. Section 119.071(2)(l)6., F.S.
d. Confessions
Section 119.071(2)(e), F.S., exempts from disclosure any information revealing the
substance of a confession by a person arrested until such time as the case is nally determined by
adjudication, dismissal, or other nal disposition. See Times Publishing Co. v. Patterson, 451 So.
2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (trial court order permitting state attorney or defendant to designate
adavits, depositions or other papers which contained “statements or substance of statements”
to be sealed was overbroad because the order was not limited to those statements revealing the
substance of a “confession”).
In AGO 84-33, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that only such portions of the
complaint and arrest report in a criminal case le which reveal the “substance of a confession,”
i.e., the material parts of a statement made by a person charged with the commission of a crime
in which that person acknowledges guilt of the essential elements of the act or acts constituting
the entire criminal oense, are exempt from public disclosure. And see Times Publishing Company
v. State, 827 So. 2d 1040, 1042 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), (portions of police interview transcript
and tape which did not “directly relate to [the defendant’s] participation in the crimes” did not
contain the substance of a confession pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(e), F.S.).
e. Condential informants
Section 119.071(2)(f), F.S., exempts information disclosing the identity of condential
informants or sources. is exemption applies regardless of whether the informants or sources
are still active or may have, through other sources, been identied as such. Christy v. Palm
Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 698 So. 2d 1365, 1368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Salcines v. Tampa
Television, 454 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); and Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3d 418
(Fla. 5th DCA 2010). And see State v. Natson, 661 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (private
citizen who provided police with tip information which led to defendant’s arrest may be aorded
condential informant status). Cf. Doe v. State, 901 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (where
citizen provided information to state attorney’s oce which led to a criminal investigation and
was justied in inferring or had a reasonable expectation that he would be treated as a condential
source, the citizen is entitled to have his identifying information redacted from the closed le,
even though there was no express assurance of condentiality by the state attorney’s oce); State
v. Bartholomew, No. 08-5656CF10A (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct., August 7, 2009), available online in the
Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (even if Crimestoppers Council
of Broward County were an agency for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S., information relating to the
identity of informants and persons from whom they received information would be condential
under s. 119.071[2][f], F.S.).
112
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
However, in Ocala Star Banner Corporation v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 5th DCA
1994), the court held that a police department should not have refused to release an entire police
report on the ground that the report contained some information identifying a condential
informant. According to the court, “[w]ithout much diculty the name of the informant,
[and] the sex of the informant (which might assist in determining the identity) . . . can be
taken out of the report and the remainder turned over to [the newspaper].” Id. at 1197. Accord
Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 698 So. 2d at 1368. And see Holley v. Bradford
County Sheri’s Department, 171 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (trial court must conduct
an in camera inspection of the records to determine whether they could be redacted to remove
information identifying condential informants). Cf. Althouse v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s
Oce, 92 So. 3d 899 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), disapproved on other grounds, Board of Trustees,
Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2016) (agency conceded that
its initial response denying public records request for “rules, regulations, operating procedures
and policies regarding the recruitment and use of condential informants” was “incorrect”;
records were subsequently produced after portions were redacted pursuant to s. 119.071[2][d],
F.S.).
Moreover, in City of St. Petersburg v. Romine ex rel. Dillinger, 719 So. 2d 19, 21 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1998), the court ruled that information regarding payments to a condential informant
(who had been previously identied as a condential informant during a criminal trial) is
subject to disclosure as long as the records are suciently redacted to conceal the specic cases
on which the informant worked. e court acknowledged that the Public Records Act may not
be used in such a way as to obtain information that the Legislature has declared must be exempt
from disclosure, but said that “this is not a situation where someone has alleged that they know
or suspect the identity of a condential informant and the production of records involving that
informant would conrm the person’s information or suspicion.” Id.
Section 943.082(1), F.S., authorizes the Florida Department of Law Enforcement,
in collaboration with the Department of Legal Aairs, to competitively procure a mobile
suspicious activity reporting tool that allows students and the community to relay information
anonymously concerning unsafe, potentially harmful, dangerous, violent or criminal activities,
or the threat of these activities, to appropriate public safety agencies and school ocials. e
identity of the reporting party received through the reporting tool and held by the department,
law enforcement agencies, or school ocials is condential. Section 943.082(6), F.S.
f. Conviction integrity unit reinvestigation information
Section 119.071(2)(q), F.S., establishes an exemption for conviction integrity unit
reinvestigation information, as dened in the exemption, for a reasonable period of time during
an active, ongoing, and good faith investigation of a claim of actual innocence in a case that
previously resulted in the conviction of the accused person and until the claim is no longer
capable of further investigation.
g. Criminal history information
(1) Criminal history information generally
Except where specic exemptions apply, criminal history information is a public record.
AGO 77-125; Inf. Op. to Lymn, June 1, 1990. And see AGO 97-09 (a law enforcement agency
may, without a request, release nonexempt information contained in its public records relating
to sexual oenders; the agency’s authority to release such information is not limited to those
oenders who are designated as “sexual predators”).
Section 943.046, F.S., states:
(1) Any state or local law enforcement agency may release to the public any criminal
history information and other information regarding a criminal oender, including,
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
113
but not limited to, public notication by the agency of the information, unless the
information is condential and exempt [from disclosure]. However, this section does not
contravene any provision of s. 943.053 which relates to the method by which an agency
or individual may obtain a copy of an oender’s criminal history record.
(2) A state or local law enforcement agency and its personnel are immune from civil
liability for the release of criminal history information or other information regarding a
criminal oender, as provided by this section.
Section 943.053(2), F.S., referenced in the above statute, provides restrictions on the
dissemination of criminal justice information obtained from federal criminal justice information
systems and other states by stating that such information shall not be disseminated in a manner
inconsistent with the laws, regulations, or rules of the originating agency. us, criminal history
record information shared with a public school district by the Federal Bureau of Investigation
retains its character as a federal record to which only limited access is provided by federal law
and is not subject to public inspection. AGO 99-01.
Section 943.053(3)(a), F.S., states that criminal history information compiled by the
Criminal Justice Information Program of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement from
intrastate sources shall be provided to law enforcement agencies free of charge and to persons in
the private sector upon payment of fees as provided in the subsection. And see page 116 relating
to dissemination of criminal history information relating to juveniles.
(2) Sealed and expunged records
Access to criminal history records sealed or expunged by court order in accordance
with s. 943.059 or s. 943.0585, F.S., is strictly limited. See, e.g., Alvarez v. Reno, 587 So. 2d
664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (Goderich, J., specially concurring) (state attorney report and any
other information revealing the existence or contents of sealed records is not a public record
and cannot, under any circumstances, be disclosed to the public). And see s. 943.0595, F.S.,
providing for automatic sealing of certain criminal history records.
A law enforcement agency that has been ordered to expunge criminal history information
or records should physically destroy or obliterate information consisting of identiable
descriptions and notations of arrest, detentions, indictments, informations, or other formal
criminal charges and the disposition of those charges. AGO 02-68. However, criminal
intelligence information and criminal investigative information do not fall within the purview
of s. 943.0585, F.S. Id. And see AGO 00-16 (only those records maintained to formalize the
petitioner’s arrest, detention, indictment, information, or other formal criminal charge and the
disposition thereof would be subject to expungement under s. 943.0585). Cf. s. 943.0582(5),
F.S. (nonjudicial records held by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement pertaining to the
arrest of juveniles for certain crimes who have had the records sealed or expunged pursuant to
s. 943.0582, are condential).
ere are exceptions allowing disclosure of information relating to the existence of
an expunged criminal history record to specied entities for their respective licensing and
employment purposes, and to criminal justice agencies for their respective criminal justice
purposes. Section 943.0585(6), F.S. Similar provisions exist relative to disclosure of sealed
criminal history records. Section 943.059(6), F.S. And see s. 943.0583(10)(a), F.S. (expunged
criminal history record of human tracking victim). A records custodian who has received
information relating to the existence of an expunged or sealed criminal history record is
prohibited from disclosing the existence of such record. AGO 94-49.
h. Fingerprint records
Biometric identication information is exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. Section 119.071(5)
(g), F.S. e term “biometric identication information” means any record of friction ridge
detail, ngerprints, palm prints, and footprints. Id.
114
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
i. Forensic behavioral health evaluations
A forensic behavioral health evaluation led with the court pursuant to Ch. 916, F.S.
(mentally decient and mentally ill defendants) is condential and exempt. Section 916.1065(1),
F.S.
j. Geolocation information
Law enforcement geolocation information of a law enforcement ocer or a law enforcement
vehicle that is held by a law enforcement agency is exempt from disclosure requirements. e
exemption does not apply to trac citations, crash reports, homicide reports, arrest reports,
incident reports, or any other ocial reports issued by an agency which contain law enforcement
geolocation information. Disclosure is required under specied circumstances. Section
119.071(4)(e), F.S.
k. Juvenile oender records
(1) Condentiality and authorized disclosure
Juvenile oender records traditionally have been considered condential and treated
dierently from other records in the criminal justice system. With limited exceptions, s.
985.04(1)(a), F.S., provides, in relevant part, that:
Except as provided in subsections (2), (3), (6), and (7) and s.
943.053, all information obtained under this chapter in the
discharge of ocial duty by any judge, any employee of the
court, any authorized agent of the department [of Juvenile
Justice], the Florida Commission on Oender Review, the
Department of Corrections, the juvenile justice circuit boards,
any law enforcement agent, or any licensed professional or
licensed community agency representative participating in the
assessment or treatment of a juvenile is condential and exempt
[from public disclosure]. is exemption applies to information
obtained before, on, or after the eective date of this exemption.
(e.s).
Section 985.04(1)(b), F.S., states that the condential and exempt information may be
disclosed only to the authorized personnel of the court, the department and its designees, the
Department of Corrections, the Florida Commission on Oender Review, law enforcement
agents, school superintendents and their designees, any licensed professional or licensed
community agency representative participating in the assessment or treatment of a juvenile, and
others entitled under this chapter to receive that information, or upon court order. Cf. AGO
96-65 (subject of juvenile oense records may authorize access to such records to others [such as
a potential employer] by means of a release).
Similarly, s. 985.04(7)(a), F.S., limits access to records in the custody of the Department
of Juvenile Justice. With the exception of specied persons and agencies, juvenile records in the
custody of that agency “may be inspected only upon order of the Secretary of Juvenile Justice
or his or her authorized agent by persons who have sucient reason and upon such conditions
for their use and disposition as the secretary or his or her authorized agent deems proper.” If a
juvenile prosecuted as an adult is transferred to serve his or her sentence in the custody of the
Department of Juvenile Justice, the department’s records relating to that juvenile are not open
to public inspection. New York Times Company v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, No.
03-46-CA (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. March 20, 2003), available online in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com.
us, as a general rule, access to records of juvenile oenders is limited. See, e.g., Inf. Op.
to Galbraith, April 8, 1992 (city’s risk manager and attorney representing city in unrelated civil
lawsuit not among those authorized to have access); and Inf. Op. to Wierzbicki, April 7, 1992
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
115
(domestic violence center not among those authorized to receive juvenile information). And
see AGO 07-19 (condentiality provisions preclude public release of the names and addresses
of the parents of juvenile arrested for a misdemeanor). And see s. 985.045(2), F.S., providing,
with limited exceptions, for condentiality of juvenile court records. Cf. AGO 97-28 (juvenile
condentiality requirements do not apply to court records of a case in which a juvenile is
prosecuted as an adult, regardless of the sanctions ultimately imposed in the case).
Condential photographs of juveniles taken in accordance with s. 985.11, F.S, “may be
shown by a law enforcement ocer to any victim or witness of a crime for the purpose of
identifying the person who committed such crime.” Section 985.11(1)(b), F.S. is statute
authorizes a law enforcement ocer to use photographs of juvenile oenders in a photographic
lineup for the purpose of identifying the perpetrator of a crime, regardless of whether those
juvenile oenders are suspects in the crime under investigation. AGO 96-80. Cf. Bareld v.
Orange County, Florida, No. CI92-5913 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. August 4, 1992), available online
in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (denying petitioner’s
request to inspect gang intelligence les compiled by the sheri’s oce).
(2) Exceptions to condentiality
(a) Child trac violators
All records of child trac violations shall be kept in the full name of the violator and shall
be open to inspection and publication in the same manner as adult trac violations. Section
985.11(3), F.S.
(b) Felony arrests and adult system transfers
Until October 1, 1994, law enforcement agencies generally could release only the name
and address of juveniles 16 and older who had been charged with or convicted of certain crimes.
In 1994, the juvenile condentiality laws were modied to eliminate the age restriction and
provide enhanced disclosure. Section 985.04(2), F.S., was amended again in 2016 and now
provides:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the name, photograph, address,
and crime or arrest report of a child:
(a) Taken into custody by a law enforcement ocer for a violation of law which, if
committed by an adult, would be a felony;
(b) Charged with a violation of law which, if committed by an adult, would be a felony;
(c) Found to have committed an oense which, if committed by an adult, would be a
felony; or
(d) Transferred to adult court pursuant to part X of Chapter 985, are not considered
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) solely because of the child’s age.
e Attorney General’s Oce has stated that the expanded disclosure provisions originally
enacted in 1994 apply only to juvenile records created after October 1, 1994, the eective
date of the 1994 amendments to the juvenile condentiality laws. AGO 95-19. Condential
information on juveniles arrested prior to October 1, 1994, is available by court order upon a
showing of good cause. Id. See G.G. v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, 97 So. 3d 268,
274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (“it is clear that only the arrest records of those juveniles who the
legislature has designated in section 985.04[2] have lost their condential status and are available
to the public . . . .”). See also the discussion below regarding the dissemination of criminal
history information relating to juveniles. Cf. s. 943.0582(5), F.S. (nonjudicial records held by
the Florida Department of Law Enforcement pertaining to the arrest of juveniles for certain
crimes who have had the records sealed or expunged pursuant to s. 943.0582, are condential).
116
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
A public records custodian may choose not to electronically publish on the custodian’s
website the arrest or booking photographs of a child which are not condential and exempt under
this section or otherwise restricted from publication by law; however, this paragraph does not
restrict public access to records as provided by s. 119.07, F.S. Section 985.04(2)(b), F.S.
(c) Mandatory notication to schools
Section 985.04(4)(b), F.S., provides that when the state attorney charges a juvenile with
a felony or a delinquent act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, the state attorney
must notify the superintendent of the juvenile’s school that the juvenile has been charged with
such felony or delinquent act. A similar directive applies to a law enforcement agency that takes
a juvenile into custody for an oense that would have been a felony if committed by an adult,
or a crime of violence. Section 985.04(4)(a), F.S. And see s. 1006.08(2), F.S. (notication by
court to school superintendent); and s. 985.04(4)(c), F.S. (notication by school superintendent
to certain school personnel). Cf. s. 985.04(4)(d), F.S. (notication by Department of Juvenile
Justice of the presence of a juvenile sex oender in the care and custody or under the jurisdiction
or supervision of the department).
(d) Criminal history information relating to juveniles
Section 943.053(3)(c)1., F.S., provides that criminal history information relating to
juveniles, including information that is condential pursuant to s. 943.053(3)(b), F.S., shall be
available to:
(a) A criminal justice agency for criminal justice purposes on a priority basis and free of
charge;
(b) e person to whom the record relates, or his or her attorney;
(c) e parent, guardian, or legal custodian of the person to whom the record relates,
provided such person has not reached the age of majority, been emancipated by a court, or
been legally married; or
(d) An agency or entity specied in s. 943.0585(6) or s. 943.059(6), F.S., for the purpose
specied therein, and any person within such agency or entity who has direct responsibility
for employment, access authorization, or licensure decisions.
(e) Victim access
Section 985.036(1), F.S., allows the victim, the victim’s parent or guardian, their lawful
representatives, and, in a homicide case, the next of kin, to have access to information and
proceedings in a juvenile case. ose entitled to access “may not reveal to any outside party any
condential information obtained under this subsection regarding a case involving a juvenile
oense, except as is reasonably necessary to pursue legal remedies.” Id. And see s. 960.001(8),
F.S., authorizing similar disclosures to victims.
In addition, s. 985.04(3), F.S., states that a “law enforcement agency may release a copy of
the juvenile oense report to the victim of the oense.” Cf. Harvard v. Village of Palm Springs, 98
So. 3d 645 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), noting that the authorization in s. 985.04(3), F.S., is permissive
not mandatory; thus, a local government was not required to produce a juvenile oense report to
the victim’s mother.
l. Motor vehicle records
(1) Automated license plate recognition system records
Images and data containing or providing personal identifying information obtained
through use of an automated license plate recognition system are condential and exempt.
Section 316.0777, F.S.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
117
(2) Crash reports
Prior to the enactment of Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, s. 316.066(2)(a), F.S., established
condentiality for motor vehicle crash reports that reveal the identity, home or employment
telephone number or home or employment address of, or other personal information concerning
the parties involved in the crash and that were held by an agency that regularly receives or prepares
information from or concerning the parties to motor vehicle crashes, for a period of 60 days after
the report was led. Specied agencies and entities, including the parties involved in the crash
and certain media, were allowed immediate access. See s. 316.066, F.S. (2021).
However, Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023, modied this exemption
in several ways. First, the 60-day condentiality period now applies to crash reports held by any
agency as dened in s. 119.011, F.S. Agencies allowed immediate access include victim services
programs, and any federal, state, or local governmental agency or private person or entity acting
on behalf of such agency in carrying out its functions, as well as the parties involved in the crash,
their legal representatives, and their insurers. Section 316.066 (2)(a)(b), F.S., as amended by Ch.
22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023. Cf. AGO 01-59 (owner of vehicle involved in
a crash authorized to receive access to crash report).
Crash reports held by an agency which do not contain the home or employment street
addresses, driver license or identication card numbers, dates of birth and home and employment
telephone numbers of the parties involved in the crash shall be made immediately available to radio
and television stations licensed by the Federal Communications Commission and newspapers
qualied to publish legal notices under ss. 50.011 and 50.031, F.S. Section 316.066(2)(b), F.S.,
as amended by Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023.
“As a condition precedent to accessing a crash report, a person must present a valid driver’s
license or other photographic identication, proof of status or identication that demonstrates
his or her qualications to access that information, and le a written sworn statement with the
state or local agency in possession of the information stating that information from a crash report
made condential and exempt by this section will not be used for any commercial solicitation of
accident victims, or knowingly disclosed to any third party for the purpose of such solicitation.
Section 316.066(2)(d), F.S., as amended by Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1,
2023.
e written statement must be completed and sworn to by the requesting party for each
individual crash report. Id. Reports may be released without the sworn statement to third-party
vendors under contract with one or more insurers, but only if the conditions set forth in the
statute are stated in the contract. Id. ird-degree felony penalties are established for knowing
unauthorized disclosure or use of condential information in violation of this statute. See s.
316.066(3)(b), (c), and (d), F.S., for more information. See also s. 316.066(3)(e), F.S., as amended
by Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023, providing a civil remedy.
Crash reports may be made available 60 days after the report is led to any person or entity
authorized in 316.066(2)(b) or in accordance with any of the permissible uses listed in 18 U.S.C.
s. 2721(b) and pursuant to the resale and redisclosure requirements in 18 U.S.C. s. 2721(c).
Section 316.066(2)(f), as amended by Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023.
If crash reports are created by or submitted to an agency electronically as data elements
within a computerized database or if personal information from a crash report is entered into
a computerized database, such crash data held by an agency is condential. Sixty days after
the crash report is led, an agency may provide crash data derived from the crash report which
includes personal information to entities eligible to access the crash report under s. 316.066(2)
(b) and pursuant to the resale and redisclosure requirements in 18 U.S.C. s. 2721(c). Such data
shall be provided pursuant to a memorandum of understanding. Section 316.066(2)(g), F.S., as
amended by Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023.
118
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(3) Trac citations
“Driver information” contained in a uniform trac citation held by an agency is exempt
from disclosure requirements. Section 316.650(11)(b)1., F.S., as amended by Ch. 22-198, Laws
of Florida, eective March 1, 2023. e term “driver information is dened to mean “a driver’s
date of birth, driver license or identication card number, address excluding the ve-digit zip
code, telephone number, motor vehicle license plate number, and trailer tag number.” Section
316.650(11)(a), F.S., as amended by Ch. 22-198, eective March 1, 2023. e term does
not include the driver’s name. Id. Driver information may be released in the same manner
applicable to the release of personal information contained in a motor vehicle record pursuant to
s. 119.0712(2)(b), F.S., and in accordance with any of the permissible uses listed in 18 U.S.C. s.
2721(b) and pursuant to the resale and disclosure requirements in 18 U.S.C. s. 2721(c). Section
316.650(11)(b)2., F.S., as amended by Ch. 22-198, Laws of Florida, eective March 1, 2023.
(4) Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles motor vehicle records
Section 119.0712(2)(b), F.S., provides that personal information, including highly
restricted personal information as dened in 18 U.S.C. s. 2725, contained in a motor vehicle
record is condential pursuant to the federal Driver’s Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C.
ss. 2721 et seq (DPPA). Such information may be released only as authorized by that act. e
term “motor vehicle record” is dened to mean any record that pertains to a motor vehicle
operator’s permit, motor vehicle title, motor vehicle registration, or identication card issued
by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV). Section 119.0712(2)(a),
F.S. Cf. AGO 10-10 (while DHSMV motor vehicle records are condential in the hands of a
law enforcement agency, to the extent information is taken from DHSMV records and used in
preparing other records of a law enforcement agency or its agent, the condentiality requirements
of s. 119.0712(2)(b), F.S., do not reach those records created by subsequent users).
E-mail addresses collected by DHSMV pursuant to cited statutes [motor vehicle record and
driver license transactions] are exempt from public disclosure requirements. Section 119.0712(2)
(c), F.S. And see s. 119.0712(2)(d)1. and 2., F.S., providing that emergency contact information
contained in a motor vehicle record is condential, and may be released only as provided in the
exemption.
Secure login credentials held by DHSMV are exempt, as are Internet protocol addresses,
geolocation data, and other information from which a user accesses a public-facing portal.
Section 119.0712(2)(f), F.S.
m. Pawnbroker records
All records relating to pawnbroker transactions delivered to appropriate law enforcement
ocials pursuant s. 539.001, F.S., the Florida Pawnbroking Act, are condential and exempt
from disclosure and may be used only for ocial law enforcement purposes. Section 539.003,
F.S. However, law enforcement ocials are not prohibited from disclosing the name and address
of the pawnbroker, the name and address of the conveying customer, or a description of the
pawned property to the alleged owner of pawned property. Id. And see AGO 01-51.
n. Polygraph records
e Attorney General’s Oce is not aware of any statutory provision barring access to
otherwise public records, simply because the records are in the form of polygraph charts. See,
e.g., Wisner v. City of Tampa Police Department, 601 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (polygraph
materials resulting from polygraph examination that citizen took in connection with a closed
internal aairs investigation were public records); and Downs v. Austin, 522 So. 2d 931 (Fla.
1st DCA 1988) (because state had already publicly disclosed the results of polygraph tests
administered to defendant’s accomplice, the tests were not exempt criminal investigative or
intelligence information and were subject to disclosure to the defendant).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
119
However, the s. 119.071(1)(a), F.S., exemption for questions and answers used in
employment examinations applies to questions and answers contained in pre-employment
polygraph examinations. Rush v. High Springs, 82 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). is
exemption applies to examination questions and answers but does not include the “impressions
and grading of the responses” by the examiners. See Dickerson v. Hayes, 543 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla.
1st DCA 1989).
o. Prison and inmate records
In the absence of statutory exemption, prison and inmate records are subject to disclosure
under the Public Records Act. Cf. Williams v. State, 741 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
(order imposing oender’s habitual oender sentence and documents showing his qualifying
convictions, subject to disclosure under Ch. 119). And see Cruz v. State, 279 So. 3d 154 (Fla.
4th DCA 2019), nding that county jail visitation logs are public records, and rejecting the
defendant’s argument that the names of jail visitors should be protected from disclosure. Cf. s.
951.27, F.S. (limited disclosure of infectious disease test results, including HIV testing pursuant
to s. 775.0877, F.S., of inmates in county and municipal detention facilities).
Subject to limited exceptions, s. 945.10, F.S., states that the following records and
information held by the Department of Corrections are condential and exempt from public
inspection: mental health, medical (including HIV tests) or substance abuse records of inmates
or oenders; preplea, pretrial intervention, presentence or postsentence investigative records;
information regarding a person in the federal witness protection program; condential or exempt
Florida Commission on Oender Review records; information which if released would jeopardize
someone’s safety; information concerning a victim’s statement and identity; information which
identies an executioner or that identies or could lead to the identication of any person or
entity that participates in an execution; and records that are otherwise condential or exempt
by law. See Correll v. State, 184 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 2015), in which the Court summarized prior
precedent upholding the constitutionality of s. 945.10, F.S., and again rejected claims that an
inmate has the right to know the identity of execution team members.
e Public Records Act applies to a private corporation which has contracted to operate and
maintain the county jail. Times Publishing Company v. Corrections Corporation of America, No.
91-429 CA 01 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct. December 4, 1991), per curiam armed, 611 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1993), available in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com.
See also Prison Health Services, Inc. v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 718 So. 2d 204 (Fla.
2d DCA 1998), review denied, 727 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) (records of private company under
contract with sheri to provide health care to jail inmates are subject to Ch. 119 just as if they
were maintained by a public agency).
p. Resource inventories and emergency response plans
Section 119.071(2)(d), F.S., exempts “[a]ny comprehensive inventory of state and local law
enforcement resources compiled pursuant to part I, chapter 23, and any comprehensive policies
or plans compiled by a criminal justice agency pertaining to the mobilization, deployment, or
tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies, as dened in s. 252.34 . . . .” See
Timoney v. City of Miami Civilian Investigative Panel, 917 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005), in
which the court held that a city police department’s Operational Plan prepared in response to
intelligence reports warning of possible violence surrounding an economic summit remained
exempt from disclosure after the summit ended. e court found that the city planned to use
portions of the Plan for future events and the “language of [the exemption] leads us to believe that
the legislature intended to keep such security information exempt after an immediate emergency
passes.” Id. at 887. And see s. 119.071(3)(a)1., F.S., which includes “emergency evacuation
plans” and “sheltering arrangements” within the denition of a “security or resafety system plan”
that is condential and exempt from public disclosure.
120
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
q. Surveillance techniques, procedures or personnel
Information revealing surveillance techniques, procedures or personnel is exempt from
public inspection pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(d), F.S. See Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3d
418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (disclosure to criminal defendant of unredacted undercover police
surveillance recordings does not destroy exemption in s. 119.071[2][d], F.S.; therefore, sheri
is only required to provide redacted recording in response to a public records request). See also
Althouse v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 92 So. 3d 899 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), disapproved
on other grounds, Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120
(Fla. 2016) noting that the agency had conceded that its initial response denying Althouse’s
request for “rules, regulations, operating procedures and policies regarding the recruitment and
use of condential informants” was “incorrect” and that the agency had subsequently produced
the records after redacting portions pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(d), F.S. Cf. State v. Wooten, 260 So.
3d 1060, 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), in which the court noted that surveillance techniques are
“exempt, not condential and exempt.” [Emphasis supplied by the Court]
e detailed schedule and travel plans of the Governor, including drive times and the time
and location of the Governor’s arrival and departure, were encompassed within the s. 119.071(2)
(d), F.S., exemption where the Florida Department of Law Enforcement special agent submitted
an undisputed adavit attesting that premature disclosure of this information would reveal
“surveillance techniques, procedures, or personnel,” and would jeopardize the security of the
Governor and the ocers assigned to protect him. Executive Oce of the Governor v. AHF MCO
of Florida, Inc., 257 So. 3d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
r. Undercover personnel
Section 119.071(4)(c), F.S., provides that any information revealing undercover personnel
of any criminal justice agency is exempt from public disclosure. But see Ocala Star Banner
Corporation v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196, 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)(police department should
not have refused to release an entire police report containing some information that could lead
to an undercover person’s identity, when, without much diculty, the name or initials and
identication numbers of the undercover ocer and that ocer’s supervisor could be taken out
of the report and the remainder released). Accord Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 698
So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).
Information regarding law enforcement ocers who are assigned to undercover duty and
whose names appear on personnel rosters or other lists of all law enforcement ocers of the city
without regard to whether the record reveals the nature of their duties may constitute “[a]ny
information revealing undercover personnel of any criminal justice agency[.]” AGO 15-02. e
Legislature’s determination that such information is exempt from public inspection, rather than
condential, conditions the release of exempt information upon a determination by the custodian
that there is a statutory or substantial policy need for disclosure. Id.
For information on the identity of safe-school ocers appointed pursuant to s. 1006.12,
F.S., please refer to the discussion on page 157.
s. Victim information
(1) Marsy’s Law
On November 6, 2018, Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment known as
Marsy’s Law. Marsy’s Law amends Art. I, s. 16 of the Constitution to add several provisions
relating to victim rights. Subsection (b)(5) provides that “every victim is entitled to the following
rights, beginning at the time of his or her victimization” to include: “e right to prevent the
disclosure of information or records that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the
victim’s family or which could disclose condential or privileged information of the victim.” e
amendment took eect on January 8, 2019.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
121
Law enforcement ocers who fatally shot suspects threatening them with deadly force
were “victims” under Marsy’s Law and were entitled to seek judicial relief to preclude release of
information in public records that identied them. Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc.
v. City of Tallahassee, 314 So. 3d 796 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021), review granted, No. 21-651 (Fla.
December 21, 2021).
(2) Statutory exemptions relating to victim information
Although s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S., exempts active criminal investigative information from
disclosure, the “name, sex, age, and address of . . . the victim of a crime, except as provided in s.
119.071(2)(h) or (o),” are specically excluded from the denition of criminal investigative or
intelligence information. See s. 119.011(3)(c)2., F.S. dening the terms “criminal investigative
information” and “criminal intelligence information.” In addition to the victim exemptions
identied above, there are other exemptions that may apply as follows:
(a) Amount of stolen property
Pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(i), F.S., criminal intelligence or investigative information that
reveals the personal assets of a crime victim, which were not involved in the crime, is exempt
from disclosure. However, this exemption does not apply to information relating to the amount
of property stolen during the commission of a crime. AGO 82-30. Note, however, that s.
119.071(2)(j)1., F.S., provides that victims of certain crimes may le a written request to exempt
information revealing their “personal assets.”
(b) Commercial solicitation of victims
Section 119.105, F.S., provides that police reports are public records except as otherwise
made exempt or condential and that every person is allowed to examine nonexempt or
noncondential police reports. However, a person who comes into possession of exempt or
condential information in police reports may not use that information for commercial
solicitation of the victims or relatives of the victims and may not knowingly disclose such
information to a third party for the purpose of such solicitation during the period of time that
information remains exempt or condential. Id. e statute “does not prohibit the publication
of such information to the general public by any news media legally entitled to possess that
information or the use of such information for any other data collection or analysis purposes by
those entitled to possess that information.” Id. A willful and knowing violation of this statute is
a third-degree felony. Section 119.10(2)(b), F.S.
(c) Documents which are received by an agency regarding victims
Section 119.071(2)(j)1., F.S., exempts from disclosure any document that reveals the
identity, home or employment telephone number or address, or personal assets of the victim
of a crime and identies that person as the victim of a crime, if that document is received by an
agency that regularly receives information from or concerning the victims of crime. However,
this provision is limited to documents received by agencies which regularly receive information
from or concerning victims of crime; it does not apply to records generated or made by these
agencies. AGO 90-80. Accordingly, this exemption does not apply to police reports. Id.
Section 119.071(2)(j)1., F.S., also provides that “[a]ny state or federal agency that is
authorized to have access to such documents by any provision of law shall be granted such access
in the furtherance of such agency’s statutory duties, notwithstanding this section.” See Inf. Op.
to McCabe, November 27, 1995 (state attorney authorized to release materials received during an
investigation of a domestic violence incident to a police department for use in the department’s
internal aairs investigation).
(d) Home or employment address, telephone number, assets
Victims of specied crimes listed in s. 119.071(2)(j)1., F.S., are authorized to le a written
122
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
request for exemption of their addresses, telephone numbers and personal assets as follows:
Any information not otherwise held condential or exempt [from
disclosure] which reveals the home or employment telephone
number, home or employment address, or personal assets of a
person who has been the victim of sexual battery, aggravated
child abuse, aggravated stalking, harassment, aggravated battery,
or domestic violence is exempt [from disclosure], upon written
request by the victim which must include ocial verication that
an applicable crime has occurred. Such information shall cease
to be exempt 5 years after the receipt of the written request. (e.s.)
is exemption is not limited to documents received by an agency, but exempts specied
information in records--whether generated or received by--an agency. us, a victim of the
enumerated crimes may le a written request and have his or her home or employment telephone
number, home or employment address, or personal assets, exempted from the police report of
the crime, provided that the request includes ocial verication, such as a copy of the incident
or oense report for one of the listed crimes, that an applicable crime has occurred. See AGO
96-82. e exemption is limited to the victim’s address, telephone number, or personal assets; it
does not apply to the victim’s identity. City of Gainesville v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Company,
No. 96-3425-CA (Fla. 8th Cir. Ct. October 28, 1996). But see the discussion of Marsy’s Law on
page 121.
e exemption applies to records created prior to, as well as after, the agency’s receipt of the
victim’s written request for exemption AGO 96-82. It applies to any records held by an agency
and is not limited to those records relating to the oense. Id. “[A]n examination of the legislative
history surrounding the adoption of this exemption indicates that the Legislature intended that
the exemption not be limited to those documents identifying the individual as a victim of crime
but rather be applied to any document revealing the personal information held by any agency.”
Id. And see AGO 02-50, in which the Attorney General’s Oce advised that s. 119.071(2)
(j)1., F.S., does not contain an exception for copies of the police report that are sent to domestic
violence centers pursuant to s. 741.29, F.S., if the victim has made a written request for exempt
status of the personal information specied in s. 119.071(2)(j)1., F.S.
In addition, the requirement that the victim make a written request for exemption applies
only to information not otherwise held condential by law; thus, the exemption supplements,
but does not replace, other condentiality provisions, such as s. 119.071(2)(h), F.S., that may be
applicable to certain crime victims. AGO 96-82
For more information on exemptions pertaining to domestic violence or stalking victims,
please see the discussion on page 78.
(e) Information identifying or depicting victims of sex oenses and of child abuse
(1) Law enforcement and prosecution records
Section 119.071(2)(h)1.a., F.S., provides condentiality for criminal investigative and
intelligence information that reveals the identity of a victim of the crime of child abuse, as dened
by Ch. 827, F.S., or that reveals the identity of a person under the age of 18 who is a victim of the
crime of human tracking proscribed in s. 787.06(3)(a), F.S. Information which may reveal the
identity of a victim of a sexual oense, including a sexual oense prohibited in s. 787.06(3)(b),
(d), (f), or (g), or Chs. 794, 796, 800, 827, or 847, F.S., is also condential. Section 119.071(2)
(h)1.b., F.S.
In addition, the photograph, videotape, or image of any part of the body of a victim of
a sexual oense prohibited under ss. 787.06(3)(b), (d), (f), or (g) or 810.145, or Chs. 794,
796, 800, 827, or 847, F.S., is condential and exempt, regardless of whether the photograph,
videotape, or image identies the victim. Section 119.071(2)(h)1.c., F.S. See Harvard v. Village
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
123
of Palm Springs, 98 So. 3d 645, 647 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), rejecting a mother’s assertion that there
is “no law prohibiting her” from obtaining a copy of her son’s videotaped interview, because s.
119.071(2)(h)1.a-c, F.S., “provides that a video of a victim is exempt from a public records request
if it is taken during the course of one of several enumerated types of criminal investigations.”
us, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that information revealing the identity of
victims of child abuse or sexual battery must be deleted from the copy of the report of domestic
violence which is sent by a law enforcement agency to the nearest domestic violence center
pursuant to s. 741.29(2), F.S. AGO 92-14. And see Palm Beach County Police Benevolent
Association v. Neumann, 796 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), applying exemption to
information identifying a child abuse victim which was contained in les prepared as part of an
internal investigation conducted in accordance with s. 112.533, F.S.
Section 119.071(2)(h)2.a-c, F.S., sets forth circumstances which permit a law enforcement
agency to disclose the condential information. Moreover, the Attorney General’s Oce has
advised that the condentiality provisions do not apply to the identity of a child abuse victim
who died from suspected abuse. AGO 90-103. But see the discussion on page 121 regarding
Marsy’s Law.
Section 119.071(2)(j)2a., F.S., provides that identifying information in a videotaped
statement of a minor who is alleged to be or who is a victim of a sexual oense prohibited
in the cited laws which reveals the minor’s identity, including, but not limited to, the minor’s
face; the minor’s home, school, church, or employment telephone number; the minor’s home,
school, church, or employment address; the name of the minor’s school, church, or place of
employment; or the personal assets of the minor; and which identies the minor as a victim, held
by a law enforcement agency, is condential. Access shall be provided, however, to authorized
governmental agencies when necessary to the furtherance of the agency’s duties. Id. A public
employee may not willfully and knowingly disclose videotaped information that reveals the
minor’s identity to anyone other than the designated individuals, including the defendant. Section
119.071(2)(j)2b., F.S. Cf. State v. Ingram, 170 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 2015) (J. Pariente concurring) (s.
119.071[2][j]2.b. does not authorize disclosure to a convicted incarcerated inmate of videotaped
information that reveals the minor victim’s identity).
A public employee or ocer having access to the photograph, name, or address of a person
alleged to be a victim of an oense described in Ch. 794 (sexual battery); Ch. 800 (lewdness,
indecent exposure); s. 827.03 (abuse, aggravated abuse, and neglect of a child); s. 827.04
(contributing to delinquency or dependency of a child); or s. 827.071 (sexual performance by a
child) may not willfully and knowingly disclose it to a person not assisting in the investigation
or prosecution of the alleged oense or to any person other than the defendant, the defendant’s
attorney, a person specied in a court order entered by the court having jurisdiction over the alleged
oense, to organizations authorized to receive such information made exempt by s. 119.071(2)
(h), F.S., or to a rape crisis center or sexual assault counselor, as dened in s. 90.5035(1)(b),
F.S., who will be oering services to the victim. Section 794.024(1), F.S. A violation of this
section constitutes a second degree misdemeanor. Section 794.024(2), F.S. Cf. State v. Globe
Communications Corporation, 648 So. 2d 110, 111 (Fla. 1994) (statute mandating criminal
sanctions for printing, publishing or broadcasting “in any instrument of mass communication”
information identifying a victim of a sexual oense, ruled unconstitutional).
An entity or individual who communicates to others, prior to open judicial proceedings,
the name, address, or other specic identifying information concerning the victim of any sexual
oense under Ch. 794 or Ch. 800 shall be liable to the victim for all damages reasonably necessary
to compensate the victim for any injuries suered as a result of such communication. Section
794.026(1), F.S. e victim, however, may not maintain a cause of action unless he or she is able
to show that such communication was intentional and was done with reckless disregard for the
highly oensive nature of the publication. Section 794.026(2), F.S. Cf. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v.
124
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Cohn, 95 S.Ct. 1029 (1975); and Cape Publications, Inc. v. Hitchner, 549 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 1989),
appeal dismissed, 110 S.Ct. 296 (1989).
e Crime Victims’ Services Oce in the Attorney General’s Oce is authorized to receive
condential records from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies. Section 960.05(2)(k), F.S.
And see AGO 92-51 (city victim services division, as a governmental agency which is part of the
city’s criminal justice system, may receive identifying information about victims of sex oenses,
for the purpose of advising the victim of available services pursuant to s. 960.001, F.S., requiring
distribution of victim support information).
(2) Court records
Section 92.56, F.S., provides that criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information made condential pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(h), F.S., must be maintained in court
records and in court proceedings, including witnesses’ testimony. If a petition for access to these
records is led with the trial court with jurisdiction over an alleged oense, the status of the
information must be maintained by the court if the state or the victim demonstrates certain
factors as set forth in the statute. Section 92.56(1), F.S. A person who willfully and knowingly
violates section 92.56, F.S., or any court order issued under this section is subject to contempt
proceedings. Section 92.56(6), F.S. See also AGO 03-56 and s. 119.0714(1)(h), F.S.
(3) Department of Children and Families abuse records
As discussed on pages 74-75, there are statutory exemptions set forth in Ch. 415, F.S., which
relate to records of abuse of vulnerable adults. Similar provisions relating to child abuse records
are found in Ch. 39, F.S. e Attorney General’s Oce has concluded that the condentiality
provisions in these laws, i.e., ss. 415.107 and 39.202, F.S., apply to records of the Department
of Children and Families [DCF] and do not encompass a law enforcement agency’s arrest report
of persons charged with criminal child abuse, after the agency has deleted all information which
would reveal the identity of the victim. See AGO 93-54. Accord Inf. Op. to O’Brien, January 18,
1994. Cf. Times Publishing Company v. A.J., 626 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 1993), holding that a sheri’s
incident report of alleged child abuse that was forwarded to the state child welfare department for
investigation pursuant to Ch. 415, F.S. 1990 [see now Part II, Ch. 39, F.S., entitled “Reporting
Child Abuse”], should not be released. e Court noted that the department had found no
probable cause and that child protection statutes accommodate privacy rights of those involved in
these cases “by providing that the supposed victims, their families, and the accused should not be
subjected to public scrutiny at least during the initial stages of an investigation, before probable
cause has been found.” Id. at 1315.
Section 39.202(1) and (2)(b), F.S., authorizes criminal justice agencies to have access
to condential abuse, abandonment, or neglect records held by DCF and provides that the
exemption from disclosure for DCF abuse records also applies to DCF records and information
in the possession of the agencies granted access. See Inf. Op. to Russell, October 24, 2001.
(f) Homicide victims and witnesses
(1) Photographs and video or audio recordings of killing of law enforcement ocer or
killing of victim of mass violence
Section 119.071(2)(p)1., F.S., provides condentiality for a photograph, video or audio
recording that depicts or records the killing of a law enforcement ocer acting in accordance with
his or her ocial duties or the killing of a victim of mass violence. Disclosure may be made to
certain persons and entities as authorized in the exemption. Section 119.071(2)(p)2., F.S. And
see page 74, discussing the condentiality of autopsy photographs.
e term “killing of a law enforcement ocer who was acting in accordance with his or her
ocial duties” is dened to mean “all acts or events that cause or otherwise relate to the death of
a law enforcement ocer who was acting in accordance with his or her ocial duties, including
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
125
any related acts or events immediately preceding or subsequent to the acts or events that were the
proximate cause of death.” Section 119.071(2)(p)1.a., F.S.
“Killing of a victim of mass violence” means events that depict either a victim being killed
or the body of a victim killed in an incident in which 3 or more persons, not including the
perpetrator, are killed by the perpetrator of an intentional act of violence. Section 119.071(2)
(p)1.b., F.S.
Section 119.071(2)(p)7., F.S., provides that the exemption shall be given retroactive
application and shall apply to all photographs and recordings of persons covered by the exemption
regardless of whether the killing occurred before, on, or after the eective date of the act, May 23,
2019. And see State v. Schenecker, No. 11 CF 001376A (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. August 3, 2011), cert.
denied sub nom., Media General Operations v. State, 71 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), in which
the court concluded that a prior version of this statute applied to crime scene photographs of the
victims. And see the discussion about Marsy’s Law on page 121.
(2) Address of victim of an incident of mass violence
e address of a victim of an incident of mass violence is exempt from disclosure
requirements. Section 119.071(2)(o), F.S. e term “incident of mass violence” means an
incident in which 4 or more people, not including the perpetrator, are severely injured or killed
by an intentional and indiscriminate act of violence of another. e term “victim” means a
person killed or injured during an incident of mass violence, not including the perpetrator. Id.
And see the discussion about Marsy’s Law on page 121.
(3) Homicide witness
Criminal investigative or intelligence information that reveals the personal identifying
information of a witness to a murder, as described in s. 782.04, F.S., is condential for 2 years
after the date on which the murder is observed by the witness. Section 119.071(2)(m), F.S. A
criminal justice agency may disclose this information in the furtherance of its ocial duties and
responsibilities; to assist in locating or identifying the witness if the agency believes the witness
to be missing or endangered; to another governmental agency for use in the performance of its
ocial duties and responsibilities; to the parties in a pending criminal prosecution as required
by law. Id. And see Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce v. Sun-Sentinel Company, LLC, 226 So. 3d
969 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (applying exemption to shield the identity of witnesses who observed
a homicide on the highway and whose vehicle was hit by bullets red by the perpetrator as the
witnesses attempted to follow the suspect’s car).
(g) Human tracking victims
Criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information that may reveal
the identity of a person who is a victim of human tracking whose criminal history record has
been expunged pursuant to s. 943.0583, F.S., is condential. Section 943.0583(11)(a), F.S.
Disclosure is authorized under certain circumstances. Section 943.0583(11)(b), F.S. And see s.
119.071(2)(h), F.S., relating to victims of the crime of human tracking proscribed in s. 787.06,
F.S., discussed on page 123.
Information about the location of a safe house, safe foster home, or other residential
facility serving child victims of commercial sexual exploitation, as dened in s. 409.016, F.S.,
is condential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. Section 409.1678(6)(a), F.S.
Information may be provided to an agency as necessary to maintain health and safety standards
and to address emergency situations in the house or facility. Section 409.1678(6)(b), F.S.
(h) Relocated victim or witness information
Information held by a law enforcement agency, prosecutorial agency or the Victim and
Witness Protection Review Committee which discloses the identity or location of a victim
126
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
or witness (or their immediate family) who has been identied or certied for protective or
relocation services is condential and exempt from disclosure. Section 914.27, F.S.
16. Litigation records
a. Attorney-client communications
e Public Records Act applies to communications between attorneys and governmental
agencies; there is no judicially created privilege which exempts these documents from disclosure.
Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979) (only the Legislature and
not the judiciary can exempt attorney-client communications from Ch. 119, F.S.). See also City
of North Miami v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 468 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 1985) (although s.
90.502, F.S., of the Evidence Code establishes an attorney-client privilege for public and private
entities, this evidentiary statute does not remove communications between an agency and its
attorney from the open inspection requirements of Ch. 119, F.S.).
Moreover, public disclosure of these documents does not violate the public agency’s
constitutional rights of due process, eective assistance of counsel, freedom of speech, or the
Supreme Court’s exclusive jurisdiction over e Florida Bar. City of North Miami v. Miami
Herald Publishing Company, supra. And see Seminole County, Florida v. Wood, 512 So. 2d 1000,
1001 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1988) (the rules of ethics
provide that an attorney may divulge a communication when required by law; the Legislature has
plenary authority over political subdivisions and can require disclosure of otherwise condential
materials); and AGO 98-59 (records in the les of the former city attorney, who served as a
contract attorney for the city, which were made or received in carrying out her duties as city
attorney and which communicate, perpetuate, or formalize knowledge constitute public records
and are required to be turned over to her successor). Cf City of St. Petersburg v. Dorchester Holdings,
LLC., 331 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), discussing the application of R. Regulating Fla. Bar
4-42 and Fla. Bar Ethics Opinion 09-1.
On the other hand, the Florida Supreme Court has ruled that les in the possession of the
Capital Collateral Representative (CCR) in furtherance of its representation of an indigent client
are not subject to public disclosure under Ch. 119, F.S. e Court noted that the les are not
governmental records for purposes of the public records law but are the “private records” of the
CCR client. Kight v. Dugger, 574 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1990). And see Times Publishing Company v.
Acton, No. 99-8304 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. November 5, 1999), available online in the Cases database
at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (private attorneys retained by individual
county commissioners in a criminal case were not “acting on behalf ” of a public agency so as
to become subject to the Public Records Act, even though the board of county commissioners
subsequently voted to pay the commissioners’ legal expenses in accordance with a county policy
providing for reimbursement of legal expenses to individual county ocers who successfully
defend criminal charges led against them arising out of the performance of their ocial duties).
b. Attorney work product
e Supreme Court has ruled that the Legislature and not the judiciary has exclusive
authority to exempt litigation records from the scope of Ch. 119, F.S. Wait v. Florida Power & Light
Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979). See also Edelstein v. Donner, 450 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA
1984), approved, 471 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1985), noting that in the absence of legislation, a work product
exemption is “non-existent;” and Hillsborough County Aviation Authority v. Azzarelli Construction
Company, 436 So. 2d 153, 154 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), stating that the Supreme Court’s decision in
Wait “constituted a tacit recognition that work product can be a public record.”
With the enactment of s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., the Legislature created a narrow statutory
exemption for certain litigation work product of agency attorneys. See City of Orlando v. Desjardins,
493 So. 2d 1027, 1029 (Fla. 1986), in which the Court noted that the exemption was enacted
because of “developing case law aording public entities no protection under either the work
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
127
product doctrine or the attorney-client privilege . . . .” See also City of North Miami v. Miami
Herald Publishing Company, 468 So. 2d 218, 219 (Fla. 1985) (noting application of exemption to
“government agency, attorney-prepared litigation les during the pendency of litigation”); and City
of Miami Beach v. DeLapp, 472 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (opposing counsel not entitled
to city’s legal memoranda as such material is exempt work product). Cf. Dettelbach v. Department
of Business and Professional Regulation, 261 So. 3d 676, 682 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), noting that “it
was important” that an agency attorney’s memorandum which was prepared exclusively to assess
the strength of the agency’s evidence in a licensing case remain exempt from disclosure during the
pendency of the adversarial administrative proceedings.
Section 119.071(1)(d)1., F.S., states, in relevant part:
A public record that was prepared by an agency attorney (including
an attorney employed or retained by the agency or employed or
retained by another public ocer or agency to protect or represent
the interests of the agency having custody of the record) or prepared
at the attorney’s express direction, that reects a mental impression,
conclusion, litigation strategy, or legal theory of the attorney or
the agency, and that was prepared exclusively for civil or criminal
litigation or for adversarial administrative proceedings, or that was
prepared in anticipation of imminent civil or criminal litigation or
imminent adversarial administrative proceedings, is exempt [from
disclosure] until the conclusion of the litigation or adversarial
administrative proceedings.
Note that this statutory exemption applies to attorney work product that has reached
the status of becoming a public record; as discussed more extensively on pages 127-128, certain
preliminary trial preparation materials, such as handwritten notes for the personal use of the
attorney, are not considered to be within the denitional scope of the term “public records” and,
therefore, are outside the scope of Ch. 119, F.S. See Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985 (Fla.
1998).
Under the terms of the statute, the work product exemption “is not waived by the release of
such public record to another public employee or ocer of the same agency or any person consulted
by the agency attorney.” Section 119.071(1)(d)2., F.S. See also AGO 94-77 (work product
exemption continues to apply to records prepared by the county attorney when these records are
transferred to the city attorney pursuant to a transfer agreement whereby the city is substituted for
the county as a party to the litigation).
An agency asserting the work product exemption must identify the potential parties to the
litigation or proceedings. Section 119.071(1)(d)2., F.S. However, the agency is not required to
identify each document in a record that it asserts to be exempt under the work product exemption.
Dettelbach v. Department of Business and Professional Regulation, 261 So. 3d 676, 683 (Fla. 1st DCA
2018). Whether to impose such a requirement “is a matter properly addressed to the legislature
rather than this court.” Id.
In the event of litigation disputing the claimed work product exemption, the court must
conduct an in camera inspection of the records. Environmental Turf, Inc. v. University of Florida
Board of Trustees, 83 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
If a court nds that the record was improperly withheld, the party seeking the record shall be
awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in addition to any other remedy ordered by the court.
Section 119.071(1)(d)2., F.S. As one court has noted, the inclusion of an attorney’s fee sanction
“was prompted by the legislature’s concern that government entities might claim the work product
privilege whenever public access to their records is demanded.” Smith & Williams, P.A. v. West Coast
Regional Water Supply Authority, 640 So. 2d 216, 218 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).
128
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(1) Scope of exemption
(a) Attorney bills and payments
Only those records which reect a “mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy, or
legal theory” are included within the parameters of the work product exemption. Accordingly,
in AGO 85-89, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that a contract between a county and a
private law rm for legal counsel and documentation for invoices submitted by such rm to the
county do not fall within the work product exemption. Accord AGO 00-07 (records of outside
attorney fee bills for the defense of the county, as well as its employees who are sued individually,
for alleged civil rights violations are public records subject to disclosure).
If the bills and invoices contain some exempt work product--i.e., “mental impression[s],
conclusion[s], litigation strateg[ies], or legal theor[ies],”--the exempt material may be deleted
and the remainder disclosed. AGO 85-89. However, information such as the hours worked or
the hourly wage clearly would not fall within the scope of the exemption. Id. And see Herskovitz
v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9, 1998), available online in the Cases database
at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (“Obviously, an entry on a [billing] statement
which identies a specic legal strategy to be considered or puts a specic amount of settlement
authority received from the client, would fall within the exemption. On the other hand, a
notation that the le was opened, or that a letter was sent to opposing counsel, would not.”).
us, an agency which “blocked out” most notations on invoices prepared in connection
with services rendered by and fees paid to attorneys representing the agency, “improperly
withheld” nonexempt material when it failed to limit its redactions to those items “genuinely
reecting its ‘mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy, or legal theory.’” Smith &
Williams, P.A. v. West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority, 640 So. 2d at 218. And see Davis
v. Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 480 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied,
488 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1986), holding in part that a citizen seeking to examine records of a public
hospital board concerning the payment of legal fees was entitled to examine actual records, not
merely excerpts taken from information stored in the hospital’s computer.
(b) Records prepared prior to litigation or for other purposes
Unlike the open meetings exemption in s. 286.011(8), F.S., for certain attorney-client
discussions between a governmental board and its attorney, s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., is not limited
to records created for pending litigation before a court or administrative agency, but may also
apply to records prepared “in anticipation of imminent civil or criminal litigation or imminent
adversarial administrative proceedings . . . .” (e.s.) See AGO 98-21, discussing the dierences
between the public records work product exemption in s. 119.071(1)(d) and the Sunshine Law
exemption in s. 286.011(8), F.S.
However, s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., does not create a blanket exception to the Public Records
Act for all attorney work product. AGO 91-75. e exemption is narrower than the work
product privilege recognized by the courts for private litigants. AGO 85-89. In order to
qualify for the work product exemption, the records must have been prepared exclusively for
litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings, or prepared in anticipation of imminent
litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings; records prepared for other purposes may
not be converted into exempt material simply because they are also used in or related to the
litigation. See, e.g., Lightbourne v. McCollum, 969 So. 2d 326, 333 (Fla. 2007), cert. denied, 553
U.S. 1059 (2008) (memoranda prepared by corrections department attorney regarding lethal
injection procedures do not constitute exempt attorney work product because memoranda do
not relate to any pending litigation nor appear to have been prepared exclusively for litigation);
MHM Correctional Services, Inc. v. State, Department of Corrections, No. 2009 CA 2105 (Fla. 2d
Cir. Ct. June 10, 2009), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (department wrongfully withheld portions of an e-mail stream regarding the
bid process as protected work product or privileged communications as none of the emails were
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
129
prepared in contemplation of litigation as required by the statute).
Moreover, only those records which are prepared by or at the express direction of the
agency attorney and reect “a mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy, or legal
theory of the attorney or the agency” are exempt from disclosure until the conclusion of the
proceedings. See City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 493 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 1986) (trial court
must examine city’s litigation le in accident case and prohibit disclosure only of those records
reecting mental impression, conclusion, litigation strategy or legal theory of attorney or city);
Jordan v. School Board of Broward County, 531 So. 2d 976, 977 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (record
did not constitute exempt work product because it “was not prepared at an attorney’s express
direction nor did it reect a conclusion and mental impression of appellee”); and Lightbourne v.
McCollum, supra (exemption inapplicable to records that conveyed specic factual information
rather than mental impressions or litigation strategies). Cf. Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So. 2d 1053,
1055 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied sub nom., Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency v.
Sanchez, 426 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1983) (documents which are given by a client to an attorney in
the course of seeking legal advice are privileged in the attorney’s hands only if the documents
were privileged in the client’s hands; thus, otherwise public records made or received by agency
personnel do not become privileged merely by transferring them to the agency attorney).
us, a circuit judge refused to apply the exemption to tapes, witness statements and
interview notes taken by police as part of an investigation of a drowning accident at a city
summer camp. See Sun-Sentinel Company v. City of Hallandale, No. 95-13528(05) (Fla. 17th
Cir. Ct. October 11, 1995), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com. Similarly, in AGO 05-23, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that notes
taken by the assistant city attorney during interviews with co-workers of certain city employees
in order to ascertain if employee discipline was warranted are not exempt from disclosure. See
also AGO 91-75 (work product exemption not applicable to documents generated or received
by school district investigators, acting at the direction of the school board to conduct an
investigation of certain school district departments). Cf. City of Avon Park v. State, 117 So. 3d
470 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (recognizing that where no charges were led against any of the parties
mentioned in a state attorney investigator’s report, the report was a public record and the s.
119.071[1][d], F.S., exemption was inapplicable).
(c) Settlement records
If the state settles a claim against one company accused of conspiracy to x prices, the state
has concluded the litigation against that company. us, the records prepared in anticipation of
litigation against that company are no longer exempt from disclosure even though the state has
commenced litigation against the alleged co-conspirator. State v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company of
Miami, Inc., 582 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). And see Tribune Company v. Hardee Memorial
Hospital, No. CA-91-370 (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. August 19, 1991), available online in the Cases
database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (settlement agreement not exempt
as attorney work product even though another related case was pending, and agency attorneys
feared disclosure of their assessment of the merits of the settled case and their litigation strategy
would have a detrimental eect upon the agency’s position in the related case). See also Inf.
Op. to Gastesi, August, 27, 2015 (settlement demand furnished by plainti to agency); and
Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, No. 91-4218
(Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 5, 1992) (technical documents or data which were not prepared for the
purpose of carrying litigation forward but rather were jointly authored among adversaries to
promote settlement are not exempted as attorney work product). Cf. Prison Health Services, Inc.
v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 718 So. 2d 204, 205 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), review denied,
727 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) (private company under contract with sheri to provide medical
services for inmates at county jail must release records relating to a settlement agreement with an
inmate because all of its records that would normally be subject to the Public Records Act if in the
possession of the public agency, are likewise covered by that law, even though in the possession
of the private corporation).
130
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(2) Duration of exemption
e exemption from disclosure provided by s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., is temporary and
limited in duration. City of North Miami v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., supra. e exemption
exists only until the “conclusion of the litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings” even if
disclosure of the information in the concluded case could negatively impact the agency’s position
in related cases or claims. See State v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Miami, Inc., 582 So. 2d 1
(Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Seminole County v. Wood, 512 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review
denied, 520 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1988); and Lightbourne v. McCollum, supra (rejecting a “continuing
exemption” claim by the state). And see AGO 13-13 (Sunshine Law exemption for certain
attorney-client meetings found in s. 286.011[8], F.S., “does not recognize a continuation of the
exemption for ‘derivative claims’ made in separate, subsequent litigation”). Cf. State v. Coca-Cola
Bottling Company of Miami, Inc., supra (although state cannot claim work product exemption
for litigation records after conclusion of litigation, Ch. 119 does not cover oral testimony; thus,
opposing counsel not entitled to take depositions of state representatives regarding the concluded
litigation).
us, a school board failed to meet its burden of showing that items contained in a school
board litigation report were exempt from disclosure where there was no evidence that the cases in
question were pending and open when the board received the public records request. Bareld v.
School Board of Manatee County, 135 So. 3d 560 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).
However, the phrase “conclusion of the litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings”
encompasses post-judgment collection eorts such as a legislative claims bill. Wagner v. Orange
County, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). And see AGO 94-33, concluding that for purposes
of the attorney-client exemption from the Sunshine Law in s. 286.011(8), F.S., a pending lawsuit
is concluded when the suit is dismissed with prejudice or the applicable statute of limitations has
run; “[t]o allow a plainti who has voluntarily dismissed a suit to gain access to transcripts of
strategy or settlement meetings in order to obtain an advantage in the reling of a lawsuit would
subvert the purpose of the statute.” Cf. Chmielewski v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d 521 (Fla.
2d DCA 2014) (rejecting city’s argument that because an agreement settling a quiet title action
provided for further mediation should a dispute arise regarding the meaning of the agreement,
the case was still pending for purposes of the Sunshine Law exemption in s. 286.011[8], F.S).
In addition, the exemption extends “through prosecution of appeals.” Inf. Op. to Boutsis,
December 13, 2012. Cf. s. 119.071(1)(d)1., F.S. (“For purposes of capital collateral litigation as
set forth in s. 27.7001, the Attorney General’s oce is entitled to claim this exemption for those
public records prepared for direct appeal as well as for all capital collateral litigation after direct
appeal until execution of sentence or imposition of a life sentence.”).
c. Other statutory exemptions relating to litigation records
Section 768.28(16)(b), F.S., provides an exemption for claims les maintained by agencies
pursuant to a risk management program for tort liability until the termination of all litigation and
settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident.
e “plain language of the statute” indicates that the “entire claims le is exempt from
disclosure until resolution of the claim or claims.” City of Homestead v. McDonough, 232 So.
3d 1069, 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). [emphasis supplied by the court]. Accordingly, the trial
court erred by ordering production of certain records in the le on the theory that production
would not harm the city. Id. See also Wagner v. Orange County, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA
2007), stating that the phrase “settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident” included
a legislative claims bill.
e exemption aorded by s. 768.28(16), F.S., is limited to tort claims for which the
agency may be liable under s. 768.28, F.S., and does not apply to federal civil rights actions under
42 U.S.C. s. 1983. AGOs 00-20 and 00-07. And see Sun-Sentinel Company v. City of Hallandale,
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
131
No. 95-13528(05) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. October 11, 1995), available online in the Cases database
at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (exemption now found at s. 768.28[16][b],
F.S., for risk management les did not apply to tapes, witness statements and interview notes
taken by police as part of an investigation of a drowning accident at a city summer camp).
Moreover, the exemption does not include outside attorney invoices indicating hours worked
and amount to be paid by the public agency, even though the records may be maintained by the
agency’s risk management oce pursuant to a risk management program. AGO 00-07. And see
AGO 92-82 (open meetings exemption provided by s. 768.28, F.S., applies only to meetings held
after a tort claim is led with the risk management program).
Section 624.311(2), F.S., provides that the “records of insurance claim negotiations of
any state agency or political subdivision are condential and exempt [from disclosure] until
termination of all litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident.” A
county’s self-insured workers compensation program is the legal equivalent of “insurance” for
purposes of this exemption. Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9, 1998),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com. And see
AGO 85-102 (s. 624.311, F.S., exemption includes correspondence regarding insurance claims
negotiations between a county’s retained counsel and its insurance carriers until termination of
litigation and settlement of claims arising out of the same incident). Compare s. 284.40(2), F.S.
(claim les maintained by the risk management division of the Department of Financial Services
are condential, shall be only for the use of the department, and are exempt from disclosure); and
s. 1004.24(4), F.S. (claims les of self-insurance program adopted by Board of Governors, or the
board’s designee, are condential and exempt).
d. Attorney notes
Relying on its conclusion in Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379
So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980), the Florida Supreme Court has recognized that “not all trial preparation
materials are public records.” State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d 324, 327 (Fla. 1990). In Kokal, the Court
approved the decision of the Fifth District in Orange County v. Florida Land Co., 450 So. 2d 341,
344 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review denied, 458 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 1984), which described certain
documents as not within the term “public records” because they were not used to perpetuate,
formalize, or communicate knowledge:
Document No. 2 is a list in rough outline form of items of
evidence which may be needed for trial. Document No. 9 is a
list of questions the county attorney planned to ask a witness.
Document No. 10 is a proposed trial outline. Document No. 11
contains handwritten notes regarding the county’s sewage system
and a meeting with Florida Land’s attorneys. Document No. 15
contains notes (in rough form) regarding the deposition of an
anticipated witness. ese documents are merely notes from the
attorneys to themselves designed for their own personal use in
remembering certain things. ey seem to be simply preliminary
guides intended to aid the attorneys when they later formalized
the knowledge. We cannot imagine that the Legislature, in
enacting the Public Records Act, intended to include within the
term ‘public records’ this type of material. [Emphasis supplied
by Court]
Similarly, in Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985, 987 (Fla. 1998), the Court ruled
that “outlines, time lines, page notations regarding information in the record, and other similar
items” in the case le, do not fall within the denition of public record, and thus are not subject
to disclosure. See also Braddy v. State, 219 So. 3d 803. 821 (Fla. 2017) (“handwritten attorney
notes, draft documents, and annotated copies of decisional law . . . do not constitute public
records”); Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203, 205 (Fla. 1998) (“attorney’s notes and other such
preliminary documents are not public records and are never subject to public records disclosure”);
132
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Valle v. State, 705 So. 2d 1331, 1335 (Fla. 1997) (prosecutors’ notes to themselves for their
own personal use, including outlines of opening and closing arguments and notes of witness
depositions are not public records); Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d 725, 727 (Fla. 1997) (handwritten
notes dealing with trial strategy and cross-examination of witnesses are not public records); and
Atkins v. State, 663 So. 2d 624, 626 (Fla. 1995) (notes of state attorney’s investigations and
annotated photocopies of decisional case law are not public records).
By contrast, documents prepared to communicate, perpetuate, or formalize knowledge
constitute public records and are, therefore, subject to disclosure in the absence of statutory
exemption. See Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid & Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633, 640
(Fla. 1980), stating that “[i]nter-oce memoranda and intra-oce memoranda communicating
information from one public employee to another or merely prepared for ling, even though not
a part of an agency’s later, formal public product, would nonetheless constitute public records
inasmuch as they supply the nal evidence of knowledge obtained in connection with the
transaction of ocial business.”
us, in Coleman v. Austin, 521 So. 2d 247, 248 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), the court observed
that “although notes from attorneys to themselves might not be public records when intended
for their own personal use, inter-oce and intra-oce memoranda may constitute public records
even though encompassing trial preparation materials.” And see Orange County v. Florida Land
Company, supra, in which the court concluded that trial preparation materials consisting of
interoce and intraoce memoranda communicating information from one public employee to
another or merely prepared for ling, even though not part of the agency’s formal work product,
were public records although such circulated trial preparation materials might be exempt from
disclosure pursuant to s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S., while the litigation is ongoing. See also AGO 05-
23 (handwritten notes prepared by city’s assistant labor attorney during her interviews with city
employees are public records “when those notes are made to perpetuate and formalize knowledge
and to communicate that information to the city’s labor attorney”).
17. Personal records not made or received in the course of ocial business
As noted in AGO 04-33, the broad denition of “public record” makes it clear that the
“form of the record is irrelevant; the material issue is whether the record is made or received by
the public agency in connection with the transaction of ocial business.” See s. 119.011(12),
F.S., dening the term “public records” to mean materials “made or received pursuant to law or
ordinance or in connection with the transaction of ocial business by any agency.” See also Shevin
v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633, 640 (Fla. 1980), stating that
in order to constitute “public records” for purposes of Ch. 119 disclosure requirements, the
records must have been prepared “in connection with ocial agency business” and be intended
to “perpetuate, communicate, or formalize knowledge of some type.”
Accordingly, records which are not made or received in connection with the transaction of
ocial business do not constitute public records for purposes of Ch. 119 disclosure requirements.
See e.g. Butler v. City of Hallandale Beach, 68 So. 3d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (e-mail sent by
mayor from her personal account using her personal computer and blind copied to friends and
supporters did not constitute a public record because the e-mail was not made pursuant to law or
ordinance or in connection with the transaction of ocial business). Similarly, text messages from
a city commissioner to her husband during a city commission meeting which were ‘uniformly
personal and private’ and were not made in connection with any business transacted by the city,
“did not possess the attributes of ocial business and, therefore, did not become subject to public
records inspection.” City of Sunny Isles Beach v. Gatto, 338 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022).
e court noted that the commissioner was not acting in her ocial capacity when she texted
with her husband; “[n]or did her husband step out of his role as husband and adopt the role of a
citizen either seeking to enter a City process or to transact City business.” Id.
In evaluating whether a record is made or received in connection with the ocial business
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
133
of an agency, “the determining factor is the nature of the record, not its physical location.” State v.
City of Clearwater, 863 So. 2d 149, 154 (Fla. 2003). In Clearwater, the Court held that personal
e-mails between government employees on government-owned computers which were not made
or received in the course of ocial business did not constitute public records. See also Bent v.
State, 46 So. 3d 1047, 1050 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (recordings made by sheri’s oce of personal
telephone calls between minors in jail awaiting trial and third parties are not public records when
contents of the phone calls do not involve criminal activity or a security breach); and Media
General Operations, Inc. v. Feeney, 849 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (records of personal or
private calls of legislative employees using cellular phone service provided by a political party do
not constitute ocial business of the Legislature and are not subject to public disclosure).
However, in concluding that the location of e-mails on a government computer does not
control the application of Public Records Act, the Clearwater court also cautioned that the case
before it did not involve e-mails “that may have been isolated by a government employee whose
job required him or her to locate employee misuse of government computers.” State v. City of
Clearwater, at 151n.2. And see Miami-Dade County v. Professional Law Enforcement Association,
997 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (personal ight log of pilots paid by county which are
required as part of pilots’ administrative duties are distinguishable from personal e-mails in City
of Clearwater case and are subject to disclosure). See also AGO 09-19 (because the creation of
a city Facebook page must be for a municipal, not private purpose, the “placement of material
on the city’s page would presumably be in furtherance of such purpose and in connection with
the transaction of ocial business and thus subject to the provisions of Chapter 119, Florida
Statutes”),
us, in Bill of Rights, Inc. v. City of New Smyrna Beach, No. 2009-20218-CINS (Fla. 7th
Cir. Ct. April 8, 2010), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com, the court concluded that billing documents regarding personal calls made
and received by city employees on city-owned or city-leased cellular telephones are public records,
when those documents are received and maintained in connection with the transaction of ocial
business; “and, the ‘ocial business’ of a city includes paying for telephone service and obtaining
reimbursement from employees for personal calls.” See also AGO 77-141 (copies of letters or
other documents received by the mayor in his ocial capacity constitute records received “in
connection with the transaction of ocial business” and therefore are public records). Compare
Inf. Op. to Burke, April 14, 2010 (while the licensing board, and not Attorney General’s Oce,
must determine whether a letter, allegedly sent to the board by mistake, had been received by the
board in connection with the transaction of ocial business, the board “may wish to consider
whether circumstances characterize how the document was received, such as does the letter relate
to a past, existing, or potential investigation by the board”).
Similarly, the mere fact that an e-mail is sent from a private e-mail account using a personal
computer is not the determining factor as to whether it is a public record; it is whether the
e-mail was prepared or received in connection with ocial agency business. See Butler v. City
of Hallandale Beach, supra. For example, if a public employee sends a proposed agency budget
to his or her supervisor for review, the report is a public record, regardless of whether the report
was sent from the employee’s agency e-mail account using a government computer, or from
his or her home computer using a personal e-mail account. And see AGO 08-07 (individual
council members who post comments and emails relating to transaction of city business on a
privately-owned and operated website “would be responsible for ensuring that the information is
maintained in accordance with the Public Records Law”).
“An elected ocial’s use of a private cell phone to conduct public business via text
messaging can create an electronic written public record subject to disclosure.” O’Boyle v.
Town of Gulf Stream, 257 So. 3d 1036, 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). However, in order for
the communication to constitute a public record, “an ocial or employee must have prepared,
owned, used, or retained it within the scope of his or her employment or agency.” Id. at 1040-
134
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
1041. According to the O’Boyle court, an ocial or employee’s communication “falls ‘within the
scope of employment or agency’ only when their job requires it, the employer or principal directs
it, or it furthers the employer’s or principal’s interests.” Id. at 1041. Cf. AG0 16-16 (hospital
district not authorized to reimburse a board member for attorney fees incurred in responding
to a public records request for records relating to her board service which were stored in her
private computer and telephone when no suit, claim, charge, or action was instituted against the
commissioner when the fees were incurred).
18. Personnel records
e general rule with regard to personnel records is the same as for other public records;
unless the Legislature has expressly exempted certain personnel records from disclosure or
authorized the agency to adopt rules limiting access to such records, personnel records are subject
to public inspection and copying under s. 119.07(1), F.S. See Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545
(Fla. 1985).
a. Annuity or custodial account activities
Records identifying individual participants in any annuity contract or custodial account
under s. 112.21, F.S. (relating to tax-sheltered annuities or custodial accounts for employees of
governmental agencies) and their personal account activities are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1), F.S. Section 112.21(1), F.S.
b. Applications for employment, references, and resumes
Applications and resumes are subject to disclosure, after redaction of statutorily exempt
information such as social security numbers. See Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid
and Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980); and AGOs 15-10 and 77-48. Similarly,
communications from third parties are subject to disclosure. See Douglas v. Michel, 410 So.
2d 936 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), questions answered and approved, 464 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1985). A
written employment contract is a public record. AGO 13-14.
Section 1004.098(1)(a), F.S., establishes condentiality for personal identifying
information of applicants for president of a state university or Florida College System institution.
e age, race, and gender of applicants who met the minimum qualications for the position
who were considered and the personal identifying information of applicants included in the
nal group of applicants are no longer condential beginning at the earlier of the date the nal
group of applicants is established or 21 days before the date of a meeting at which an interview
of an applicant will be conducted or at which nal action or a vote is to be taken on the oer of
employment of an applicant. Section 1004.098(1)(b), F.S.
c. Collective bargaining
(1) Relationship of collective bargaining agreement to personnel records
A collective bargaining agreement between a public employer and its employees may not
validly make the personnel records of public employees condential or exempt the same from the
Public Records Act. AGO 77-48. us, employee grievance records are disclosable even though
classied as condential in a collective bargaining contract because “to allow the elimination of
public records from the mandate of Chapter 119 by private contract would sound the death
knell of the Act.” Mills v. Doyle, 407 So. 2d 348, 350 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Cf. Palm Beach
County Classroom Teacher’s Association v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 411 So. 2d 1375,
1376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (collective bargaining agreement cannot be used “to circumvent the
requirements of public meetings” in s. 286.011, F.S.).
Similarly, a city may not remove and destroy disciplinary notices, with or without the
employee’s consent, during the course of resolving collective bargaining grievances, except in
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
135
accordance with retention schedules established by the Division of Library and Information
Services of the Department of State. AGO 94-75. Accord AGO 94-54.
(2) Collective bargaining work product exemption
Section 447.605(3), F.S., provides:
All work products developed by the public employer in
preparation for negotiations, and during negotiations, shall be
condential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), F.S.
e exemption is limited and does not remove budgetary or scal information from the
purview of Ch. 119, F.S. See Bay County School Board v. Public Employees Relations Commission,
382 So. 2d 747, 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), noting that records which are prepared for other
purposes do not, as a result of being used in negotiations, come within the s. 447.605(3)
exemption; and Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976), ordering that working
papers used in preparing a college budget be produced for inspection by a labor organizer.
us, proposals and counter proposals presented during the course of collective bargaining
would appear to be subject to public disclosure. However, written notes taken by the representative
of a re control district during collective bargaining sessions for use in preparing for subsequent
bargaining sessions which reect the impressions, strategies and opinions of the district representative
are exempt pursuant to s. 447.605(3), F.S. Inf. Op. to Fulwider, June 14, 1993.
d. Complaints against employees
Section 119.071(2)(k), F.S., provides that a complaint of misconduct led with an agency
against an agency employee and all information obtained pursuant to an investigation by the
agency of the complaint is condential and exempt until the investigation ceases to be active,
or until the agency provides written notice to the employee who is the subject of the complaint,
either personally or by mail, that the agency has either:
a. Concluded the investigation with a nding not to proceed with disciplinary action or
le charges; or
b. Concluded the investigation with a nding to proceed with disciplinary action or le
charges.
Prior to the enactment of this statute in 2013, there was no general exemption from
public disclosure for complaints and investigative records based on alleged misconduct by
agency employees. See e.g., AGO 04-22 (anonymous letter sent to city ocials containing
allegations of misconduct by city employees is a public record). Instead, the Legislature enacted
exemptions pertaining to specic types of complaints and investigations. See e.g. s. 943.03(2),
F.S., providing for condentiality of Florida Department of Law Enforcement records relating to
an active investigation of misconduct, in connection with their ocial duties, of public ocials
and employees and of members of public corporations and authorities subject to suspension or
removal by the Governor.
For information on the exemptions for whistleblower, discrimination and ethics complaints
directed against public ocials and employees, please refer to the discussion on pages 98-101. A
discussion of exemptions addressing complaints against law enforcement ocers and educators
follows:
(1) Law enforcement ocers and correctional ocers
(a) Scope of exemption and duration of condentiality
In the absence of an express legislative exemption, law enforcement personnel records are
open to inspection just like those of other public employees. See Tribune Company v. Cannella,
438 So. 2d 516, 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), quashed on other grounds, 458 So. 2d 1075 (Fla.
136
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., Deperte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985) (law
enforcement personnel records compiled and maintained by the employing agency “can never
constitute criminal investigative or intelligence information within the meaning of the Public
Records Act even if subpoenaed by another law enforcement agency at some point after their
original compilation by the employing agency”).
However, section 112.533(2)(a), F.S., provides that complaints led against law
enforcement ocers and correctional ocers, and all information obtained pursuant to the
agency’s investigation of the complaint, are condential until the investigation is no longer active
or until the agency head or his or her designee provides written notice to the ocer who is the
subject of the complaint that the agency has concluded the investigation with a nding to either
proceed or not to proceed with disciplinary action or the ling of charges.
e term “law enforcement ocer” is dened as any person, other than a chief of
police, who is employed full time or part time by any municipality or the state or any political
subdivision thereof and whose primary responsibility is the prevention and detection of crime
or the enforcement of the penal, trac, or highway laws of this state; and includes any person
who is appointed by the sheri as a deputy sheri under s. 30.07, F.S. Section 112.531(2), F.S.
Complaints led with the employing agency by any person, whether within or outside the
agency, are subject to the exemption. AGO 93-61. However, the complaint must be in writing
in order for the condentiality provisions to apply. City of Delray Beach v. Bareld, 579 So. 2d
315 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Cf. Fraternal Order of Police v. Rutherford, 51 So. 3d 485, 488 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2010) (written complaint not necessary to trigger condentiality aorded by s. 112.532[4]
[b], F.S., as that statute provides a broader condentiality for ongoing investigations whenever a
law enforcement or correctional ocer faces possible dismissal, demotion, or suspension without
pay until the investigating agency “completes or abandons its investigation”).
While s. 112.533, F.S., applies to complaints and records obtained pursuant to the law
enforcement agency’s investigation of the complaint, it does not transform otherwise public
records (such as crime or incident reports) into condential records simply because the actions
which are described in the crime report later form the basis of a complaint led pursuant to s.
112.533, F.S. AGO 96-27. And see AGO 08-33 (list of law enforcement ocers who have been
placed on administrative duty by their employer is not condential under s. 112.533[2][a], F.S.,
but is subject to inspection and copying even if information on the list will identify ocers who
are the subject of internal investigation). But see Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. v. City
of Tallahassee, 314 So. 3d 796 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021), review granted, No. 21-651 (Fla. December
21, 2021) (law enforcement ocers who fatally shot suspects threatening them with deadly force
were “victims” under Marsy’s Law and were entitled to seek judicial relief to preclude release of
identifying information in incident reports). For more information about Marsy’s Law, please see
the discussion on page 121.
If the ocer resigns prior to the agency’s completion of its investigation, the exemption
from disclosure provided by s. 112.533(2), F.S., no longer applies, even if the agency is still
actively investigating the complaint. AGO 91-73. However, if the complaint has generated
information which qualies as active criminal investigative information, i.e., information
compiled by a criminal justice agency while conducting an ongoing criminal investigation of
a specic act, such information would be exempt while the investigation is continuing with a
good faith anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution in the foreseeable future. Id. See s.
112.533(2)(b), F.S., providing that the disclosure provisions do not apply to any public record
[such as active criminal investigative information exempted in s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S.] which is
exempt from disclosure pursuant to Ch. 119, F.S.
e exemption is of limited duration. Section 112.533(2), F.S., establishes that the
complaint and all information gathered in the investigation of that complaint generally become
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
137
public records at the conclusion of the investigation or at such time as the investigation becomes
inactive. AGO 95-59. us, a court ruled that the exemption ended once the sheri’s oce
provided the accused deputy with a letter stating that the investigation had been completed, the
allegations had been sustained, and that the deputy would be notied of the disciplinary action
to be taken. Neumann v. Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association, 763 So. 2d 1181 (Fla.
4th DCA 2000).
However, the mere fact that written notice of intervening actions is provided to the ocer
under investigation does not signal the end of the investigation nor does such notice make this
information public prior to the conclusion of the investigation. AGO 95-59. Similarly, the
exemption remains in eect if an agency schedules a pre-disciplinary determination meeting with
an ocer to hear and evaluate the ocer’s side of the case because “[d]iscipline is not an accepted
fact at this point.” Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v. Neumann, 796 So. 2d 1278,
1280 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).
A complaint is presumed to be inactive, and hence subject to disclosure, if no nding is
made within 45 days after the complaint is led. Section 112.533(2)(b), F.S. See City of Delray
Beach v. Bareld, 579 So. 2d at 318 (trial court’s nding that complaint was inactive, despite
contrary testimony of law enforcement ocers conducting the investigation, comes to appellate
court “clothed with its own presumption of correctness--especially, as here, where there is other
record evidence which sustains it”).
(b) Limitations on disclosure
Section 112.533(2)(b), F.S., states that the inspection provisions in that subsection do
not apply to any public record which is exempt from public disclosure under Ch. 119, F.S. For
example, active criminal investigative or intelligence information which is exempt pursuant to
s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S., remains exempt notwithstanding the disclosure provisions set forth in s.
112.533(2)(a), F.S. Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v. Neumann, 796 So. 2d
1278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). And see AGO 91-73. us, in such cases, the information would
be subject to disclosure when the criminal investigative information exemption ends, rather than
as provided in s. 112.533(2), F.S. Cf. City of Riviera Beach v. Bareld, 642 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1995) (exempt active criminal investigative
information may be shared with another criminal justice agency for use in a simultaneous internal
aairs investigation and retain its protected status).
Similarly, information that would reveal the identity of the victim of child abuse or the
victim of a sexual oense is not subject to disclosure since the information is exempt pursuant to
s. 119.071(2)(h), F.S. Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v. Neumann, supra.
However, the state attorney’s records of a closed criminal investigation are not made
condential by s. 112.533, F.S., even though an internal investigation conducted by the police
department remains pending concerning the same complaint. AGO 00-66. Cf. AGO 96-05,
noting that a police report of an agency’s criminal investigation of a police ocer is a public
record in the hands of the police department after the investigation is over regardless of whether
a copy of the report is forwarded to the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission or
to the Commission on Ethics.
(c) Unauthorized disclosure penalties
Section 112.533(4), F.S., makes it a rst degree misdemeanor for any person who is a
participant in an internal investigation to willfully disclose any information obtained pursuant
to the agency’s investigation before such information becomes a public record. However, the
subsection “does not limit a law enforcement or correctional ocer’s ability to gain access to
information under paragraph (2)(a).” Section 112.533(4), F.S. In addition, a sheri, police chief
or other head of a law enforcement agency, or his or her designee, may acknowledge the existence
of a complaint, and the fact that an investigation is underway. Id.
138
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
e Attorney General’s Oce has issued several advisory opinions interpreting this statute.
See, e.g., AGO 03-60 (while public disclosure of information obtained pursuant to an internal
investigation prior to its becoming a public record is prohibited, s. 112.533[4], F.S., “would
not preclude intradepartmental communications among those participating in the investigation).
Cf. AGO 97-62 (condentiality requirements prevent the participation of a citizens’ board
in resolving a complaint made against a law enforcement ocer until the ocer’s employing
agency has made its initial ndings). But see Cooper v. Dillon, 403 F. 3d 1208, 1218-1219
(11th Cir. 2005), in which the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that s. 112.533(4), F.S.,
was unconstitutional “[b]ecause the curtailment of First Amendment freedoms by Fla. Stat.
ch. 112.533(4) is not supported by a compelling state interest, the statute fails to satisfy strict
scrutiny and unconstitutionally abridges the rights to speak, publish, and petition government.”
(2) Public school system employees
e complaint and material relating to the investigation of a complaint against a public
school system employee are condential until the preliminary investigation is either concluded
or ceases to be active. Section 1012.31(3)(a)1., F.S. See AGO 91-75 (while exemption applies
when a complaint against a district employee has been led and an investigation against that
employee ensues, it does not provide a basis for withholding documents compiled in a general
investigation of school departments). Cf. Johnson v. Deluz, 875 So. 2d 1,3 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
(because “legislature had no intention of permitting condential student information to be made
public,” student-identifying information must be redacted from public report of investigation of
school principal); and Rhea v. District Board of Trustees of Santa Fe College, 109 So. 3d 851 (Fla.
1st DCA 2013) (student’s unredacted e-mail complaining about a college instructor’s classroom
behavior qualies as an exempt “education record”).
While s. 1012.31(1)(b), F.S., prohibits placing anonymous letters and material in a school
district employee’s personnel le, the statute does not prevent a school board from investigating
the allegations contained in an anonymous letter nor does it permit the school board to destroy
the anonymous material absent compliance with statutory restrictions on destruction of public
records. AGO 87-48. Moreover, the personnel le is open at all times to school board members,
the superintendent, or the principal, or their respective designees in the exercise of their duties,
and to law enforcement personnel in the conduct of a lawful criminal investigation. Section
1012.31(3)(b) and (c), F.S.
(3) State university and Florida College System institution employees
For information on statutory exemptions for complaints led against state university or
Florida College System institution (formerly community college) employees, please refer to the
discussion of employee evaluations on pages 141.
e. Conditions for inspection of personnel records
An agency is not authorized to unilaterally impose special conditions for the inspection
of personnel records. An automatic delay in the production of such records is invalid. Tribune
Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune
Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985) (automatic 48 hour delay unauthorized by Ch. 119, F.S.). And
see Alterra Healthcare Corporation v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936, 940n.4 (Fla. 2002) (“only
the custodian of such records can assert any applicable exemption; not the employee”).
us, while an agency is not precluded from notifying an employee that a request has been
made to inspect his or her personnel records, in the absence of express legislative authority, the
production of personnel records may not be delayed in order to allow the employee to be notied
or present during the inspection of the public records relating to that employee. Compare s.
1012.31(3)(a)3., F.S., providing that no material derogatory to a public school employee may be
inspected until 10 days after the employee has been notied by certied mail or personal delivery
as provided in s. 1012.31(2)(c), F.S.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
139
(1) Privacy issues
e courts have rejected claims that constitutional privacy interests operate to shield
agency personnel records from disclosure. See Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545, 546 (Fla.
1985), holding that the state constitution “does not provide a right of privacy in public records”
and that a state or federal right of disclosural privacy does not exist.
“Absent an applicable statutory exception, pursuant to Florida’s Public Records Act
(embodied in chapter 119, Florida Statutes), public employees (as a general rule) do not have
privacy rights in such records.” Alterra Healthcare Corporation v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936,
940n.4 (Fla. 2002). See also Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379 So.
2d 633 (Fla. 1980); and Mills v. Doyle, 407 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). But see Fadjo v.
Coon, 633 F.2d 1172, 1175n.3 (5th Cir. 1981), noting that “it is clear that the legislature cannot
authorize by statute an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.”
Additionally, the judiciary has refused to deny access to personnel records based on claims
that the release of such information could prove embarrassing or unpleasant for the employee.
See e.g., News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Gadd, 388 So. 2d 276, 278 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)
(absent a statutory exemption, a court is not free to consider public policy questions regarding
the relative signicance of the public’s interest in disclosure and damage to an individual or
institution resulting from such disclosure).
Public employers should note, however, that a court has held that an agency must provide
a discharged employee with an opportunity for a post-termination name-clearing hearing when
stigmatizing information concerning the employee is made a part of the public records or is
otherwise published. Buxton v. City of Plant City, Florida, 871 F.2d 1037 (11th Cir. 1989).
See also Garcia v. Walder Electronics, Inc., 563 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), review denied,
576 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 1990) (public employer has an armative duty to inform a discharged
employee of his right to seek a post-termination name-clearing hearing). Cf. Cannon v. City of
West Palm Beach, 250 F.3d 1299, 1303 (11th Cir. 2001) (failure to provide name-clearing hearing
to employee who alleged that he was denied a promotion due to stigmatizing information in
his personnel le does not violate the employee’s due process rights, because “in this circuit a
‘discharge or more’ is required”).
(2) Sealed records
An agency is not authorized to “seal” disciplinary notices and thereby remove such notices
from disclosure under the Public Records Act. AGO 94-75. Nor may an agency, absent a
statutory exemption for such records, agree to remove counseling slips and written reprimands
from an employee’s personnel le and maintain such documents in a separate disciplinary le
for the purpose of removing such records from public access. AGO 94-54. Accord AGO 11-
19 (superintendent’s failure to comply with a statutory requirement to discuss a performance
evaluation with the employee before ling it in the employee’s personnel le, does not change the
public records status of the evaluation; the evaluation is a public record and may not be removed
from public view or destroyed). And see AGO 15-10 (agency may not “seal” job applications or
request that they be submitted as “sealed” records to foreclose public access).
f. Criminal history information
Except where specic exemptions apply, criminal history information is a public record.
AGO 77-125; Inf. Op. to Lymn, June 1, 1990.
In some cases, criminal or juvenile records information obtained by specic agencies as
part of a background check required for certain positions has been made condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), F.S., or use of the information is restricted. See, e.g., s. 110.1127(2)(d) and
(e), F.S. (agency positions designated or specied as provided in s. 110.1127, F.S.); s. 1002.36(7)
(d) and (e), F.S. (School for the Deaf and the Blind); and s. 39.821(1) F.S. (guardian ad litem).
140
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Federal condentiality provisions also apply to criminal history information received
from the U.S. government. For example, criminal history information shared with a public
school district by the Federal Bureau of Investigation retains its character as a federal record
to which only limited access is provided by federal law and is not subject to public inspection
under Florida’s Public Records Act. AGO 99-01. However, information developed by the school
district from further inquiry into references in the federal criminal history record information is a
public record which should be included in a school district employee’s personnel le. Id.
Sections 943.0585 and 943.059, F.S., prohibit a records custodian who has received
information relating to the existence of an expunged or sealed criminal history record from
disclosing the existence of such record. AGO 94-49.
g. Deferred compensation
All records identifying individual participants in any deferred compensation plan under the
Government Employees’ Deferred Compensation Plan Act and their personal account activities
shall be condential and exempt. Section 112.215(7), F.S.
h. Direct deposit
Direct deposit records made prior to October 1, 1986, are exempt from s. 119.07(1),
F.S. With respect to direct deposit records made on or after October 1, 1986, the names of the
authorized nancial institutions and the account numbers of the beneciaries are condential
and exempt. Section 17.076(5), F.S.
i. Drug test results
Drug test results and other information received or produced by a state agency employer as
a result of a drug-testing program in accordance with s. 112.0455, F.S., the Drug-Free Workplace
Act, are condential and exempt, and may not be disclosed except as authorized in the statute.
Section 112.0455(11), F.S. See also s. 112.0455(8)(l) and (t), F.S.
While the provisions of s. 112.0455, F.S., are applicable to state agencies and not to
municipalities, ss. 440.101-440.102, F.S., may be used by a municipality or other entity that
is an “employer” for purposes of these statutes, to establish a drug-free workplace program. See
AGO 98-38. Section 440.102(8), F.S., provides for condentiality of drug test results or other
information received as a result of a drug-testing program implemented pursuant to Ch. 440,
F.S. AGO 13-19. Cf. AGO 94-51 (city not authorized to delete or remove consent forms or
records of disciplinary action relating to city employees’ drug testing from personnel records
when drug testing was not conducted pursuant to s. 440.102, F.S.); and Inf. Op. to McCormack,
May 13, 1997 (s. 440.102[8], F.S., applies to public employees and not to drug test results of
public assistance applicants). And see s. 443.1715(3), F.S., relating to condentiality of drug
test information and limited disclosure in proceedings conducted for purposes of determining
compensability under the reemployment assistance law.
In AGO 96-58, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that the medical director for a city
re and rescue department may submit drug test results to the state health department pursuant
to s. 401.265(2), F.S., requiring a medical director to report to the department any emergency
medical technician or paramedic who may have acted in a manner constituting grounds for
discipline under the licensing law. e tests were conducted during routine pre-employment and
annual tness for duty examinations and not pursuant to ss. 440.101-440.102, F.S.
j. Employee assistance program
An employee’s personal identifying information contained in records held by the employing
agency relating to that employee’s participation in an employee assistance program is condential
and exempt from disclosure. See ss. 110.1091 (state employees), 125.585 (county employees),
and 166.0444 (municipal employees), F.S.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
141
k. Employment search or consultant records
“[D]ocuments provided to a consultant in relation to his acting on behalf of a public
agency are public documents.” Wallace v. Guzman, 687 So. 2d 1351, 1353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
us, if an agency uses a recruitment company to conduct an employment search for the agency,
records made or received by the private company in connection with the search are public
records. AGO 92-80. See also Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, 379 So.
2d 633 (Fla. 1980) (rm of consultants hired to conduct an employment search for position of
managing director of a public agency was “acting on behalf of ” a public agency and thus letters,
memoranda, resumes, and travel vouchers made or received by consultants as part of search
were public records). Cf. s. 1004.098(1), F.S., discussed on page 134 establishing an exemption
for personal identifying information of applicants for president of a state university or Florida
College institution.
l. Evaluations of employee performance
Evaluations of public employee performance are generally subject to disclosure. As the
Florida Supreme Court pointed out in News-Press Publishing Company v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646,
648 (Fla. 1977):
No policy of the state protects a public employee from the
embarrassment which results from his or her public employer’s
discussion or action on the employee’s failure to perform his or
her duties properly.
However, there are statutory restrictions on access to evaluations of employee performance
for public school system employees. Section 1012.31(3)(a), F.S. Similarly, there are exemptions
for evaluations contained in limited-access records prescribed by a hospital or other facility
licensed under Ch. 395, F.S., for employees of the facility, s. 395.3025(9), F.S.; prescribed by the
State Board of Education for Florida College System institution employees, s. 1012.81, F.S.; or
prescribed by a university board of trustees for its employees, s. 1012.91, F.S.
A discussion of each of these exemptions follows:
(1) Hospital employees
Section 395.3025(9), F.S., authorizes hospitals to prescribe the content of limited-access
employee records which are not available for disclosure for 5 years after such designation. Such
records are limited to evaluations of employee performance, including records forming the basis
for evaluation and subsequent actions. See Times Publishing Company v. Tampa General Hospital,
No. 93-03362 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. May 27, 1993), available online in the Cases database at the
open government site at myoridalegal.com (s. 395.3025[9] exemption does not apply to list of
terminated hospital employees; hospital ordered to allow newspaper to inspect list and personnel
les of those persons named in list after “limited-access” documents have been removed).
(2) Public school employees
Employee evaluations of public school system employees prepared pursuant to cited statutes
are condential until the end of the school year immediately following the school year during
which the evaluation was made; however, no evaluations made prior to July 1, 1983, shall be made
public. Section 1012.31(3)(a)2., F.S. However, the exemption applies only to the “employee
evaluation.” See Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. Department of Education, 133 So. 3d 957, 960
(Fla. 1st DCA 2013), review denied, 157 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 2014) (“While section 1012.31[3]
[a]2 provides that the evaluation of a public school teacher is not subject to disclosure under the
public records law, it does not follow that any information or data used to prepare the evaluation
is likewise exempt from disclosure”).
Moreover, information obtained from evaluation forms circulated by the local teacher’s
union to its members that is provided unsolicited to the superintendent is not exempt under this
142
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
statute. AGO 94-94. In addition, written comments and performance memoranda prepared by
individual school board members regarding an appointed superintendent are not exempt from
disclosure. AGO 97-23. Cf. AGO 11-19, concluding that a superintendent’s failure to comply
with a statute requiring that a performance evaluation be discussed with an employee before it is
led in the employee’s personnel le, does not change the public records status of the evaluation;
the evaluation is a public record and may not be removed from public view or destroyed.
(3) State university and Florida College System institution employees
Limited-access records maintained by a state university on its employees are condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S., and may be released only upon authorization in writing from
the employee or upon court order. Without such authorization, access to the records is limited to
university personnel as specied in the statute. Section 1012.91, F.S.
“Limited-access records” are limited to: information reecting academic evaluations
of employee performance that are open to inspection only by the employee and university
ocials responsible for supervision of the employee; records relating to an investigation of
employee misconduct which records are condential until the conclusion of the investigation
or the investigation ceases to be active as dened in the exemption; and records maintained for
the purpose of any disciplinary proceeding against the employee or records maintained for any
grievance proceeding brought by an employee for enforcement of a collective bargaining agreement
or contract until a nal decision is made. Section 1012.91(1), F.S.
For sexual harassment investigations of university personnel, portions of records that identify
or reasonably could lead to the identication of the complainant or a witness also constitute
limited-access records. Section 1012.91(2), F.S. Records which comprise the common core items
contained in the State University System Student Assessment of Instruction instrument may not
be prescribed as limited-access records. Section 1012.91(4), F.S.
Regarding Florida College System institution employees, s. 1012.81, F.S., states that rules
of the State Board of Education shall prescribe the content and custody of limited-access records
maintained by a Florida College System institution on its employees. Such records are limited
to information reecting academic evaluations of employee performance and certain disciplinary
and grievance records as described in the exemption. Limited access records are condential and
exempt and may not be released except as authorized in the exemption. Cf. Rhea v. District Board
of Trustees of Santa Fe College, 109 So. 3d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (student’s unredacted e-mail
complaining about an instructor’s classroom behavior qualies as an exempt “education record”).
m. Examination questions and answer sheets
Examination questions and answer sheets of examinations administered by governmental
entities for the purpose of licensure, certication, or employment are exempt from mandatory
disclosure requirements. Section 119.071(1)(a), F.S. See
Dickerson v. Hayes, 543 So. 2d 836, 837
(Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (applying exemption to portions of rating sheets used by promotion board
which contained summaries of applicants’ responses to oral examination questions where the oral
questioning “was a formalized procedure with identical questions asked of each applicant [which]
‘tested’ the applicants’ response both as to style and content”). And see Rush v. High Springs, 82
So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (exemption applies to questions and answers contained in pre-
employment polygraph examinations).
e exemption from disclosure in s. 119.071(1)(a), F.S., applies to examination questions
and answers, and does not include the “impressions and grading of the responses” by the examiners.
See Dickerson v. Hayes, supra at 837. Compare s. 455.229(1), F.S., providing condentiality for
“examination questions, answers, papers, grades, and grading keys” used in licensing examinations
administered by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation.
A person who has taken an examination has the right to review his or her own completed
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
143
examination. Section 119.071(1)(a), F.S. See AGO 76-210, stating that an examinee has the right
to inspect the results of a completed civil service promotional examination, including question and
answer sheets, after the examination has been completed. However, the examinee possesses only
the right to review his or her own completed examination and may not make or obtain copies of
that examination. AGO 81-12.
n. Home addresses, telephone numbers and other personal information
In the absence of statutory exemption, home addresses, telephone numbers, photographs,
and dates of birth of public ocers and employees are not exempt from disclosure. See AGO
96-88 (home addresses and telephone numbers and business addresses and telephone numbers of
members of state and district human rights advocacy committees are public records); Browning v.
Walton, 351 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (city cannot refuse to allow inspection of records
containing the names and addresses of city employees who have lled out forms requesting that
the city maintain the condentiality of their personnel les). And see United Teachers of Dade v.
School Board of Dade County, No. 92-17803 (01) (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Nov. 30, 1992), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (home telephone
numbers and addresses of school district employees not protected by constitutional right to
privacy; only the Legislature can exempt such information). Cf. AGO 85-03 (list containing
names and addresses of subscribers to state magazine is a public record).
(1) Listing of public ocers and employees covered by exemptions
e home addresses, telephone numbers, and other specied personal information
pertaining to certain public ocers and employees and their spouses and children have been
exempted in ss. 119.071(4)(d) and 119.071(5)(i) F.S. e term “home address” for purposes of s.
119.071(4)(d), F.S., means “the dwelling location at which an individual resides and includes the
physical address, mailing address, street address, parcel identication number, plot identication
number, legal property description, neighborhood name and lot number, GPS coordinates,
and any other descriptive property information that may reveal the home address.” Section
119.071(4)(d)1.a., F.S.
For purposes of s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S., the term “telephone numbers” includes “home
telephone numbers, personal cellular telephone numbers, personal pager telephone numbers,
and telephone numbers associated with personal communications devices.” Section 119.071(4)
(d)1.b., F.S.
(a) Abuse investigators for Department of Children and Families and Department of
Health
a. Scope of exemption: Active or former personnel of the Department of Children and
Families whose duties include the investigation of abuse, neglect, exploitation, fraud,
theft or other criminal activities; and active or former personnel of the Department of
Health whose duties are to support the investigation of child abuse or neglect
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers,
photographs, dates of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of
such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended
by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.a., F.S.
(b) Child advocacy personnel and child protection team members
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former directors, managers, supervisors, and clinical
employees of a child advocacy center that meets the standards of s. 39.3035(2) and
fullls the screening requirements of s. 39.3035(3) and the members of a Child
144
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Protection Team as described in s. 39.303 whose duties include supporting the
investigation of child abuse or sexual abuse, child abandonment, child neglect, and
child exploitation or to provide services as part of a multidisciplinary case review team.
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers,
photographs, dates of birth and places of employment of the spouses and children of
such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended
by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.t., F.S.
(c) Code enforcement ocers
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former code enforcement ocers
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.i., F.S.
(d) County addiction facility personnel
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former directors, managers, supervisors, nurses, and
clinical employees of an addiction treatment facility. e term “addiction treatment
facility” means a county government, or agency thereof, that is licensed pursuant to s.
397.401, and provides substance abuse prevention, intervention, or clinical treatment,
including any licensed service component described in s. 397.311(26)
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel, and the names and
locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.s., F.S.
(e) County tax collectors
a. Scope of exemption: County tax collectors
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, and dates of birth
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.n., F.S.
(f) Domestic violence advocates
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former sta and domestic violence advocates, as
dened in s. 90.5036(1)(b), of domestic violence centers certied by the Department of
Children and Families under chapter 39
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, places of employment,
dates of birth, and photographs
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
145
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, places
of employment, dates of birth, and photographs of the spouses and children of such
personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by
the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.u., F.S.
(g) Domestic violence and other specied crime victims
Please refer to the discussion on page 78.
(h) Emergency medical technicians or paramedics
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former emergency medical technicians or paramedics
certied under Ch. 401, F.S.
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.q., F.S.
(i) Fireghters
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former reghters certied in compliance with s.
633.408, F.S.
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates
of birth, photographs, and places of employment of spouses and children of such
reghters; and the names and locations of the schools and day care facilities attended
by the children of the reghters
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.d., F.S.
(j) Guardians ad litem
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former guardians ad litem, as dened in s. 39.820, F.S.
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, places of
employment, and photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of spouses and children of such persons; and the names
and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such persons
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.j., F.S.
(k) Hospital employees
Please refer to the discussion on pages 96-97.
(l) Human resource managers (local governments)
a.
Scope of exemption: Current or former human resource, labor relations, or employee
relations directors, assistant directors, managers, or assistant managers of any local
government agency or water management district whose duties include hiring and ring
employees, labor contract negotiation, administration, or other personnel-related duties
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
146
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.h., F.S.
(m) Impaired practitioner consultants
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former impaired practitioner consultants retained
by an agency or current or former employees of an impaired practitioner consultant
whose duties result in a determination of a person’s skill and safety to practice a licensed
profession
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such consultants or
their employees; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended
by the children of such consultants or employees
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.p., F.S.
(n) Inspectors general and internal auditors performing specied duties
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former personnel employed in an agency’s oce
of inspector general or internal audit department whose duties include auditing or
investigating waste, fraud, abuse, theft, exploitation, or other activities that could lead
to criminal prosecution or administrative discipline
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.r., F.S.
(o) Investigators and inspectors of the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former investigators or inspectors of the Department
of Business and Professional Regulation
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, and places
of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the names and
locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.m., F.S.
(p) Investigators of the Department of Financial Services and Oce of Financial
Regulation with specied duties
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former nonsworn investigative personnel of the
Department of Financial Services and Oce of Financial Regulation whose duties
include the investigation of fraud, theft, workers’ compensation coverage requirements
and compliance, other related criminal activities, or state regulatory requirement
violations
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
147
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel.
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.b., and c., F.S.
(q) Judges, magistrates, and hearing ocers (state)
I. Administrative law judges, magistrates, and child support hearing ocers
a. Scope of exemption: General magistrates, special magistrates, judges of compensation
claims, administrative law judges of the Division of Administrative Hearings, and child
support enforcement hearing ocers
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, dates of birth, and telephone numbers
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.g., F.S.
II. Court justices and judges
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former Justices of the Supreme Court, district court
of appeal judges, circuit court judges, and county court judges
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, dates of birth, and telephone numbers
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates
of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of current or former
justices and judges; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities
attended by the children of such justices and judges
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.e., F.S.
(r) Juvenile Justice juvenile probation and detention ocers and counselors
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former juvenile probation ocers and supervisors,
detention superintendents and assistant superintendents, juvenile justice detention
ocers and supervisors, juvenile justice residential ocers and supervisors, juvenile
justice counselors, supervisors, and administrators, human services counselor
administrators, rehabilitation therapists and social services counselors of the
Department of Juvenile Justice
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the
names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.k., F.S.
(s) Law enforcement and correctional personnel
a. Scope of exemption: Active or former sworn law enforcement personnel or active
or former civilian personnel employed by a law enforcement agency, including
correctional and correctional probation ocers
148
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers,
photographs, dates of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities
attended by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.a., F.S.
(t) Personnel of the Department of Health with specied duties
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former personnel of the Department of Health
whose duties include, or result in, the determination or adjudication of eligibility
for social security disability benets, the investigation or prosecution of complaints
led against health care practitioners, or the inspection of health care practitioners
or health care facilities licensed by the Department of Health
b. Information exempted: Homes addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates
of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel;
and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the
children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.o., F.S. See also s. 119.071(4)(d)2.a.,
F.S. (child abuse or neglect investigators).
(u) Prosecutors and judges (federal)
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former United States attorneys, assistant United
States attorneys, judges of the United States Courts of Appeal, United States district
judges or United States magistrates if the individual submits to the agency having
custody of such information a written request to exempt such information from
public disclosure as well as a written statement that he or she has made reasonable
eorts to protect such information from being accessible through other means
available to the public
b. Information exempted: Home address, telephone number and photograph
c. Family information exempted: Home address, telephone number, photograph, and
place of employment of the spouse or child; and the name and location of the school
or day care facility attended by the child of such attorney, judge or magistrate
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(5)(i), F.S.
(v) Prosecutors (state)
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former state attorneys, assistant state attorneys,
statewide prosecutors, or assistant statewide prosecutors
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers,
photographs, dates of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities
attended by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.f., F.S.
(w) Public defenders and other specied counsel
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former public defenders, assistant public defenders,
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
149
criminal conict and civil regional counsel, and assistant criminal conict and civil
regional counsel
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates
of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel;
and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the
children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.l., F.S.
(x) Public guardians
a. Scope of exemption: Current or former public guardians and employees with
duciary responsibility, as that term is dened in the exemption, who submit to
the custodial agency a written request for maintenance of the exemption. e term
“employee with duciary responsibility” means an employee of a public guardian
who has the ability to direct any transactions of a ward’s funds, assets, or property;
who under the supervision of the guardian, manages the care of the ward; or who
makes any health care decision, as dened in s. 765.101, on behalf of the ward
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, places
of employment, and photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of
birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such persons; and
the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children
of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 744.21031, F.S.
(y) Revenue collection and enforcement or child support enforcement
a. Scope of exemption: Active or former personnel of the Department of Revenue
or local governments whose duties include revenue collection and enforcement or
child support enforcement
b. Information exempted: Home addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and
photographs
c. Family information exempted: Names, home addresses, telephone numbers,
photographs, dates of birth, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities
attended by the children of such personnel
d. Statutory reference: Section 119.071(4)(d)2.a., F.S.
Note: In AGO 96-57, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that this exemption
should be construed as including personnel whose duties include both revenue
collection and enforcement, as opposed to those personnel whose duties include
only revenue collection or only revenue enforcement.
(2) Authority to release protected information
e purpose of the s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S., exemption is to protect the safety of the
enumerated individuals and their families by removing certain information relating to such
individuals from the mandatory disclosure requirements of Ch. 119, F.S. AGO 10-37.
And see AGOs 90-50 and 96-57. e statute makes these records exempt from mandatory
disclosure requirements, not condential; thus, an agency is not prohibited from disclosing
the information in all circumstances. AGO 10-37.
150
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
However, in determining whether to disclose the information, the agency should consider
the underlying purpose of the statute, i.e., safety of the listed individuals and their families. AGO
90-50. See also AGO 08-24. Cf. AGO 90-50, noting that the exemption does not prohibit an
agency from “access to, and maintaining information on, its employees, including their names
and addresses.”
In other words, a police department, in deciding whether to publicly release photographs
of law enforcement personnel, should determine whether there is a statutory or substantial
policy need for disclosure. AGO 07-21. In the absence of a statutory or other legal duty to be
accomplished by disclosure, the agency should consider whether the release of such information
is consistent with the purpose of the exemption aorded by s. 119.071(4)(d)2. Id. For example,
a posting of the names, I.D. numbers and photographs of police ocers in the hallway of the
police department for public display would appear to be counter to the purpose of the exemption.
AGO 90-50.
Similarly, in AGO 08-24, the Attorney General’s Oce noted that the home addresses
and other protected personal information of the spouses of law enforcement ocers who are
employed by the school board are exempt from disclosure under s. 119.071(4)(d)2., F.S., and
therefore, the school board was not required to report such information to the certied bargaining
representative. And see Henderson v. Perez, 835 So. 2d 390, 392 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (trial court
order compelling sheri to produce exempt home addresses and photographs of 10 active law
enforcement ocers in a civil lawsuit led by Perez predicated on his arrest, quashed because
“Perez has not shown that the photographs and home addresses of the law enforcement ocers
are essential to the prosecution of his suit”).
By contrast, information from the city personnel les which reveals the home addresses of
former law enforcement personnel may be disclosed to the State Attorney’s oce for the purpose
of serving criminal witness subpoenas by mail pursuant to s. 48.031, F.S. Inf. Op. to Reese,
April 25, 1989. Similarly, a police and reghter pension board may release exempt employee
information pursuant to a condentiality agreement for use by a vendor that has contracted with
the board to conduct cybersecurity testing of the board’s electronic data storage systems. AGO
19-08.
A 2017 Attorney General Opinion advised that a property appraiser may disclose the
address of an alleged violator of the local code when a code inspector or code enforcement board
is attempting to provide notice regarding the violation as required by s. 162.06, F.S. AGO 17-
05. e code inspector’s statutory duty to notify an alleged code violator of a violation warrants
use of an otherwise exempt address for the limited purpose of providing such notice and does
not authorize further disclosure of the address. Id. Cf., s. 119.071(4)(d)7., F.S.(2021), brought
into the statutes by s. 3, Ch. 21-215, Laws of Florida, providing that exempt information “may
be disclosed pursuant to s. 28.2221[relating to exempt information in the Ocial Records] to
a title insurer authorized pursuant to s. 624.401 and its aliates as dened in s. 624.10; a title
insurance agent or title insurance agency as dened in s. 626.841(1) or (2), respectively; or an
attorney duly admitted to practice law in this state and in good standing with e Florida Bar.”
e s. 119.071(4)(d)2., F.S., exemption applies to public agencies, not private entities
unless the private entity is acting on behalf of a public agency. Inf. Op. to Gomez, Nov. 3, 2008.
Cf. s. 843.17, F.S., making it a misdemeanor to maliciously publish or disseminate, with intent
to obstruct the due execution of the law or with the intent to intimidate, hinder, or interrupt
any law enforcement ocer in the legal performance of his or her duties, the residence address or
telephone number of any law enforcement ocer while designating the ocer as such, without
authorization of the agency which employs the ocer. But see Brayshaw v. City of Tallahassee,
Fla., 709 F. Supp. 2d 1244 (N.D. Fla. 2010), holding that s. 843.17, F.S., was unconstitutional
on its face.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
151
(3) Records held by agencies that are not the employer of the designated ocers or
employees
An agency that is the custodian of personal information specied in s. 119.071(4)(d)2.,
F.S., but is not the employer of the ocer or employee, may maintain the exempt status of that
information only if the ocer or employee or the employing agency of the designated employee
submits a written request for maintenance of the exemption to the custodial agency. Section
119.071(4)(d)3., F.S. See AGOs 97-67 (Ocial Records maintained by clerk of court), 04-18
(applying exemption when requested to petitions and campaign papers led with supervisor of
elections), and 04-20 (property appraiser). And see AGO 05-38 (request made to the property
appraiser for an exemption from disclosure of personal information would follow the property
appraiser’s records when they are relayed to the clerk of courts carrying out duties for the Value
Adjustment Board).
e request must be notarized and state under oath the statutory basis for the individual’s
exemption request and conrm the individual’s status as a party eligible for exempt status.
Section 119.071(4)(d)3., F.S.
e provisions of s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S., should not be read “to impose a burden on
employers to know the past law enforcement employment status of employees who may work
for them in other capacities.” AGO 10-37. us, a former law enforcement ocer from one
municipality who is currently employed by another municipality in a non-law enforcement
capacity must make a written request pursuant to s. 119.071(4)(d)3., F.S., that his or her personal
information be maintained as exempt by the current employer. Id.
A request made pursuant to s. 119.071(4)(d)3., F.S., for maintenance of exempt information
in court records or the ocial records must specify the document type, identication number,
and page number of the court record or ocial record that contains the exempt information.
Section 119.0714(2)(f) and (3)(f ), F.S.
A covered ocer or employee or other specied person may submit a written request for
the release of his or her exempt information to the custodial agency. e written request must
be notarized and must specify the information to be released and the party that is authorized to
receive the information. Upon receipt of the written request, the custodial agency must release
the specied information to the party authorized to receive such information. Section 119.071(4)
(d)5., F.S. And see s. 119.071(4)(d)4., F.S., specifying duties of property appraisers and county
tax collectors with respect to a request for maintenance of exempt status; s. 119.071(4)(d)8.,
F.S., providing that the exempt status of a home address contained in the Ocial Records is
maintained only during the period when a protected party resides at the dwelling location; and
s. 119.071(4)(d)9., F.S., providing procedures for a request for release of protected decedent’s
removed information.
(4) Application of exemption to:
(a) Telephone numbers of cellular telephones issued by agencies
Cellular telephone numbers of telephones provided by the agency to law enforcement
ocers and used in performing law enforcement duties are not exempt from disclosure. Inf. Op.
to Laquidara, July 17, 2003. In 2012, the Legislature amended s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S., to dene
the term “telephone numbers” as used in the exemption to include “home telephone numbers,
personal cellular telephone numbers, personal pager telephone numbers, and telephone numbers
associated with personal communications devices.” See s. 119.071(4)(d)1.b., F.S. As originally
introduced, the 2012 legislation would have also included “telephone numbers associated with
agency cellular telephones” within the denition of “telephone numbers.” See HB 629, led
November 10, 2011. However, this proposed language was removed from the original bill during
the legislative process.
152
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(b) List of names of designated ocers and employees
While s. 119.071(4)(d)2., F.S., exempts home addresses and other personal information of
the designated public ocers and employees, it does not exempt the names of these ocers and
employees from public disclosure (although typically the names of the spouses and children are
exempt). See, e.g., s. 119.071(4)(d)2.g., F.S. (names of spouses and children of code enforcement
ocers are exempt).
Accordingly, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that if the property appraiser maintains
a list of the names of ocers and employees who have requested the exemption of their home
addresses as authorized by s. 119.071(4)(d)3., F.S., this list is not exempt. AGO 08-29. Cf.
s. 119.071(4)(d)4.a., F.S. (2021), relating to removal of the name of the individual who has
requested exempt status and the instrument number or Ocial Records information identifying
the property from publicly available records maintained by the tax collector or property appraiser.
However, as noted elsewhere in this manual, an agency is not required to create or reformat
records in order to comply with a request under Ch. 119; the duty of the public records custodian
is to provide access to existing records. See the discussion in pages 167-169.
(c) Prior home addresses
Section 119.071(4)(d)2., F.S., applies only to the current home address or addresses
(including a current vacation home address) of the designated individuals. AGO 10-37.
(d) Maps showing physical location of homes
A property appraiser is precluded from making technology available to the public that
would enable a user to view a map on the Internet showing the physical location of a law
enforcement ocer’s home, even though the map does not contain the actual home address of the
ocer, if the property appraiser has received a written exemption request from the ocer. AGO
04-20. See also the denition of the term “home address” as dened in s. 119.071(4)(d)1.a., F.S.
(e) Home addresses of persons who are not the owner of the property
e exemption applies to the home addresses, telephone numbers, and other personal
information relating to the specied individuals “without regard to whether or not they own the
real property at which they reside.” AGO 14-07.
(f) Booking photographs
Section 119.071(4)(d), F.S., exempts the photograph of a current or former law
enforcement ocer, whether held by the employing agency or by a nonemploying agency which
has received a written request to maintain the exempt status of the record. Inf. Op. to Amunds,
June 8, 2012. us, the agency should determine whether there is a statutory or substantial
policy need for disclosure before releasing the booking photograph. Id. In the absence of a
statutory or other legal duty to be accomplished by disclosure, an agency should consider whether
the release of such information is consistent with the purpose of the exemption, i.e., the safety of
law enforcement ocers and their families. Id. See also AGOs 90-50 and 07-21. Cf. AGO 94-90
(statute did not preclude release of booking photograph of deputy who was not an undercover
ocer whose identity would otherwise be protected by s. 119.071(4)(c), F.S.).
o. Medical information and health insurance participant information
(1) Medical information and medical claims records
Medical information pertaining to a prospective, current, or former ocer or employee
of an agency which, if disclosed, would identify that ocer or employee is exempt from s.
119.07(1), F.S. Section 119.071(4)(b)1., F.S. Such information may be disclosed if the person
or the person’s legal representative provides written permission or pursuant to court order. Id.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
153
See AGO 98-17 (exemption “appears to extend to governmental employees the protection for
personal medical records that is generally enjoyed by private sector employees”). Cf. Delaurentos
v. Peguero, 47 So. 3d 879, 881 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (s. 119.071[4][b]1., “simply provides an
exemption in the event that a citizen makes a public records request for medical records;” but
does not “create a privilege which would insulate such records from discovery in litigation”).
Public school system employee medical records, including psychiatric and psychological
records, are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S. Section 1012.31(3)(a)5., F.S.
Every employer who provides or administers health insurance benets or life insurance
benets to its employees shall maintain the condentiality of information relating to the medical
condition or status of any person covered by such insurance benets. Such information is exempt
from s. 119.07(1), F.S. Section 760.50(5), F.S.
Patient medical records and medical claims records of current or former employees and eligible
dependents enrolled in group insurance plans of specied governmental entities are condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S.; such records shall not be furnished to any person other than the
employee or the employee’s legal representative, except as authorized in the subsection. Sections
110.123(10) (state employees), 112.08(7) (county or municipal employees), and 112.08(8) (water
management district employees), F.S. See AGO 91-88, citing to News-Press Company, Inc. v. Kaune,
511 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), stating that the exemption applies broadly and is not
limited solely to medical records led in conjunction with an employee’s participation in a group
insurance plan; rather, the exemption applies to all medical records relating to employees enrolled
in a group insurance plan. And see AGOs 01-33 (condentiality of patient records at medical clinic
owned and operated by city for the use and benet of its employees); 94-78 (monthly printout of
medical claims paid under city group health insurance plan that identies the public employees who
obtained medical services and the amounts of the claims, together with some account information,
is exempt from public inspection), and 94-51 (agency “should be vigilant in its protection of the
condentiality provided by statute for medical records of [its] employees”).
(2) Health insurance participant information
While “information relating to an insurance program participant’s medical condition is
protected from disclosure . . . there is no clear statement that such protection extends to the
name, address, age, or other non-medical information of such participants.” Inf. Op. to Dockery,
November 10, 2008.
Subsequent to the issuance of this opinion, the Legislature enacted an exemption for
personal identifying information of a dependent child of a current or former ocer or employee
of an agency, whose dependent child (as dened in s. 409.2554, F.S.) is insured by the agency’s
group insurance plan. Section 119.071(4)(b)2., F.S. However, while personal identifying
information relating to the dependent child’s participation in an agency’s group insurance plan is
now condential, personal identifying information relating to the current or former ocer’s or
employee’s participation in such plan is subject to disclosure. Cf. s. 110.12301(3), F.S., providing
condentiality for records collected for purposes of dependent eligibility verication services
conducted for the state group insurance program and held by the Department of Management
Services.
p. Payroll deduction records
ere is no general exemption from disclosure that applies to agency payroll deduction
records. However, public school system employee payroll deduction records are condential.
Section 1012.31(3)(a)4., F.S. See AGO 09-11 (tax information [such as Federal Withholding Tax
Deduction, FICA Tax Deduction and the Medicare Tax Deduction] of a public school system
employee would appear to constitute payroll deduction records and would be condential and
exempt from disclosure pursuant to s. 1012.31[3][a]4., F.S.).
154
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
q. Retiree lists
e names and addresses of retirees are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), F.S.,
to the extent that no state or local governmental agency may provide the names or addresses of
such persons in aggregate, compiled or list form except to public agencies engaged in ocial
business, to collective bargaining agents or to retiree organizations for ocial business use.
Section 121.031(5), F.S. “Any person may view or copy any individual’s retirement records
at the Department of Management Services, one record at a time, or may obtain information
by a separate written request for a named individual for which information is desired.” Id.
Cf. s. 121.4501(19), F.S. (personal identifying information of members in the investment plan
contained in Florida Retirement System records held by the State Board of Administration or the
Department of Management Services is exempt).
Section 121.021(60), F.S., denes the term “retiree” to mean “a former member of
the Florida Retirement System or an existing system who has terminated employment and is
receiving benet payments from the system in which he or she was a member.” Accordingly,
the s. 121.031(5) exemption does not apply to employees who are participants in the Deferred
Retirement Option Program (DROP); DROP participants “are not retirees since they have
not terminated their employment.” Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. School Board of Palm Beach
County, No. 502007CA020000XXXXMB (Fla. 15th
Cir. Ct. November 28, 2007), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com.
r. Salary records
Salary and other information relating to compensation is subject to disclosure. Lewis v.
Schreiber, No. 92-8005(03) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. June 12, 1992), per curiam armed, 611 So. 2d
531 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com. Accord AGOs 80-92 and 73-30.
s. Travel records
Travel vouchers are open to public inspection, after redaction of exempt material such as
credit card account numbers (s. 119.071[5][b], F.S.) or social security numbers (ss. 119.071[4]
a] and [5][a]F.S). See Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla.
1980). See also AGO 72-356 (travel itineraries and plane reservations for use of state aircraft are
public records). Cf. Executive Oce of the Governor v. AHF MCO of Florida, Inc., 257 So. 3d 612
(Fla. 1st DCA 2019), nding that premature disclosure of prospective information relating to the
Governor’s detailed schedule and travel plans would reveal surveillance techniques, procedures, or
personnel which are exempt pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(d), F.S.
t. Undercover personnel of criminal justice agencies
Please refer to the discussion of this topic on page 120.
19. Security system information and blueprints
a. Blueprints
Section 119.071(3)(b)1., F.S., exempts building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings, and
diagrams which depict the internal layout and structural elements of a building, arena, stadium,
water treatment facility, or other structure owned or operated by an agency. Exempt information
may be disclosed to another governmental entity, to a licensed professional performing work on
the structure, or upon a showing of good cause to a court. Section 119.071(3)(b)3., F.S. Exempt
documents may also be released in order to comply with competitive bidding requirements. AGO
02-74. However, the entities or persons receiving such information must maintain its exempt
status. Id. And see 119.071(3)(e), F.S. (exemption for records which depict structural elements of
911, E911 or public safety radio communications system infrastructure, structures, or facilities
owned and operated by an agency; and geographical maps indicating actual or proposed locations
of such infrastructure, structures, or facilities).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
155
Section 119.071(3)(c)1., F.S., exempts building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings
and diagrams which depict the internal layout or structural elements of various attractions,
retail, resort, oce, health care facilities, and industrial complexes and developments when the
records are held by an agency. e exemption aorded by this statute, however, does not apply
to comprehensive plans or site plans, or amendments thereto, which are submitted for approval
or which have been approved under local land development regulations, local zoning regulations,
or development of regional impact review. Section 119.071(3)(c)4., F.S. And see s. 119.071(3)
(d) (information relating to the National Public Safety Broadband Network deemed condential
if disclosure would reveal information set forth in the exemption)
b. Security system records
Information relating to the security or resafety systems for property owned by or leased to
the state or any of its political subdivisions is condential and exempt from disclosure. Section
281.301, F.S. Exempt information includes all records, information, photographs, audio and
visual presentations, schematic diagrams, surveys, recommendations, or consultations or portions
thereof relating directly to or revealing such security systems or information. Id.
e exemption extends to information relating to or revealing the security or resafety
systems for property owned or leased by the state or its political subdivisions, and also to such
information concerning privately owned or leased property which is in the possession of an
agency. AGOs 01-75 and 93-86, and Inf. Op. to Sherman, July 2, 2018. See also ss. 331.22, F.S.
(airport security plans); s. 311.13, F.S. (seaport security plans); and 1004.0962(2), F.S. (campus
emergency response of postsecondary education institution).
Section 119.071(3)(a), F.S., provides a similar exemption from disclosure for a security
or resafety system plan of a private or public entity that is held by an agency. e information
may be disclosed to the property owner or leaseholder; in furtherance of the ocial duties and
responsibilities of the agency holding the information; to another local, state or federal agency in
furtherance of that agency’s ocial duties and responsibilities; or upon a showing of good cause
before a court.
e term “security or resafety system plan” includes: records relating directly to the physical
security or resafety of the facility or revealing security or resafety systems; threat assessments
conducted by an agency or private entity; threat response plans; emergency evacuation plans;
sheltering arrangements; or security or resafety manuals. Id. Cf. Marino v. University of Florida,
107 So. 3d 1231 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), in which the court rejected a university’s contention that it
could withhold the location of animal research facilities based on a determination that the nature
of the public activities occurring at the facility subjects them to physical threats.
(1) Security system (alarm) permits and applications
Sections 281.301 and 119.071(3)(a), F.S., prohibit public disclosure of the name
and address of applicants for security system permits, of persons cited for violations of alarm
ordinances, and of individuals who are the subject of law enforcement dispatch reports for
veried or false alarms “because disclosure would imperil the safety of persons and property.”
Critical Intervention Services, Inc. v. City of Clearwater, 908 So. 2d 1195, 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA
2005). Accord AGO 04-28.
(2) Surveillance video recordings
e term “security or resafety system plan” as used in s. 119.071(3)(a)1., F.S., includes
“audio and visual presentations . . . relating directly to the physical security or resafety of the
facility or revealing security or resafety systems.” Video footage captured by city bus cameras
“directly relates to and reveals information about a security system” and thus was determined
to be condential and exempt from disclosure by ss. 281.301 and 119.071(3)(a), F.S. Central
Florida Regional Transportation Authority v. Post-Newsweek Stations, Orlando, Inc., 157 So. 3d 401
156
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(Fla. 5th DCA 2015). e videos “reveal the capabilities—and as a corollary, the vulnerabilities”
of the security system. Id. at 405. And see AGO 15-06, relying on Central Florida Regional
Transportation Authority, and applying the exemption to surveillance tapes from a security system
for a public transit authority building. Cf. Gonzalez v. State, 240 So. 3d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
(in the absence of an in camera inspection of the requested records [CDs] the circuit court could
not conclude that the contents were exempt from disclosure under s. 119.071(3)(a)2., or s.
281.301; nor could it determine whether redaction was possible); and City of Miami v. Blanco,
336 So. 3d 1268 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (trial court departed from essential requirements of law by
failing to conduct in camera review before granting defendant’s motion to compel and/or for a
subpoena for video camera recordings taken at police station following his arrest; without an in
camera inspection, the judge could not determine whether the video recordings fell within the
security plan exemption).
Video footage from surveillance cameras at a high school “relates directly” to the security
system at the school, including both its capabilities and its vulnerabilities, and thus is condential
and exempt from disclosure unless one of the exceptions to the exemption applies. State Attorney’s
Oce of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit v. Cable News Network, Inc., 251 So. 3d 205 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2018). As previously discussed on pages 153-154, there are several exceptions to this
condentiality provision, including a court order issued upon a showing of good cause. In
State Attorney’s Oce, the appellate court armed the trial judge’s order mandating release of
surveillance video from a school shooting where 17 students and sta were killed. e court
found that the media had established good cause because the footage revealed the conduct of
public servants in the discharge of their duties and also provided “insight” into the high school’s
security “net” that failed to protect the students and sta. Id. at 215.
By contrast, the First District overturned the trial court’s determination that a news
organization had shown good cause to obtain security footage from two correctional institutions.
Florida Department of Corrections v. Miami Herald Media Company, 278 So. 3d 786 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2019). At the hearing, the Miami Herald advised that it no longer needed the video
recordings as they were no longer newsworthy. Nevertheless the court still found that the Herald
had satised the statutory exception to condentiality, noting the awards the journalist received
for her reporting on prison issues, and that this fact, combined with the “extremely important
right of freedom of the press” constituted good cause. e appellate court reversed, nding that
the Herald “extinguished any claim to good cause when it unambiguously renounced its need for
the video footage.” 278 So. 3d at 790.
c. Cybersecurity
Section 119.01(2)(a), F.S., states that agencies “must provide reasonable public access to
records electronically maintained and must ensure that exempt or condential records are not
disclosed except as otherwise permitted by law.” Cf. AGO 19-08 (pension board authorized to
release nonpublic personnel information pursuant to a condentiality agreement with a vendor
conducting cybersecurity testing of the board’s electronic data storage systems).
Accordingly, an agency is not required to provide direct access to the agency’s electronic
records through a hard drive provided by a requester, but must otherwise allow inspection and
copying of such records in a manner which will accommodate the request, but protect from
disclosure exempt or condential materials. AGO 13-07. And see Rea v. Sansbury, 504 So. 2d
1315, 1317-1318 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1987) (while
county possesses statutory authority to facilitate inspection of public records by electronic means,
this “does not mean that every means adopted by the county to facilitate the work of county
employees ipso facto requires that the public be allowed to participate therein”).
Section 119.0725(2), F.S., provides that the following information held by an agency is
condential: coverage limits and deductible or self-insurance amounts of insurance or other risk
mitigation coverages acquired for the protection of information technology systems, operational
technology systems, or data of an agency; information relating to critical infrastructure;
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
157
cybersecurity incident information reported pursuant to s. 282.318 or 282.3185, F.S.; network
schematics, hardware and software congurations, or encryption information or information that
identies detection, investigation, or response practices for suspected or conrmed cybersecurity
incidents, including suspected or conrmed breaches, if the disclosure of such information
would facilitate unauthorized access to or unauthorized modication, disclosure, or destruction
of data or information or information technology resources. Key terms used in this exemption
such as “information technology” and “incident” are dened in s. 119.0725(1), F.S. Section
119.0725(5)(a), F.S., species agencies authorized to receive condential information.
ere are other exemptions which address cybersecurity issues. For example, s. 282.318(4),
F.S., requires state agencies, as dened in the statute, to conduct risk assessments, and internal
audits, as well as to develop policies and procedures to address cybersecurity issues. is section
also contains exemptions for records relating to these functions. See s. 282.318(4)(d), (e), and (g),
and (5), F.S. And see s. 119.0713(5)(a), F.S. (records relating to security of information technology
systems of local government owned or operated utilities); s. 627.352 (Citizens Property Insurance
Corporation) and s. 1004.055(1), F.S. (state postsecondary education institutions). Secure login
credentials held by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles are exempt, as are
Internet protocol addresses, geolocation data, and other information from which a user accesses a
public facing portal. Section 119.0712(2)(f), F.S. And see the discussion of the exemptions from
the Sunshine Law for cybersecurity meetings found on pages 36-37.
d. School system security
Section 943.082(1), F.S., requires the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to
acquire a mobile suspicious activity reporting tool that allows students and the community to
relay information anonymously concerning unsafe, potentially harmful, dangerous, violent, or
criminal activities, or the threat of these activities to appropriate public safety agencies and school
ocials. e identity of the reporting party received through the reporting tool and held by the
department, law enforcement agencies, or school ocials is condential and exempt. Section
943.082(6), F.S. Any other information received through the reporting tool and held by the above
agencies is exempt. Id. And see ss. 1004.0962(2), F.S. (campus emergency response held by a
public postsecondary institution or specied agencies is exempt from disclosure); and 1004.055(1)
(certain security incident information records held by state postsecondary education institution).
Any information that would identify whether an individual has been appointed as a safe-
school ocer pursuant to s. 1006.12, F.S., held by a law enforcement agency, school district, or
charter school is exempt. Section 1006.12(8), F.S. See also s. 119.071(3)(a), F.S., providing an
exemption for agency security system plans, discussed on pages 155-156.
20. Social security numbers
Section 119.071(5)(a)5., F.S., states that social security numbers held by an agency are
condential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. See Department of Health v.
Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills, 259 So. 3d 979, 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), noting the
condential status of social security numbers.
e exemption does not supersede any federal law prohibiting the release of social security
numbers or any other applicable public records exemptions for such numbers. Section 119.071(5)
(a)5., F.S. See, e.g., s. 193.114(5), F.S. (social security number submitted on an application for a
tax exemption is condential); and s. 119.071(4)(a), F.S. (social security numbers of current and
former employees held by the employing agency are condential and exempt from disclosure).
And see s. 119.0714, F.S., regarding condentiality of social security numbers in court records and
in the ocial records.
Section 119.071(5)(a)6., F.S, authorizes disclosure of social security numbers under
certain conditions.
In addition, s. 119.071(5)(a)7.b., F.S., states that an agency may not deny a
commercial entity engaged in “commercial activity,” as dened in the exemption, access to social
158
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
security numbers, “provided the social security numbers will be used only in the performance of
a commercial activity and provided the commercial entity makes a written request for the social
security numbers.” “Commercial activity” does not include the display or bulk sale of social security
numbers to the public or the distribution of such numbers to any customer not identiable by the
commercial entity. Section 119.071(5)(a)7.a.(I), F.S. See Inf. Op. to Carland, January 12, 2012
(teacher union’s access to social security numbers maintained by school district limited to those
social security numbers which will be used to verify the accuracy of numbers which the union has
already received in the normal course of business) and AGO 19-08 (pension board authorized to
release social security numbers pursuant to a condentiality agreement to a vendor conducting
cybersecurity testing on the board’s electronic data storage systems).
e written request must be veried as provided in Florida law and meet the other
requirements specied in the exemption. See Florida Department of Education v. NYT Management
Services, Inc., 895 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). See also AGO 10-06 (agency authorized to
request additional information that is reasonably necessary to verify the identity of the commercial
entity and the specic purposes for which the social security numbers will be used).
21. Telephone records
Records of telephone calls made from agency telephones are subject to disclosure in the
absence of statutory exemption. See Gillum v. Times Publishing Company, No. 91-2689-CA
(Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. July 10, 1991). See also Media General Operation, Inc. v. Feeney, 849 So. 2d
3, 6 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), rejecting the argument that redaction of telephone numbers for
calls made in the course of ocial business could be justied because disclosure could result in
“unreasonable consequences” to the persons called. Cf. s. 119.071(5)(d), F.S. (all records supplied
by a telecommunications company, as dened by s. 364.02, F.S., to an agency which contain the
name, address, and telephone number of subscribers are condential and exempt). And see Inf. to
Michelson, January 27, 1992 (cellular telephone company which provided city with statements
reecting amount of usage of cell phones by city sta rather than listing individual calls, did not
appear to be an “agency” for purposes of Ch. 119, F.S., making company’s records of individual
calls subject to disclosure).
In Bill of Rights, Inc. v. City of New Smyrna Beach, No. 2009-20218-CINS (Fla. 7th
Cir. Ct. April 8, 2010), available online in the Cases database at the open government site
at myoridalegal.com, the court stated that “as a matter of law, . . . billing documents regarding
personal calls made and received by city employees on city-owned or city-leased cellular telephones
are public records, when those documents are received and maintained in connection with the
transaction of ocial business; and, the ‘ocial business’ of a city includes paying for telephone
service and obtaining reimbursement from employees for personal calls.” Compare Media General
Operation, Inc. v. Feeney, supra, in which the court held that under the circumstances of that case
(involving access to records of cellular phone service provided by a political party for legislative
employees), records of personal or private calls of the employees fell outside the denition of public
records.
Additionally, in responding to a question from a police department regarding the provisions
of Ch. 934, F.S., (interception of wire and oral communications), the Attorney General’s Oce
advised that recordings of telephone conversations made by the police department in the usual
course of business would be public records subject to the inspection, copying, and retention
requirements of Ch. 119, F.S. AGO 12-07. “Any such public records would likewise be subject
to the exemption and condentiality provisions of the Public Records Law.” Id. And see Morris
Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 154 So. 3d 528, 532 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), review denied, 163
So. 3d 512 (Fla. 2015) (“No one disputes” that phone recordings of telephone calls made by the
defendant while incarcerated and provided in criminal discovery were public records). Compare
Bent v. State, 46 So. 3d 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (recordings of personal telephone calls between
minors in jail awaiting trial and third parties made by sheri’s oce are not public records when
contents of the phone calls do not involve criminal activity or a security breach).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
159
22. Trade secrets and proprietary condential business information
a. Trade secrets
Prior to the adoption of s. 119.0715, F.S., “documents submitted by a private party which
constitute trade secrets as dened in s. 812.081,” F.S., and which were stamped as condential
at the time of submission to an agency by a private party, were found to be not subject to public
access. Sepro Corporation v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 839 So. 2d 781,
784(Fla. 1st DCA 2003), review denied sub nom., Crist v. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, 911 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 2005). And see Seta Corporation of Boca, Inc. v. Oce of the
Attorney General, 756 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
Section 119.0715(2), F.S., now expressly provides that a “trade secret held by an agency”
is condential and exempt from disclosure. An agency may disclose a trade secret to an ocer
or employee of another agency or government entity whose use of the trade secret is within the
scope of his or her lawful duties and responsibilities. Section 119.0715(3), F.S.
e term “trade secret” has the same meaning as in s. 688.002, F.S. Section 119.0715(1),
F.S. Section 688.002(4), F.S., denes “trade secret” to mean information, including a formula,
pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that: (a) Derives
independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and
not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic
value from its disclosure or use; and (b) Is the subject of eorts that are reasonable under the
circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
e trial court’s conclusion as to whether specic information constitutes a trade secret
“rests on factual determinations that are assailable on appeal only if unsupported by competent,
substantial evidence.” Sepro, 839 So. 2d at 785. Cf. Managed Care of North America, Inc. v.
Florida Healthy Kids Corporation, at 286 So. 3d at 859 (appellate court’s role is to strictly construe
the statutory denition of trade secret, and determine if competent, substantial evidence exists
to support the factual ndings of the trial court; the trial court’s interpretation of a statute and
its application of the law to facts are subject to de novo review); Oce of Insurance Regulation
v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company, 213 So. 3d 1104 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (trial court’s
conclusion that insurance policy statistics submitted to the Oce of Insurance Regulation had
“independent economic value” within the meaning of the statutory denition of trade secret in
s. 688.002(4), F.S., was supported by competent, substantial evidence). Cf. Surterra Florida,
LLC v. Florida Department of Health, 223 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (arming trial court’s
nding that identities of investors and partners listed in applications to dispense medical cannabis
were not trade secrets because the applicants “did not prove” that this information constituted
a trade secret). And see Bareld v. Florida Department of Health, No. 2015 CA 003014 (Fla. 2d
Cir. Ct. October 27, 2017), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (identity of consultants and related information contained in application to
dispense medical cannabis qualied as a trade secret).
Similarly, the Fourth District upheld the trial court’s determination, after an in camera
inspection, that the aggregate number of airport pick-ups by a transportation service company
and the sums of money paid to the county pursuant to a license agreement between the company
and the county did not constitute trade secret information. Rasier-DC, LLC v. B & L Service,
Inc., 237 So. 3d 374 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). e court also found that a provision in the agreement
requiring that the county maintain the condentiality of the company’s trade secret information
and assert the exempt status in response to a public records request could not transform the
information into a condential record, citing to National Collegiate Athletic Association v.
Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201, 1208 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). And see James, Hoyer, Newcomer,
Smiljanich, & Yanchunis, P.A., v. Rodale, Inc., 41 So. 3d 386, 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), rejecting
a company’s claim that information in customer complaints and company responses were trade
secrets; noting that such information “is not secret and is not [the company’s] to control;”Allstate
160
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Floridian Ins. Co. v. Oce of Ins. Regulation, 981 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review denied,
987 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2008) (to the extent Allstate believed any documents sought by the Oce
of Insurance Regulation were privileged as trade secrets, Allstate was required to timely seek a
protective order in circuit court). Cf. Inf. Op. to Brown, March 11, 2016 (if an agency has
received material that the sender has identied as “trade secret” and the material does not appear
to meet the statutory denition of trade secret, the agency should advise the sender “that it has
a received a public request and will release the records and allow the sender to seek a protective
order for those materials”)
In addition to the general trade secret exemption in s. 119.0715, there are also specic
trade secret exemptions. See, e.g., s. 570.544(8), F.S. (records of the Division of Consumer
Services of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are public records; however,
customer lists, customer names, and trade secrets are condential and exempt). Cf. AGO
09-02 (s. 581.199, F.S., prohibits authorized representatives of Division of Plant Industry in
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services from disclosing trade secrets obtained in
carrying out their duties under Ch. 581 to any unauthorized person, provided such trade secrets
fall within the statutory denition in s. 812.081, F.S., and owner of the trade secrets has taken
measures to maintain the information’s secrecy). More information about these exemptions may
be found in the summaries located in Appendix D.
b. Proprietary condential business information
While there is no generic exemption for information claimed to be “proprietary
condential business information,” the Legislature has created a number of exemptions from Ch.
119, F.S., for proprietary condential business information held by certain agencies. e term
is generally dened by the statute creating the exemption and frequently includes trade secrets.
See, e.g., s. 288.075, F.S. (economic development agency); s. 288.9626, F.S. (Florida Opportunity
Fund); and ss. 364.183, 366.093, 367.156, and 368.108, F.S. (Public Service Commission). Cf.
Florida Power & Light Company v. Public Service Commission, 31 So. 3d 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
(listed categories of proprietary condential business information in s. 366.093, F.S., as exempt
are not exhaustive; information relating to employees’ compensation warranted condential
classication as it would have impaired utility’s competitive interests). Compare Southern Bell
Telephone and Telegraph Company v. Beard, 597 So. 2d 873, 876 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (Public
Service Commission’s determination that statutory exemption for proprietary condential
business information should be narrowly construed and did not apply to company’s internal self-
analysis was “consistent with the liberal construction aorded the Public Records Act in favor of
open government”). And see AGO 08-14 (lease payment amount made by a private company to
the city does not constitute “proprietary condential business information”).
D. PROVIDING PUBLIC RECORDS
1. Validity of agency conditions on access
Section 119.07(1)(a), F.S., establishes a right of access to public records in plain and
unequivocal terms:
Every person who has custody of a public record shall permit
the record to be inspected and copied by any person desiring to
do so, at any reasonable time, under reasonable conditions, and
under supervision by the custodian of the public records.
e term “reasonable conditions” as used in s. 119.07(1)(a), F.S., “refers not to conditions
which must be fullled before review is permitted but to reasonable regulations that would
permit the custodian of records to protect them from alteration, damage, or destruction and also
to ensure that the person reviewing the records is not subjected to physical constraints designed
to preclude review.” Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420, 425 (Fla. 1979).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
161
See also Chandler v. City of Greenacres, 140 So. 3d 1080, 1084 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (noting the
narrow interpretation of the phrase “reasonable conditions”); and Tribune Company v. Cannella,
458 So. 2d 1075, 1078 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune Company,
105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985) (the sole purpose of custodial supervision is to protect the records from
alteration, damage, or destruction).
Accordingly, the “reasonable conditions” do not include a rule or condition of inspection
which operates to restrict or circumvent a person’s right of access. AGO 75-50. “e courts
of this state have invalidated measures which seek to impose any additional burden on those
seeking to exercise their rights to obtain records” under Ch. 119, F.S. Inf. Op. to Cook, May
27, 2011. And see State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (requirement that persons
with custody of public records allow records to be examined “at any reasonable time, under
reasonable conditions” is not unconstitutional as applied to public records custodian who was
dilatory in responding to public records requests).
e Public Records Act “embodies important public policy” and “is designed to provide
citizens with a simple and expeditious method of accessing public records.” Orange County v.
Hewlings, 152 So. 3d 812, 817 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). us, an agency violated the Act when
instead of complying with Hewlings’ “simple request” for records, it “chose to interpose the
additional bureaucratic hurdles of forcing her to come to its oces, comb through the records,
mark the records in a certain manner, wait for a written estimate of costs, then, after paying the
costs, wait again for the records to be mailed to her.” Id.
e custodian “is at all times responsible for the custody of the [public] records but when
a citizen applies to inspect or make copies of them it is his duty to make provision for this to
be done in such a manner as will accommodate the applicant and at the same time safeguard
the records.” Fuller v. State ex rel. O’Donnell, 17 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 1944). us, the right of
inspection may not be frustrated or circumvented through indirect means such as the use of a
code book. State ex rel. Davidson v. Couch, 158 So. 103, 105 (Fla. 1934) (right of inspection was
“hindered and obstructed” by city “imposing conditions to the right of examination which were
not reasonable nor permissible under the law”). Accord AGO 05-12 (city may not require the
use of a code to review e-mail correspondence of city’s police department and human resources
department). And see Inf. Op. to Cook, May 27, 2011, noting that “[a] policy requiring
a physical address for mailing copies of requested public records or the personal appearance
of the requestor would not appear to relate to the custodian’s duty to protect public records
from alteration or destruction, but to impose additional constraints on the requestor.” Compare
Siegmeister v. Johnson, 240 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (state attorney did not violate the
Public Records Act by making requested records available for inspection and copying at the
main oce of the state attorney, rather than at a branch oce closer to the requester’s home,
because the Public Records Act “does not require government ocials to move records from
where they are being maintained to a dierent place convenient to the requester”).
Moreover, any local enactment or policy which purports to dictate additional conditions
or restrictions on access to public records is of dubious validity since the legislative scheme of
the Public Records Act has preempted any local regulation of this subject. Tribune Company
v. Cannella, supra at 1077. A policy of a governmental agency cannot exempt it from the
application of Ch. 119, F.S., a general law. Douglas v. Michel, 410 So. 2d 936, 938 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1982), questions answered and approved, 464 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1985). And see AGO 90-04
(county ocial not authorized to assign county’s rights to a public record as part of a settlement
agreement compromising a lawsuit against the county). Cf. Herbits v. City of Miami, 207 So. 3d
274, 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (claim based on alleged concealment of information in violation
of transparency mandates established in local enactments is preempted by the Florida Public
Records Act, because the “Florida Legislature has so pervasively legislated regarding this subject
area that a local government is precluded from legislating in the same area.”).
162
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
2. Individuals authorized to inspect and receive copies of public records
Section 119.01, F.S., provides that “[i]t is the policy of this state that all state, county, and
municipal records are open for personal inspection and copying by any person.” (e.s.) A state
citizenship requirement was deleted from the law in 1975. A public employee is a person within
the meaning of Ch. 119, F.S. and, as such, possesses the same right of inspection as any other
person. AGO 75-175. Likewise, a county is “any person” who is allowed to seek public records
under Ch. 119, F.S. Hillsborough County, Florida v. Buccaneers Stadium Limited Partnership, No.
99-0321 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. February 5, 1999), armed per curiam, 758 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 2d DCA
2000), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com.
us, “the law provides any member of the public access to public records, whether he or
she be the most outstanding civic citizen or the most heinous criminal.” Church of Scientology
Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27, 1997), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com. “[A]s long as
the citizens of this state desire and insist upon ‘open government’ and liberal public records
disclosure, as a cost of that freedom public ocials have to put up with demanding citizens even
when they are obnoxious as long as they violate no laws.” State v. Colby, No. MM96-317A-
XX (Fla. Highlands Co. Ct. May 23, 1996), available online in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com.
“Even though a public agency may believe that a person or group are fanatics, harassers
or are extremely annoying, the public records are available to all of the citizens of the State of
Florida.” Salvadore v. City of Stuart, No. 91-812 CA (Fla. 19th Cir. Ct. December 17, 1991),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com. And
see Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736, 741 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (defendant’s conduct in making
over 40 public records requests concerning victim constituted a “legitimate purpose,” and thus
cannot violate the stalking law “because the right to obtain the records is established by statute
and acknowledged in the state constitution”). Cf. James v. Loxahatchee Groves Water Control
District, 820 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), concluding that a trial court erred when it failed
to hold a hearing before denying a request to require a district to permit inspection at the district
oces, rather than at an o-premises location. e agency argued that it would be “disruptive”
to require that the records inspection be conducted at its oces. Id. However, the appeals court
ruled that a hearing should have been held to determine whether the requester, who was in
litigation with the district, should be allowed to view the records at the district oces, and if so,
under what conditions. Id.
3. Purpose of request
e requester is not required to explain the purpose or reason for a public records request.
“e motivation of the person seeking the records does not impact the person’s right to see
them under the Public Records Act.” Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736, 742 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
See also Bareld v. School Board of Manatee County, 135 So. 3d 560, 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)
(“An individual’s reason for requesting a public record is irrelevant”); Timoney v. City of Miami
Civilian Investigative Panel, 917 So. 2d 885, 886n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (“generally, a person’s
motive in seeking access to public records is irrelevant”); Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940, 941
(Fla. 1st DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton v. Austin, 605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992)
(petitioner’s reasons for seeking access to public records “are immaterial”); Lorei v. Smith, 464
So. 2d 1330, 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985) (legislative
objective underlying the creation of Ch. 119 was to insure to the people of Florida the right
freely to gain access to governmental records; the purpose of such inquiry is immaterial); and
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Gadd, 388 So. 2d 276, 278 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (“the
newspaper’s motives [for seeking the documents], as well as the hospital’s nancial harm and
public harm defenses, are irrelevant in an action to compel compliance with the Public Records
Act”). Cf. Town of Gulf Stream v. O’Boyle, 654 F. App’x 439 (11th Cir. 2016) (alleged ling of
large numbers of frivolous public records requests which are then followed by lawsuits when the
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
163
requests are not addressed does not constitute a predicate act under the Racketeer Inuenced
Corrupt Organizations Act), and DeMartini v. Town of Gulf Stream, 942 F.3d 1277, 1289 (11th
Cir. 2019) ( “In short, a citizen’s public records requests and lawsuits against the government can
clearly constitute protected First Amendment activity”).
us, an agency is not authorized to impose conditions or limit access to public records
based on a suspicion that the request may be for an improper purpose. Inf. Op. to Cook, May
27, 2011. However, as noted in that opinion, Florida Statutes impose criminal penalties for the
unauthorized use of personal identication information for fraudulent or harassment purposes
and for the criminal use of a public record or public records information. See ss. 817.568 and
817.569, F.S.
Similarly, “the fact that a person seeking access to public records wishes to use them in
a commercial enterprise does not alter his or her rights under Florida’s public records law.”
Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871, 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review denied, 902 So.
2d 791 (Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005). See also State ex rel. Davis v. McMillan,
38 So. 666 (Fla. 1905) (abstract companies may copy documents from the clerk’s oce for their
own use and sell copies to the public for a prot); Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes & Noble
College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227, 228n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), review denied, 729 So. 2d
389 (Fla. 1999) (“Booksmart’s reason for wanting to view and copy the documents is irrelevant
to the issue of whether the documents are public records”).
4. Role of the records custodian
Section 119.011(5), F.S., denes the term “custodian of public records” to mean “the
elected or appointed state, county, or municipal ocer charged with the responsibility of
maintaining the oce having public records, or his or her designee.”
e custodian of public records, or a person having custody of public records, may
designate another ocer or employee of the agency to permit the inspection and copying of
public records, but must disclose the identity of the designee to the person requesting to inspect
or copy public records. Section 119.07(1)(b), F.S. And see s. 119.0701(2), F.S. (discussed more
fully on page 65) requiring that certain agency contracts for public services must contain contact
information pertaining to the agency’s custodian of public records.
However, the courts have concluded that the statutory reference to the records custodian
does not alter the “duty of disclosure” imposed by s. 119.07(1), F.S., upon “[e]very person who has
custody of a public record.” Puls v. City of Port St. Lucie, 678 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
[Emphasis supplied by the court]. us, the term “custodian” for purposes of the Public Records
Act refers to all agency personnel who have it within their power to release or communicate
public records. Mintus v. City of West Palm Beach, 711 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (citing
Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683, 687 [Fla. 5th DCA 1991]). But, “the mere fact
that an employee of a public agency temporarily possesses a document does not necessarily mean
that the person has custody as dened by section 119.07.” Id. at 1361. In order to have custody,
one must have supervision and control over the document or have legal responsibility for its care,
keeping or guardianship. Id.
In Siegmeister v. Johnson, 240 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), the court rejected the
requester’s claim that he was entitled to view the records at the oce of an assistant state attorney
in Lake City when oce policy required that the records be sent to the state attorney’s main oce
in Live Oak to be reviewed for exemptions. e court reasoned that the assistant state attorney
“couldn’t have, for instance simply handed over the records on the spot” when the requester
asked for them in Lake City because both the “[Public Records] Act and oce policy” required
that the records “be reviewed for exempt information by the public records custodian (who was
also responsible for supervising the record inspection and copying process)” as provided in s.
119.07(1)(a), F.S. Id. at 74
164
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
e custodian of public records and his or her designee must acknowledge requests to
inspect or copy records promptly and respond to such requests in good faith. Section 119.07(1)
(c), F.S. See Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120, 128
(Fla. 2016), noting that the “good faith language” was intended “to strengthen the responsibilities
of records custodians by imposing an explicit requirement on public agencies that they act in
good faith in responding to public records requests.”
A good faith response includes making reasonable eorts to determine from other ocers
or employees within the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which
the record can be accessed. Id. Cf. SDE Media LLC v. City of Doral, 25 F.L.W. Supp 243a
(Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. May 5, 2017) in which the circuit judge found that the city had violated
the Public Records Law by “misrepresenting to SDE Media LLC that all responsive records had
been located and produced when, in fact, [the city] knew that a good faith search had not been
made and that additional responsive records may not have been produced”. And see Raydient
LLC v. Nassau County, Florida, No. 2019-CA-000054 (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. August 24, 2021),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (“If
public agency employees and ocials transact public business on their privately-owned accounts
or devices, then the agency has an armative duty in response to public records requests to do
what is reasonably necessary to promptly retrieve any public documents from those employees
or ocials”).
e duty of “good faith” imposed on public ocers who are charged with the responsibility
of complying with the law is “subjective.” Consumer Rights, LLC v. Union County, 159 So.
3d 882, 885 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), review denied, 177 So. 3d 1264 (Fla. 2015). “Whether
a governmental entity acted in ‘good faith’ in the manner in which it responded to a request
for disclosure of public records is necessarily a question for the court to decide based on the
circumstances of a case.” Id.
Sections 119.12(1)(b) and (2), F.S mandate that the complainant in a public records
lawsuit must provide written notice identifying the public records request to the custodian of
public records at least 5 business days prior to ling a civil action. However, the notice is not
required if the agency fails to prominently post the contact information for the custodian in the
manner prescribed in the statute. Cf. City of St. Petersburg v. Dorchester Holdings, LLC, 331 So.
3d 799, n.2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), in which the court noted that “[a]lthough there appears to be
no prohibition against using the [Public Records]Act as a discovery device, thereby circumventing
the rules of procedure regarding discovery, this does not provide an attorney who represents a
party in pending litigation with carte blanche to directly contact a represented opposing party.
See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-42; Fla. Bar Ethics Opinion 09-1 (concluding that a lawyer may
not communicate with government ocers, directors, or employees who are directly involved or
whose acts can be imputed to the government entity in a represented matter).” Questions relating
to the application of the Rules of Professional Conduct should be addressed to e Florida Bar.
5. Requests for copies versus requests to inspect public records
“It is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal records are open for
personal inspection and copying by any person.” (e.s.) Section 119.01(1), F.S. In addition,
s. 119.07(1)(a), F.S., provides that “[e]very person who has custody of a public record shall
permit the record to be inspected and copied by any person desiring to do so . . . .” Finally, s.
119.07(4), F.S., requires the custodian to “furnish a copy or a certied copy of the record upon
payment of the fee prescribed by law . . . .” And see Fuller v. State ex rel. O’Donnell, 17 So. 2d 607
(Fla. 1944) (“e best-reasoned authority in this country holds that the right to inspect public
records carries with it the right to make copies”); and Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer
Fire Department, 352 So. 2d 1230, 1232n.2 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (Public Records Act requires
custodian to furnish copies). Cf. Wootton v. Cook, 590 So. 2d 1039, 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (if
the requestor identies a record with sucient specicity to permit the agency to identify it and
forwards the appropriate fee, the agency must furnish by mail a copy of the record).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
165
6. Records maintained by more than one agency
e fact that a particular record is also maintained by another agency does not relieve the
custodian of the obligation to permit inspection and copying in the absence of an applicable
statutory exemption. AGO 86-69. If information contained in the public record is available
from other sources, a person seeking access to the record is not required to make an unsuccessful
attempt to obtain the information from those sources as a condition precedent to gaining access
to the public records. Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2d 977, 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).
7. Records not in physical possession of agency
An agency is not authorized to refuse to allow inspection of public records it made or
received in the course of ocial business on the grounds that the documents are in the actual
possession of another agency or ocial other than the records custodian. See Wallace v. Guzman,
687 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (public records cannot be hidden from the public by
transferring physical custody of the records to the agency’s attorneys); Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So.
2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied sub nom., Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency v.
Sanchez, 426 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1983) (ocial charged with maintenance of records may not transfer
actual physical custody of records to county attorney and thereby avoid compliance with request
for inspection under Ch. 119, F.S.); and AGO 92-78 (public housing authority not authorized
to withhold its records from disclosure on the grounds that the records have been subpoenaed by
the state attorney and transferred to that oce). “Given the aggressive nature of the public’s right
to inspect and duplicate public records, a governmental agency may not avoid a public records
request by transferring custody of its records to another agency.” Chandler v. City of Sanford, 121
So. 3d 657, 660 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013).
us, in Bareld v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, No. 93-1701 (Fla. 2d Cir.
Ct. May 19, 1994), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com, the court held that an agency that received records from a private entity
in the course of ocial business and did not make copies of the documents could not “return”
them to the entity following receipt of a public records request. e court ordered the agency to
demand the return of the records from the private entity so they could be copied for the requestor.
Similarly, in Times Publishing Company v. City of St. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487, 492-493
(Fla. 2d DCA 1990), the court found that both the city and a private entity violated the Public
Records Act when, pursuant to a plan to circumvent Ch. 119, F.S., the city avoided taking
possession of negotiation documents reviewed and discussed by both parties and instead left
them with the private entity’s attorney. e court determined that although city ocials may
have intended merely to “avoid” the law, the eect of their actions was to “evade the broad
policy of open government.” And see Wisner v. City of Tampa Police Department, 601 So. 2d 296,
298 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (city may not allow a private entity to maintain physical custody of
public records [polygraph chart used in internal investigation] “to circumvent the public records
chapter”); and National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201 (Fla.
1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (records on private entity’s secure
website that were viewed and used by a state university in carrying out its ocial duties were
public records even though the university did not take physical possession); and AGO 98-54
(registration and disciplinary records stored in a computer database maintained by a national
securities association which are used by a state agency in licensing and regulating securities dealers
doing business in Florida are public records).
8. “Overbroad” public records requests
In Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330, 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 475 So. 2d
695 (Fla. 1985), the court recognized that the “breadth of such right [to gain access to public
records] is virtually unfettered, save for the statutory exemptions . . . .” Accordingly, in the
absence of a statutory exemption, a custodian must produce the records requested regardless
of the number of records involved or possible inconvenience. Note, however, s. 119.07(4)(d),
166
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
F.S., authorizes a custodian to charge, in addition to the cost of duplication, a reasonable service
charge for the cost of the extensive use of information technology resources or of personnel, if
such extensive use is required because of the nature or volume of public records to be inspected
or copied. See AGO 92-38.
us, a person seeking to inspect “all” nancial records of a municipality may not be required
to specify a particular book or record he or she wishes to inspect. State ex rel. Davidson v. Couch,
156 So. 297, 300 (Fla. 1934). In Davidson, the Florida Supreme Court explained that if this were
the case, “one person may be required to specify the book, while another and more favored one,
because of his pretended ignorance of the name of the record might be permitted examination of
all of them.” Id. Such a result would be inconsistent with the mandate in the Public Records Act
that public records are open to all who wish to inspect them. Id. Cf. Salvadore v. City of Stuart, No.
91-812 CA (Fla. 19th Cir. Ct. December 17, 1991), available online in the Cases database at the
open government site at myoridalegalcom, stating that if a public records request is insucient to
identify the records sought, the city has an armative duty to promptly notify the requester that
more information is needed in order to produce the records; it is the responsibility of the city and
not the requestor to follow up on any requests for public records. Compare Woodard v. State, 885
So. 2d 444, 446 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (records custodian must furnish copies of records when the
person requesting them identies the portions of the record with sucient specicity to permit the
custodian to identify the record and forwards the statutory fee).
9. Written request or form requirements
Chapter 119, F.S., does not authorize an agency to require that requests for records be in
writing. See Dade Aviation Consultants v. Knight Ridder, Inc., 800 So. 2d 302, 305n.1 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2001) (“ere is no requirement in the Public Records Act that requests for records must
be in writing”). As noted in AGO 80-57, a custodian must honor a request for copies of records
which is sucient to identify the records desired, whether the request is in writing, over the
telephone, or in person, provided that the required fees are paid. “In sum, the city could not
properly condition disclosure of the public records, to the then-anonymous requester on lling
out the city’s form . . . .” Chandler v. City of Greenacres, 140 So. 3d 1080, 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA
2014).
If a public agency believes that it is necessary to provide written documentation of a
request for public records, the agency may require that the custodian complete an appropriate
form or document; however, the person requesting the records cannot be required to provide
such documentation as a precondition to the granting of the request to inspect or copy public
records. See Sullivan v. City of New Port Richey, No. 86-1129CA (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. May 22, 1987),
per curiam armed, 529 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), noting that a requester’s failure to
complete a city form required for access to documents did not authorize the custodian to refuse
to honor the request to inspect or copy public records.
However, a request for records of the judicial branch (which is not subject to Ch. 119,
F.S., see Times Publishing Company v. Ake, 660 So. 2d 255 [Fla. 1995]), must be in writing.
Rule 2.420(m)(1), Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. In its commentary accompanying the rule
change that incorporated this requirement, the Court said that the “writing requirement is not
intended to disadvantage any person who may have diculty writing a request; if any diculty
exists, the custodian should aid the requestor in reducing the request to writing.” In re Report of
the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla. 2002).
10. Identication of requester
A person requesting access to or copies of public records may not be required to disclose
his or her name, address, telephone number or the like to the custodian, unless the custodian is
required by law to obtain this information prior to releasing the records. AGOs 92-38 and 91-
76. Accord Inf. Op. to Cook, May 27, 2011. See also Bevan v. Wanicka, 505 So. 2d 1116 (Fla.
2d DCA 1987) (production of public records may not be conditioned upon a requirement that
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
167
the person seeking inspection disclose background information about himself or herself). Cf. s.
1012.31(2)(f), F.S., providing that the custodian of public school employee personnel les shall
maintain a record in the le of those persons reviewing an employee personnel le each time it
is reviewed.
us, a city may not require an anonymous requester who made a public records request
via e-mail to provide an “address or other identiable source for payment of the associated costs.”
Chandler v. City of Greenacres, 140 So. 3d 1080, 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). Instead, “the city
could have sent an estimate of costs through e-mail to the requester just as it could through
regular mail, had the request been made via paper by an anonymous requester.” Id. Cf. Consumer
Rights, LLC v. Union County, Florida, 159 So. 3d 882, 886 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), review denied,
177 So. 3d 1264 (Fla. 2015) (“We know of no law that requires a governmental entity to provide
public records to a generic email address, at least not until such time as it is made clear that the
address belongs to a person”); and Citizens Awareness Foundation, Inc. v. Wantman Group, Inc.,
195 So. 3d 396, 402 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“ere is a dierence between allowing anonymous
public records requests and evaluating an agency’s response when such requests are justiably
handled with caution”).
11. Remote access
Section 119.07(2)(a), F.S., states that “[a]s an additional means of inspecting or copying
public records, a custodian may provide access to public records by remote electronic means,
provided exempt or condential information is not disclosed.” And see s. 119.01(2)(e), F.S. us,
an agency is authorized but not required to permit remote electronic access to public records.
Similarly, access to public records by remote electronic means is merely an additional
means of inspecting or copying public records; this “additional means of access, however, is
insucient where the person requesting the records species the traditional method of access via
paper copies.” Lake Shore Hospital Authority v. Lilker, 168 So. 3d 332, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Section 119.07(2)(b), F.S., requires the custodian to provide safeguards to protect the
contents of the public records from unauthorized electronic access or alteration and to prevent
the disclosure or modication of those portions of the records which are exempt from disclosure.
Unless otherwise required by law, the custodian may charge a fee for remote electronic
access, granted under a contractual arrangement with a user, which fee may include the direct and
indirect costs of providing such access. However, fees for remote electronic access provided to
the general public must be in accordance with the provisions of s. 119.07, F.S. Section 119.07(2)
(c), F.S.
12. Requests to create new records, answer questions about the records, or reformat
existing records
e statutory obligation of the custodian of public records is to provide access to, or copies
of, public records “at any reasonable time, under reasonable conditions, and under supervision by
the custodian of the public records” provided that the required fees are paid. Section 119.07(1)
(a) and (4), F.S. However, a custodian is not required to give out information from the records
of his or her oce. AGO 80-57. e Public Records Act does not require a town to produce
an employee, such as the nancial ocer, to answer questions regarding the nancial records of
the town. AGO 92-38. Cf. In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records, 825
So. 2d 889, 898 (Fla. 2002) (the custodian of judicial records “is required to provide access to or
copies of records but is not required either to provide information from records or to create new
records in response to a request”).
In other words, Ch. 119, F.S., provides a right of access to inspect and copy an agency’s
existing public records; it does not mandate that an agency create new records in order to
accommodate a request for information from the agency. us, the clerk of court is not required
168
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
to provide an inmate with a list of documents from a case le which may be responsive to some
forthcoming request. Wootton v. Cook, 590 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). See also AGO 08-
29. Cf. s. 120.53, F.S., relating to maintenance of nal orders by agencies subject to Ch. 120, F.S.
However, in order to comply with the statutory directive that an agency provide copies of
public records upon payment of the statutory fee, an agency must respond to requests by mail
for information as to copying costs. Wootton v. Cook, supra. See also Woodard v. State, 885 So. 2d
444, 445n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), remanding a case for further proceedings where the custodian
forwarded only information relating to the statutory fee schedule rather than the total copying
cost of the requested records. Cf. Gilliam v. State, 996 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (clerk,
as custodian of judicial records, had a legal duty to respond to Gilliam’s request for information
regarding costs) and Blackshear v. State, 115 So. 3d 1093 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (clerk is “duty-
bound to respond to a request about copying costs for the records sought”).
Similarly, as stated in Seigle v. Barry, 422 So. 2d 63, 66 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), review
denied, 431 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1983), the intent of Ch. 119, F.S., is “to make available to the public
information which is a matter of public record, in some meaningful form, not necessarily that
which the applicant prefers.” Accordingly, an agency is not ordinarily required to reformat its
records and provide them in a particular form as demanded by the requestor. AGO 08-29. As
explained in Seigle:
If the health department maintains a chronological list of dog-bite
incidents with rabies implications [a] plainti, bitten by a suspect
dog, may not require the health department to reorder that list
and furnish a record of incidents segregated by geographical areas.
Nothing in the statute, case law or public policy imposes such a
burden upon our public ocials. 422 So. 2d at 65.
us, in AGO 97-39, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that a school district was
not required to furnish electronic public records in an electronic format other than the standard
format routinely maintained by the district.
Despite the general rule, however, the Seigle court recognized that an agency may be
required to provide access through a specially designed program, prepared by or at the expense
of the requestor, where:
1) available programs do not access all of the public records stored in the computer’s data
banks; or
2) the information in the computer accessible by the use of available programs would include
exempt information necessitating a special program to delete such exempt items; or
3) for any reason the form in which the information is proered does not fairly and
meaningfully represent the records; or
4) the court determines other exceptional circumstances exist warranting this special remedy.
422 So. 2d at 66-67.
For the purpose of satisfying a public records request, the fee to be charged by an agency if
it elects to provide a copy of a public record in a medium that is not routinely used by the agency,
or if it elects to compile information that is not routinely developed or maintained by the agency
or that requires a substantial amount of manipulation or programming, must be in accordance
with s. 119.07(4), F.S. (authorizing imposition of a special service charge if extensive information
technology resources or labor are required). Section 119.01(2)(f), F.S.
13. Records available in more than one medium
An agency must provide a copy of the record in the medium requested if the agency
maintains the record in that medium, and the agency may charge a fee which shall be in
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
169
accordance with Ch. 119, F.S. Section 119.01(2)(f), F.S. See AGO 13-07. Accordingly, an
agency violated the Public Records Act when it referred the requester to a website instead of
providing paper copies as the requester asked. Lake Shore Hospital Authority v. Lilker, 168 So.
3d 332 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). See also AGO 91-61 (custodian must provide a copy of computer
disk in its original format; a typed transcript does not satisfy the requirements of this statute).
Similarly, an agency violated s. 119.01(2)(f), F.S., when it refused to provide electronic
records (emails and calendar entries) in a pst. or similar electronic medium, and instead provided
all the requested records in PDF format. e court ordered the agency to provide the records in
pst. or other electronic medium that allowed the requester to view them in Outlook in the same
manner that the agency could view such records in its own system, except for specic emails or
calendar entries that required redactions, which could be provided in PDf format. Bracci v. School
Board of Lee County, No. 20-CA-5205 (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. January 12, 2021), available online
in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com. See also Miami-Dade
County v. Professional Law Enforcement Association, 997 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (fact
that pertinent information may exist in more than one format is not a basis for exemption or
denial of the request). Cf. AGO 06-30, stating that an agency may respond to a public records
request requiring the production of thousands of documents by composing a static web page
where the responsive public documents are posted for viewing if the requesting party agrees to
the procedure and agrees to pay the administrative costs, in lieu of copying the documents at a
much greater cost.
14. Amount of time allowed for response to public records requests
a. Duty to acknowledge requests promptly
e custodian of public records or his or her designee is required to acknowledge requests
to inspect or copy records promptly and to respond to such requests in good faith. Section
119.07(1)(c), F.S. Cf. Hewlings v. Orange County, 87 So. 3d 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (mere fact
that county quickly responded to public records request by voicemail and fax is not dispositive
of whether county’s 45-day delay in complying with the request was unjustied for purposes of
s. 119.12, F.S., authorizing an award of attorney’s fees to a party who succeeds in a civil action
resulting from an unlawful refusal to provide public records).
b. Automatic delay impermissible
A policy which provides for an automatic delay in the production of public records is
impermissible. Tribune Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075, 1078-1079 (Fla. 1984), appeal
dismissed sub nom., Deperte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985). And see Lake Shore
Hospital Authority v. Lilker, 168 So. 3d 332, 333-334 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (agency not authorized
to automatically delay production by imposing a 24-hour notice requirement).
us, an agency is not authorized to delay inspection of personnel records in order to
allow the employee to be present during the inspection of his or her records. Tribune Company
v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d at 1078. Compare s. 1012.31(3)(a)3., F.S., in which the Legislature has
expressly provided that no material derogatory to a public school employee may be inspected
until 10 days after the employee has been notied as prescribed by statute.
Similarly, the Attorney General’s Oce has advised that a board of trustees of a police
pension fund may not delay release of its records until such time as the request is submitted to
the board for a vote. AGO 96-55. And see Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (city may not delay public access to board
meeting minutes until after the city commission has approved the minutes).
c. Unjustied delay
e Public Records Act does not contain a specic time limit (such as 24 hours or 10 days)
for compliance with public records requests. However, “delay in making public records available
170
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
is permissible under very limited circumstances.” Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v. Sundy, 145 So.
3d 980, 983 (Fla. 1st DCA, 2014). In Promenade, the court noted that a records custodian could
delay production to determine whether the records exist, s. 119.07[1][c], F.S.; if the custodian
believes the some or all of the record is exempt, s. 119.07[1][d]-[e]; or if the requesting party
fails to forward the appropriate fees, s. 119.07[4], F.S. Otherwise, the only delay in producing
records permitted under Ch. 119, F.S., “is the limited reasonable time allowed the custodian to
retrieve the record and delete those portions of the record the custodian asserts are exempt.” Id.
at 983, citing Tribune Company v. Cannella, 458 So. 2d 1075, 1078 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed
sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985). Where the delays aren’t justied,
“the Public Records Act holds ocials accountable.” Siegmeister v. Johnson, 240 So. 3d 70, 74
(Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
us, an agency’s unjustied delay in producing public records constitutes an unlawful
refusal to provide access to public records. See Lilker v. Suwannee Valley Transit Authority, 133
So. 3d 654, 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“Unlawful refusal under section 119.12 includes not only
armative refusal to produce records, but also unjustied delay in producing them”). See also
State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d 602, 604 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (error for a lower court judge to vacate
a misdemeanor conviction of a records custodian [Webb] who had been found guilty of willfully
violating s. 119.07(1)(a), F.S., based on her “dilatory” response to public records requests).
For example, in Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v. Sundy, supra, the appellate court determined
that an agency violated the Public Records Act by refusing to provide non-exempt public records
until a court denied its motion for a protective order to block the requestor (an adversary in out-
of-state litigation) from using the Act. Similarly, a trial judge erred by granting the agency’s motion
to dismiss on the grounds that the agency ultimately provided the record three months after the
request was made and two weeks after the request for mandamus relief had been led. Consumer
Rights, LLC v. Bradford County, Florida, 153 So. 3d 394, 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). Instead, the
judge should have conducted a hearing to determine whether the delay was justied. Id.
By contrast, in Lang v. Reedy Creek Improvement District, No. CJ-5546 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct.
October 2, 1995), armed per curiam, 675 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), available online in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, the circuit court rejected
the petitioner’s claim that the agency should have produced requested records within 10, 20 and
60-day periods. e court determined that the agency’s response to numerous (19) public records
requests for 135 categories of information and records led by the opposing party in litigation was
reasonable in light of the cumulative impact of the requests and the fact that the requested records
contained exempt as well as nonexempt information and thus required a considerable amount
of review and redaction. And see Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9,
1998), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com,
in which the court said that in view of the “nature and volume of the materials requested [over
9000 pages], their location, and the need for close supervision by some knowledgeable person of
the review of those records for possible exemptions,” the amount of time expended by the county
to produce the records (several weeks) to opposing counsel was not unreasonable.
Moreover, recent cases have emphasized that in order for a delay to constitute an “unlawful
refusal” for purposes of the award of attorney’s fees under s. 119.12, F.S., the delay must be
“unjustied.” See e.g., Consumer Rights, LLC v. Union County, 159 So. 3d 882, 885 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2015), review denied, 177 So. 3d 1264 (Fla. 2015) and Citizens Awareness Foundation, Inc.
v. Wantman Group, Inc., 195 So. 3d 396, 401 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). See also the discussion on
pages 196-200 relating to attorney’s fees awarded under s. 119.12, F.S., for an “unlawful refusal”
to provide access to public records.
Stated another way, the Public Records Act “demands prompt attention and a reasonable
response time, not the quickest-possible response.” Siegmeister v. Johnson, 240 So. 3d 70, 74
(Fla. 1st DCA 2018). In Siegmeister, the court noted that the agency had not “intentionally or
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
171
unjustiably delayed responding” to a public records request because it took two weeks for the
response to be delivered to the requester. Id. at 74. Cf. Florida Agency for Health Care Administration
v. Zuckerman, Spaeder, LLP, 221 So. 3d 1260, 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (trial court abused its
discretion by issuing a writ of mandamus requiring health care agency to produce a large number
of public records within 48 hours when the records could not be reviewed for redaction of exempt
information within this “compressed time period;” trial court also erred by requiring the agency
to produce the records prior to the requester’s payment of the agency’s invoices associated with
production of the records).
d. Arbitrary time for inspection
e Public Records Act authorizes inspection and copying of public records “at any
reasonable time.” Section 119.07(1)(a), F.S. While the custodian may reasonably restrict
inspection to those hours during which his or her oce is open to the public, an agency policy
that restricts inspection of public records to the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., Monday through
Friday with 24-hour advance notice violates the Public Records Act. Lake Shore Hospital Authority
v. Lilker, 168 So. 3d 332 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). Accord AGO 81-12 (custodian not authorized to
establish an arbitrary time period during which records may or may not be inspected).
ere may be instances where, due to the nature or volume of the records requested,
a delay based upon the physical problems in retrieving the records and protecting them is
necessary; however, the adoption of a schedule in which public records may be viewed only
during certain hours is impermissible. Inf. Op. to Riotte, May 21, 1990, concluding that an
agency policy which permits inspection of its public records only from 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, violates the Public Records Act.
e. Standing requests
e Attorney General’s Oce has stated that upon receipt of a public records request,
the agency must comply by producing all non-exempt documents in the custody of the agency
that are responsive to the request, upon payment of the charges authorized in Chapter 119, F.S.
However, this mandate applies only to those documents in the custody of the agency at the time
of the request; nothing in the Public Records Act appears to require that an agency respond to a
so-called “standing” request for production of public records that it may receive in the future. See
Inf. Op. to Worch, June 15, 1995.
15. Condentiality agreements
An agency “cannot bargain away its Public Records Act duties with promises of condentiality
in settlement agreements.” e Tribune Company v. Hardee Memorial Hospital, No. CA-91-370 (Fla.
10th Cir. Ct. August 19, 1991), available online in the Cases database at the open government site
at myoridalegal.com, (condentiality provision in a settlement agreement which resolved litigation
against a public hospital did not remove the document from the Public Records Act).
us, in National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201, 1207
(Fla. 1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010), the court held that a condentiality
agreement entered into by a private law rm on behalf of a state university with the NCAA that
allowed access to records contained on the NCAA’s secure custodial website that were used by
the university in preparing a response to possible NCAA sanctions, had no impact on whether
such records were public records, stating that “[a] public record cannot be transformed into
a private record merely because an agent of the government has promised that it will be kept
private.” And see Rasier-DC, LLC v. B & L Service, Inc., 237 So. 3d 374 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
(provision in license agreement between company and county which required county to maintain
the condentiality of company’s trade secret information and assert its exempt status in response
to a public records request could not transform information found to be a public record into a
private record); City of Pinellas Park, Florida v. Times Publishing Company, No. 00-008234CI-19
(Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. January 3, 2001), available online in the Cases database at the open government
172
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
site at myoridalegal.com (“there is absolutely no doubt that promises of condentiality [given
to employees who were asked to respond to a survey] do not empower the Court to depart from
the public records law”); and Gadd v. News-Press Publishing Company, 412 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1982) (records of a county hospital’s utilization review committee were not exempt from
Ch. 119, F.S., even though the information may have come from sources who expected or were
promised condentiality).
Similarly, in Times Publishing Company v. City of St. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487, 494 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1990), the court determined that a baseball organization and a city improperly attempted
to circumvent the Public Records Act by agreeing to keep negotiation documents relating to use
of a municipal stadium condential and in the exclusive custody of the organization. Noting
the dangers that exist if private entities “are allowed to demand that they retain custody [and
prevent inspection] of documents as a condition of doing business with a governmental body,”
the court ruled that both the organization and the city violated the Public Records Act. Cf.
WPTV-TV v. State, 61 So. 3d 1191 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2011) (trial court may not require media to
enter into condentiality agreement in order to receive advance notice of information relating to
jury selection in criminal case).
Additionally, s. 69.081(8), F.S., part of the Sunshine in Litigation Act, provides, subject to
limited exceptions, that any portion of an agreement which has the purpose or eect of concealing
information relating to the settlement or resolution of any claim or action against an agency is
void, contrary to public policy, and may not be enforced. Settlement records must be maintained
in compliance with Ch. 119, F.S. See Inf. Op. to Barry, June 24, 1998 (agency not authorized
to enter into a settlement agreement authorizing the concealment of information relating to an
adverse personnel decision from the remainder of a personnel le). Cf. s. 215.425(5), F.S. (any
agreement or contract, executed on or after July 1, 2011, which involves extra compensation
between a unit of government and an ocer, agent, employee, or contractor may not include
provisions that limit the ability of any party to the agreement or contract to discuss the agreement
or contract).
Moreover, to allow the maker or sender of records to dictate the circumstances under
which the records are to be deemed condential would permit private parties as opposed to the
Legislature to determine which public records are subject to disclosure and which are not. Such
a result would contravene the purpose and terms of Ch. 119, F.S. Browning v. Walton, 351 So.
2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (city cannot refuse to allow inspection of records containing the
names and addresses of city employees who lled out forms requesting that city maintain the
condentiality of all material in their personnel les); AGO 97-84 (architectural and engineering
plans under seal pursuant to s. 481.221 or s. 471.025, F.S., that are held by a public agency in
connection with the transaction of ocial business are subject to public inspection); and Inf.
Op. to Echeverri, April 30, 2010 (taxpayer may not request that records submitted to value
adjustment board be kept condential).
Accordingly, it is clear that the determination as to when public records are to be deemed
condential rests exclusively with the Legislature. See Sepro Corporation v. Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, 839 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), review denied sub nom., Crist v.
Department of Environmental Protection, 911 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 2005) (private party cannot render
public records exempt from disclosure merely by designating as condential the material it furnishes
to a state agency). See also AGO 90-104 (desire of data processing company to maintain “privacy”
of certain materials led with Department of State is of no consequence unless such materials fall
within a legislatively created exemption to Ch. 119, F.S.). And see Hill v. Prudential Insurance
Company of America, 701 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), review denied, 717 So. 2d 536 (Fla.
1998) (materials obtained by state agency from anonymous sources during its investigation of an
insurance company were public records subject to disclosure in the absence of statutory exemption,
notwithstanding the company’s contention that the records were “stolen” or “misappropriated”
privileged documents that were delivered to the state without the company’s permission).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
173
erefore, unless the Legislature has expressly authorized the maker of records received
by an agency to keep the material condential, the wishes of the sender or the agency in this
regard cannot supersede the requirements of Ch. 119, F.S. Compare, e.g., s. 377.2409(1), F.S.
(information on geophysical activities conducted on state-owned mineral lands received by
Department of Environmental Protection shall, on the request of the person conducting the
activities, be held condential and exempt from Ch. 119, F.S., for 10 years). And see Morris
v. Whitehead, 588 So. 2d 1023, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (upholding the nondisclosure of
condential records received by housing authority from the federal government pursuant to
agreement authorized by state housing law). Cf. Doe v. State, 901 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA
2005) (where citizen provided information to state attorney’s oce which led to a criminal
investigation was justied in inferring or had a reasonable expectation that he would be treated as
a condential source in accordance with statutory exemption now found at s. 119.071[2][f], F.S.,
the citizen was entitled to have his identifying information redacted from the closed le, even
though there was no express assurance of condentiality by the state attorney’s oce).
16. Redaction of condential or exempt information
If the custodian asserts that an exemption applies to part of the record, the custodian
“shall redact that portion . . . and shall produce the remainder of such record for inspection
and copying.” Section 119.07(1)(d), F.S. Ocala Star Banner Corp. v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196
(Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (city may redact information identifying condential informant from
police report but must produce the rest for inspection); City of Riviera Beach v. Bareld, 642
So. 2d 1135, 1137 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1995) (police
department authorized to withhold statutorily exempt criminal investigative information but
must allow inspection of nonexempt portions of the records); and AGO 95-42 (statute providing
for condentiality of certain audit information did not make the entire report condential and
exempt from disclosure; the portions of the report which do not contain exempt information
must be released).
e fact that an agency believes that it would be impractical or burdensome to redact
condential information from its records does not excuse noncompliance with the mandates of
the Public Records Act. AGO 99-52. See also AGO 02-73 (agency must redact condential and
exempt information and release the remainder of the record; agency not authorized to release
records containing condential information, albeit anonymously). Compare Florida Agency for
Health Care Administration v. Zuckerman Spaeder, LLP, 221 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)
(trial court order mandating that agency produce a large number of public records within 48
hours “eectively requires AHCA to ignore its statutory duty to redact exempted information”);
and Department of Health v. Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills 259 So. 3d 979, 982 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2018), reversing a lower court order that ordered production of death certicates without
addressing the Department’s “statutory duty to safeguard condential and exempt information
contained in the requested certicates.”
A custodian of records containing both exempt and nonexempt material may comply
with s. 119.07(1)(d), F.S., by any reasonable method which maintains and does not destroy the
exempted portion while allowing public inspection of the nonexempt portion. AGO 84-81. And
see AGOs 97-67 and 05-37 (Ocial Records).
Section 119.011(13), F.S., denes the term “redact” to mean “to conceal from a copy
of an original public record, or to conceal from an electronic image that is available for public
viewing, that portion of the record containing exempt or condential information.” See AGO
02-69 (statute providing for redaction of certain information in court records available for
public inspection does not authorize clerk of court to permanently remove or obliterate such
information from the original court records).
Section 119.07(1)(e), F.S., states that a custodian of a public record who contends that
a record or part of a record is exempt from inspection must state the basis for the exemption,
174
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
including the statutory citation to the exemption. Additionally, upon request, the custodian
must state in writing and with particularity the reasons for the conclusion that the record is
exempt or condential. Section 119.07(1)(f), F.S. See Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla.
1st DCA 2000) (agency’s response that it had provided all records “with the exception of certain
information relating to the victim” deemed inadequate because the response “failed to identify
with specicity either the reasons why records were believed to be exempt, or the statutory basis
for any exemption”); and Langlois v. City of Deereld Beach, Florida, 370 F. Supp. 2d 1233 (S.D.
Fla. 2005) (city re chief’s summary rejection of request for employee personnel le violated the
Public Records Act because the chief gave no statutory reason for failing to produce the records).
However, in City of St. Petersburg v. Romine ex rel. Dillinger, 719 So. 2d 19, 21 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1998), the court cautioned that the Public Records Act “may not be used in such a way
to obtain information that the legislature has declared must be exempt from disclosure.” us,
a request for agency records may not be phrased or responded to in terms of a request for the
specic documents asked for and received by a law enforcement agency during the course of
an active criminal investigation. AGO 06-04. Compare AGO 08-33 (list of law enforcement
ocers who have been placed on administrative duty is a public record; the list is not condential
pursuant to section 112.533[2][a], F.S., providing for condentiality of complaints led against a
law enforcement ocer); and AGO 07-15 (statutory exemption authorizing certain corporations
to request condentiality of information relating to the company’s interest or plans to relocate to
the state may be cited by a records custodian as statutory authority for withholding information
from public disclosure without violating the condentiality provisions of the exemption).
However, s. 119.07(1)(e), F.S., “requires only record-by-record—not redaction-by-
redaction—identication of the exemptions authorizing the redactions in each record.” Jones
v. Miami Herald Media Company, 198 So. 3d 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). e court upheld the
agency’s use of a form with checkboxes identifying the various statutory exemptions relied upon
for the redactions in the records and rejected the petitioner’s contention that the agency should
have specied which exemption applied to which redaction. And see Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d
725 (Fla. 1997) (state attorney’s contention that requested records were work product and not
subject to public records disclosure was sucient to identify asserted statutory exemptions). “e
merit of imposing a duty on the Department to identify each document in a record that it asserts
to be exempt under the [Public Records] Act—similar to the generation of a privilege log in
response to a civil discovery request—is a matter properly addressed to the legislature rather than
this court.” Dettelbach v. Department of Business and Professional Regulation, 261 So. 3d 676, 683
(Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
It has been held that a federal agency subject to the federal Freedom of Information Act,
5 U.S.C. s. 552, must, in addition to providing a detailed justication of the basis for claimed
exemptions under the Act, specically itemize and index the documents involved so as to show
which are disclosable and which are exempt. See Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820, 827-828 (D.C.
Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 94 S.Ct. 1564 (1974). However, a Florida court refused to apply the
Vaughn requirements to the state Public Records Act. See Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330, 1332
(Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985).
17. Privacy rights
It is well established in Florida that “neither a custodian of records nor a person who is the
subject of a record can claim a constitutional right of privacy as a bar to requested inspection of a
public record which is in the hands of a government agency.” Williams v. City of Minneola, 575
So. 2d 683, 687 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991).
In reaching the conclusion that public records must be open to public inspection unless
the Legislature provides otherwise, the courts have rejected claims that the constitutional right of
privacy bars disclosure. Article I, s. 23, Fla. Const., provides:
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
175
Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from
governmental intrusion into the person’s private life except as
otherwise provided herein. is section shall not be construed to
limit the public’s right of access to public records and meetings as
provided by law. (e.s.)
Accordingly, the Florida Constitution “does not provide a right of privacy in public
records” and a state or federal right of disclosural privacy does not exist. Michel v. Douglas, 464
So. 2d 545, 546 (Fla. 1985). See also Forsberg v. Housing Authority of City of Miami Beach, 455
So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1984); and AGO 09-19 (to extent that information on an agency’s Facebook
page constitutes a public record within the meaning of Ch. 119, F.S., Art. I, s. 23, Fla. Const.,
“is not implicated”). “[I]n Florida the right to privacy is expressly subservient to the Public
Records Act.” Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County v. D.B., 784 So. 2d 585, 591
(Fla. 4th DCA 2001). But see Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla.
1992) (public’s right of access to pretrial criminal discovery materials must be balanced against a
nonparty’s constitutional right to privacy).
In O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 257 So. 3d 1036, 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), the court
recognized that a public ocial’s use of a private cell phone to conduct public business via text
messaging could create a written public record subject to disclosure. “e purpose of both Article
I, section 24 and Chapter 119 is to ensure that citizens may review (and criticize) government
actions. at purpose would be defeated if a public ocial could shield the disclosure of public
records by conducting business on a private phone.” 257 So. 3d at 1042. e court acknowledged
that the public’s right to public records “does not extinguish an individual’s constitutional and
statutory rights in private information.” However, the court found that a judicial review of the
records could safeguard “all legitimate privacy concerns.” Id.
18. Liability for disclosure
Nothing in Ch. 119, F.S., indicates an intent to give private citizens a right to recovery
for an agency negligently maintaining and providing information from public records. City of
Tarpon Springs v. Garrigan, 510 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Friedberg v. Town of Longboat
Key, 504 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Cf. Layton v. Florida Department of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles, 676 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (agency has no common law or statutory
duty to citizen to maintain accurate records). Accord Hillsborough County v. Morris, 730 So. 2d
367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
However, a custodian is not protected against tort liability resulting from that person
intentionally communicating public records or their contents to someone outside the agency
which is responsible for the records unless the person inspecting the records has made a bona
de request to inspect the records or the communication is necessary to the agency’s transaction
of its ocial business. Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991),
review denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991). On appeal, after remand, the Fifth District held
the claim against the city was barred on the basis of sovereign immunity. Williams v. City of
Minneola, 619 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Cf. AGO 97-09 (law enforcement agency’s
release of sexual oender records for purposes of public notication is consistent with its duties
and responsibilities).
E. STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS
1. Creation of exemptions
“Courts cannot judicially create any exceptions, or exclusions to Florida’s Public Records
Act.” Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County v. D.B., 784 So. 2d 585, 591 (Fla.
4th DCA 2001). Wait v. Florida Power and Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420, 425 (Fla. 1979)
(Public Records Act “excludes any judicially created privilege of condentiality;” only the
176
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Legislature may exempt records from public disclosure). Accord Wait v. Florida Power and Light
Company, 372 So. 2d 420, 425 (Fla. 1979) (Public Records Act “excludes any judicially created
privilege of condentiality;” only the Legislature may exempt records from public disclosure).
See s. 119.011(8), F.S., dening the term “exemption” to mean “a provision of general law
which provides that a specied record or meeting, or portion thereof, is not subject to the access
requirements of s. 119.07(1), s. 286.011, or s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.”
Article I, s. 24(c), Fla. Const., authorizes the Legislature to enact general laws creating
exemptions provided that such laws “shall state with specicity the public necessity justifying the
exemption and shall be no broader than necessary to accomplish the stated purpose of the law.”
“e Constitution allows for the legislature, not the courts to provide for exceptions to the public
records act.” Cruz v. State, 297 So. 3d 154 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). See Halifax Hospital Medical
Center v. News-Journal Corporation, 724 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1999) (statute providing an exemption
from the Sunshine Law for portions of hospital board meetings is unconstitutional because it
does not meet the constitutional standard of specicity as to stated public necessity and it is
broader than necessary to achieve its purpose). Compare Memorial Hospital-West Volusia v. News-
Journal Corporation, 729 So. 2d 373, 380 (Fla. 1999), in which the Court refused to “imply” an
exemption from open records requirements, stating “we believe that an exemption from public
records access is available only after the legislature has followed the express procedure provided
in article I, section 24(c) of the Florida Constitution.” And see Campus Communications, Inc.
v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388, 395 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), review denied, 848 So. 2d 1153 (Fla.
2003) (statutory exemption for autopsy photographs serves identiable public purpose and is
no broader than necessary to meet that public purpose); Bryan v. State, 753 So. 2d 1244 (Fla.
2000) (statute exempting from public disclosure certain prison records satises the constitutional
standard because the Legislature set forth the requisite public necessity [personal safety of prison
ocials and inmates] for the exemption); and State, Department of Financial Services v. Danahy
& Murray, P.A., 246 So. 3d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (distinguishing Halifax and nding that a
statute exempting certain information held by the Department of Financial Services under the
Florida Insurance Code met the constitutional standard in Article I s. 24[c], Fla. Const.).
Laws enacted pursuant to Art. I, s. 24, Fla. Const., shall relate to one subject and must
contain only exemptions or provisions governing enforcement. Cf. State v. Knight, 661 So. 2d
344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (while exemptions when enacted must contain a public necessity
statement, exceptions to an exemption are not required to contain such a statement; thus, a
trial judge erred in overturning a statute providing a limited exception to the public records
exemption for grand jury materials).
Article I, s. 24(c) also requires that laws providing exemptions from public records or
public meetings requirements must be passed by a two-thirds vote of each house. e two-
thirds vote requirement applies when an exemption is readopted in accordance with the Open
Government Sunset Review Act, s. 119.15, F.S., as well as to the initial creation of an exemption.
AGO 03-18.
In accordance with s. 24(d), all statutory exemptions in eect on July 1, 1993, are
grandfathered into the statutes and remain in eect until they are repealed. Rules of court in
eect on November 3, 1992, that limit access to records remain in eect until repealed. See Rule
2.420, Fla. R. Gen. Prac & Jud. Admin. (originally adopted by the Florida Supreme Court on
October 29, 1992, as Rule 2.051, and subsequently renumbered in 2006 as Rule 2.420). Rule
2.420 may be accessed online at www.oridabar.org.
e Open Government Sunset Review Act, codied at s. 119.15, F.S., provides for
the review and repeal or reenactment of an exemption from s. 24, Art. I, Fla. Const., and s.
119.07(1), or s. 286.011, F.S. e act does not apply to an exemption that is required by federal
law or applies solely to the Legislature or the State Court System. Section 119.15(2)(a) and (b),
F.S. Pursuant to the Act, in the fth year after enactment of a new exemption or expansion of
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
177
an existing exemption, the exemption shall be repealed on October 2 of the fth year, unless the
Legislature acts to reenact the exemption. Section 119.15(3), F.S.
2. Strict construction
e general purpose of Ch. 119, F.S., “is to open public records to allow Florida’s citizens
to discover the actions of their government.” Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri ‘s Oce, 698
So. 2d 1365, 1366 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). “Because Florida’s public policy favors disclosure, “the
Public Records Act is construed liberally in favor of openness, and exemptions from disclosure are
construed narrowly and limited to their designated purpose.” City of Miami Beach v. Miami New
Times, LLC, 314 So. 3d 562, 565 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), quoting from Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29
So. 3d 418, 421 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). See also National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated
Press, 18 So. 3d 1201, 1206 (Fla.1st DCA 2009), review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010);
Krischer v. D’Amato, 674 So. 2d 909, 911 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Tribune Company v. Public
Records, 493 So. 2d 480, 483 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied sub nom., Gillum v. Tribune
Company, 503 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 1987).
An agency claiming an exemption from disclosure bears the burden of proving the right to
an exemption. See Bareld v. School Board of Manatee County, 135 So. 3d 560, 562 (Fla. 2d DCA
2014); Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765, 768 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), review denied, 786 So. 2d
1186 (Fla. 2001); Bareld v. City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department, 639 So. 2d 1012, 1015
(Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 649 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 1994); and Florida Freedom Newspapers,
Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128, 1130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). See also Bludworth v. Palm Beach
Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775, 780n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So. 2d 67 (Fla.
1986); Tribune Company v. Public Records, supra, stating that doubt as to the applicability of an
exemption should be resolved in favor of disclosure rather than secrecy. And see Times Publishing
Company v. City of St. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487, 492, noting that the judiciary cannot create
a privilege of condentiality to accommodate the desires of government and that “[a]n open
government is crucial to the citizens’ ability to adequately evaluate the decisions of elected and
appointed ocials”; rather the “right to access public documents is virtually unfettered, save
only the statutory exemptions designed to achieve a balance between an informed public and the
ability of the government to maintain secrecy in the public interest.” Accord AGO 80-78 (“policy
considerations” do not, standing alone, justify nondisclosure of public records).
3. Retroactive application of new exemptions
Access to public records is a substantive right. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v.
News-Journal Corporation, 784 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2001). us, a statute aecting that right is
presumptively prospective and there must be a clear legislative intent for the statute to apply
retroactively. Id. Generally, the critical date in determining whether a document is subject to
disclosure is the date the public records request is made; the law in eect on that date applies. Baker
County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, 870 So. 2d 189, 192-193 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
However, if the Legislature is “clear in its intent,” an exemption may be applied retroactively.
Campus Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388, 396 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), review
denied, 848 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 2003) (statute exempting autopsy photographs from disclosure
is remedial and may be retroactively applied). See also Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce v. Sun-
Sentinel Company, LLC, 226 So. 3d 969 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); City of Orlando v. Desjardins,
493 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 1986); and Roberts v. Butterworth, 668 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1996). Cf.
Cebrian By and rough Cebrian v. Klein, 614 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (amendment
to child abuse statute limiting access to unfounded reports was remedial in nature and therefore
applied retroactively); AGO 11-16 (applying exemption to a public records request received before
the statute’s eective date because the legislation creating the exemption states that it “applies
to information held by an agency, before, on, or after the eective date of this exemption”);
and AGO 94-70 (amendment to expungement statute appears to be remedial and, therefore,
should be retroactively applied to those records ordered expunged prior to the eective date of the
amendment).
178
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
4. Retroactive application of statutes eliminating condentiality
In Baker v. Eckerd Corporation, 697 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), the court held that
an amendment eliminating protection against disclosure of certain records applies prospectively
from the eective date of the amendment. See also AGO 95-19 (expanded disclosure provisions
for juvenile records apply only to records created after the eective date of the amendment); and
Coventry First, LLC v. Oce of Insurance Regulation, 30 So. 3d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (although
intended to apply retroactively, statutory amendment imposing a time limitation on the exempt
status of certain records submitted to an agency applied prospectively since retroactive application
improperly deprived company of its vested property rights in records already submitted to the
agency).
Records made before the date of a repeal of an exemption under s. 119.15, F.S., the Open
Government Sunset Review Act, “may not be made public unless otherwise provided by law.”
Section 119.15(7), F.S.
5. Dierence between exempt and condential records
a. Condential records
ere is a dierence between records the Legislature has determined to be exempt from the
Public Records Act and those which the Legislature has determined to be exempt from the Act
and condential. WFTV, Inc. v. School Board of Seminole County, 874 So. 2d 48, 53 (Fla. 5th DCA
2004), review denied, 892 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2004). And see State v. Wooten, 260 So. 3d 1060,
1069-1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (Ch. 119, F.S., refers to both “exempt” records and records
which are “condential and exempt”).
If information is made condential in the statutes, the information is not subject to
inspection by the public and may be released only to those persons and entities designated in the
statute. Id. And see AGOs 08-24, 04-09 and 86 -97. us, where a statute provided condentiality
for all records in the city’s risk management claims le, the trial judge lacked authority to order
the city to produce certain records based on a determination that their production would not
harm the city. City of Homestead v. McDonough, 232 So. 3d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). And see
City of Miami Beach v. Miami New Times, 314 So. 3d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), concluding that
condential draft audit reports relating to towing companies did not become subject to disclosure
when the companies (without the knowledge of the agency) disclosed them to a third party.
However, a statute restricting release of condential emergency call information does
not prevent the city’s attorneys or other city ocials who are responsible for advising the city
regarding the provision of emergency medical services or for defending the city against a possible
claim arising from such services, from reviewing the records related to such emergency calls that
contain patient examination or treatment information. AGO 95-75.
An agency is authorized to take reasonable steps to ensure that condential records are not
improperly released. Lee County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 634 So. 2d
250, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (county policy requiring the patient’s notarized signature on all
release forms for emergency services medical records “not unreasonable or onerous;” requirement
was a valid means of protecting records made condential by s. 401.30[4], F.S.). Accord AGO
94-51 (agency “should be vigilant in its protection of the condentiality provided by statute
for medical records of [its] employees”). Cf. Florida Department of Revenue v. WHI Limited
Partnership, 754 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (administrative law judge [ALJ] not authorized
to mandate that agency disclose condential records because ALJ is not a judge of a court of
competent jurisdiction for purposes of statute permitting disclosure of condential records in
response “to an order of a judge of a court of competent jurisdiction”); and AGO 94-86 (if
custodian of condential library circulation records believes that such records should not be
disclosed in response to a subpoena because the subpoena is not a “proper judicial order” as
provided in s. 257.261, F.S., custodian may assert the condentiality provisions in a motion to
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
179
quash the subpoena but should not ignore the subpoena for production of such records). And see
State Attorney’s Oce of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit v. Cable News Network, Inc., 251 So. 3d
205, 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (when statute authorizes release of condential security system
records upon a showing of “good cause,” the Legislature “intended the courts to apply a common
law approach to ‘good cause,’ where meaning emerges over time, on a case-by-case basis, and
courts arrive at a desirable equilibrium between the competing needs of disclosure and secrecy of
government records”). Cf. Florida Department of Corrections v. Miami Herald Media Company,
(Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (trial court erred when it found “good cause” for release of condential
prison video footage even though newspaper had admitted at the hearing that it no longer needed
the recordings).
b. Exempt records
If records are not made condential but are simply exempt from the mandatory disclosure
requirements in s. 119.07(1), F.S., the agency is not prohibited from disclosing the documents in
all circumstances. See Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683, 687 (Fla. 5th DCA), review
denied, 589 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1991), in which the court observed that pursuant to s. 119.07(3)
(d), F.S. [now s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S.], “active criminal investigative information” was exempt
from the requirement that public records be made available for public inspection. However, as
stated by the court, “the exemption does not prohibit the showing of such information. ere are
many situations in which investigators have reasons for displaying information which they have
the option not to display.” [Emphasis supplied by the Court] See also AGO 07-21 (while statute
makes photographs of law enforcement personnel exempt rather than condential, custodian,
in deciding whether such information should be disclosed, must determine whether there is a
statutory or substantial policy need for disclosure and in the absence of a statutory or other legal
duty to be accomplished by disclosure, whether release of such information is consistent with the
exemption’s purpose). Accord AGO 08-24. And see AGO 17-05 (property appraiser authorized
to disclose addresses that are exempt from public inspection, but not condential, to the code
inspector for the limited purpose of providing alleged code violators with the statutory notice
required by s. 162.06, F.S.).
Once an agency has gone public with information which could have been previously
protected from disclosure under Public Records Act exemptions, no further purpose is served
by preventing full access to the desired information. Downs v. Austin, 522 So. 2d 931, 935 (Fla.
1st DCA 1988). Cf. AGO 01-74 (taxpayer information that is condential in the hands of
certain specied ocers under s. 193.074, F. S., is subject to disclosure under the Public Records
Act when it has been submitted by a taxpayer to a value adjustment board as evidence in an
assessment dispute).
However, in City of Riviera Beach v. Bareld, 642 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994),
review denied, 651 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1995), the court held that when a criminal justice agency
transfers exempt criminal investigative information to another criminal justice agency, the
information retains its exempt status. And see Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203, 206 (Fla. 1998)
(“the focus in determining whether a document has lost its status as a public record must be on
the policy behind the exemption and not on the simple fact that the information has changed
agency hands”); Alice P. v. Miami Daily News, Inc., 440 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983),
review denied, 467 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1985) (condential birth information contained in license
application submitted to state health agency not subject to disclosure); AGO 04-44 (if the prison
industry agency sends exempt proprietary condential business information to the Secretary of
the Department of Corrections in his capacity as a member of the board of directors of the prison
industry agency, that information does not lose its exempt status by virtue of the fact that it
was sent to the Secretary’s oce in the department); and AGO 94-77 (work product exception
authorized in former s. 119.07[3][l], F.S. [now s. 119.071(1)(d), F.S.], will be retained if the work
product is transferred from the county attorney to the city attorney pursuant to a substitution of
parties to the litigation).
180
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
6. Discovery of exempt or condential records
An exemption from disclosure under the Public Records Act does not render the document
automatically privileged for purposes of discovery under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure or
in administrative proceedings. See Department of Health v. Poss, 45 So. 3d 510 (Fla. 1st DCA
2010); Department of Professional Regulation v. Spiva, 478 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
“Although the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Public Records Act may overlap in certain areas,
they are not coextensive in scope.” Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Krop ,
445 So. 2d 1068, 1069n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). See also Department of Highway Safety and Motor
Vehicles v. Krejci Company Inc., 570 So. 2d 1322 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d
286 (Fla. 1991) (records which are exempt from public inspection may be subject to discovery
in a civil action upon a showing of exceptional circumstances and if the trial court takes all
precautions to ensure the condentiality of the records). Cf. League of Women Voters v. Florida
House of Representatives, 132 So. 3d 135, 153 (Fla. 2013) (“if the circuit court concludes, after
undertaking an in camera review of any disputed documents, that draft [apportionment] plans
are exempt from public records disclosure, the circuit court should still require the Legislature to
produce the draft apportionment maps and supporting documents under appropriate litigation
discovery rules, to the extent these documents do not contain information regarding individual
legislators’ or legislative sta members’ thoughts or impressions”).
For example, in B.B. v. Department of Children and Family Services, 731 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1999), the court ruled that as a party to a dependency proceeding involving her daughters,
a mother was entitled to discovery of the criminal investigative records relating to the death
of her infant. e court found that the statutory exemption for active criminal investigative
information did not “override the discovery authorized by the Rules of Juvenile Procedure.”
Id. at 34. Compare Henderson v. Perez, 835 So. 2d 390, 392 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (trial court
order compelling sheri to produce exempt home addresses and photographs of 10 active law
enforcement ocers in a civil lawsuit led by Perez predicated on his arrest, quashed because
“Perez has not shown that the photographs and home addresses of the law enforcement ocers
are essential to the prosecution of his suit”). And see Delaurentos v. Peguero, 47 So. 3d 879 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2010 (while the exemption for employee medical information in s. 119.071[4][b] did not
preclude the discovery of a police ocer’s pre-employment psychological evaluation, the estate’s
request for the evaluation in a wrongful death case led against the ocer and county was, under
the circumstances of the case, outside the scope of permissible discovery).
F. FEDERAL LAW AND THE FLORIDA PUBLIC RECORDS LAW
1. Application of federal condentiality requirements to Florida public records
Generally, records that would otherwise be public under state law are unavailable for
public inspection only when there is an absolute conict between federal and state law relating
to condentiality of records. If a federal statute requires particular records to be withheld from
a public records request, and the state is clearly subject to the provisions of such statute, then
pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, Art. VI, U.S. Const.,
the state must keep the records condential. See Florida Department of Education v. NYT
Management Services, Inc., 895 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (federal law prohibits public
disclosure of social security numbers in state teacher certication database); AGOs 90-102 and
74-372. Compare State ex rel. Cummer v. Pace, 159 So. 679 (Fla. 1935); AGOs 85-03, 81-101,
and 80-31. See also Wallace v. Guzman, 687 So. 2d 1351, 1353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (exemptions
from disclosure set forth in federal Freedom of Information Act apply to federal agencies but not
to state agencies).
Federal condentiality requirements may be a concern if the Florida governmental entity
or ocer is acting as an instrumentality or agent of the federal government. In such a case, a
federal agency may assert ownership of records and assert federal jurisdiction and protection
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
181
of such records. See, e.g., U.S. v. Story County, Iowa, 28 F. Supp. 3d 861, 872 (S.D. Iowa
2014) (emails of sheri from his county email account were sent in his capacity of an appointed
board member of an independent authority within an agency of the United States Department of
Commerce, and were federal records subject to federal jurisdiction since “the subject emails were
not ‘produced by or originated from’ [the sheri’s] role as … Sheri nor were they held by [the
sheri] in his ocial capacity as … sheri.”). Compare Housing Authority of the City of Daytona
Beach v. Gomillion, 639 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (tenant records of a state public housing
authority were not protected under federal law because the federal agency was not involved in the
day-to-day operations of the authority).
Records received from a federal agency may have a statutory or regulatory basis for
protection. Morris v. Whitehead, 588 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (holding condential
records received by a state run housing authority from the federal government may not be
disclosed where there was a statutorily-authorized agreement between agencies that the state
housing authority will maintain the condentiality of the materials received); Miami Herald
Media Company v. Florida Department of Transportation, 345 F. Supp. 3d 1349, 1356 (N.D. Fla.
2018) (state agency could not disclose records when federal safety board investigating bridge
collapse took control over dissemination of records relating to the investigation, designated the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) as a party to assist NTSB in the investigation, and
directed the state agency to not disclose the information contained in those records by agreement
and as authorized by federal regulation); but see Lakeland Ledger Publishing Co. v. Sch. Bd. of Polk
Co., GV-G-91-3803 (Fla. 10th Cir. Ct. Nov. 21, 1991), available online in the Cases database
at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (relying on Morris v. Whitehead, supra, to
determine a map prepared by the U.S. Justice Department concerning desegregation of Lakeland
schools and given to school district employees was a public record and open to inspection).
If litigation ensues with respect to whether the disclosure of a record is subject to federal
law, under some circumstances the federal agency may be considered a real party in interest, and
the matter may be removed to federal court. See e.g., Miami Herald Media Company v. Florida
Department of Transportation, supra, 345 F. Supp. 3d at 1356 (denying a motion to remand
case to state court after the United States removed matter to federal district court because the
federal agency in the suit was a real party in interest); compare In re Motion to Compel Compliance
to Minnesota Department of Health v. All Temporaries Midwest, Inc, 423 F. Supp. 3d 670, 678
(D. Minn. 2019) (remanding matter to state court despite assertion of federal agency that it
was a real party in interest; subpoenaed records were collected pursuant to state law and a state
investigation, and thus subject to state law, notwithstanding a joint investigation by the federal
agency.).
Records do not become subject to disclosure merely because they are not entitled to federal
protection. City of Miami v. Metropolitan Dade County, 745 F. Supp. 683 (S.D. Fla. 1990)
(records provided by the United States Attorney’s Oce to a criminal defendant were active
criminal investigative records in the hands of the Florida governmental entities).
2. Copyrighted records
a. Copyrights held by agencies
In the absence of statutory authorization, a public ocial is not empowered to obtain a
copyright for material produced by his or her oce in connection with the transaction of ocial
business. Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review denied, 902
So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005) (property appraiser not authorized to
assert copyright protection for the Geographic Information System maps created by his oce).
Accord AGOs 03-42, 88 -23, and 86-94. Cf. AGO 00-13 (in the absence of express statutory
authority, state agency not authorized to secure a trademark).
Section 119.084(2), F.S., however, specically authorizes agencies to hold a copyright for
data processing software created by the agency. e agency may sell the copyrighted software
182
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
to public or private entities or may establish a license fee for its use. See also s. 24.105(10), F.S.,
authorizing the Department of the Lottery to hold patents, copyrights, trademarks and service
marks; and see ss. 286.021 and 286.031, F.S., prescribing duties of the Department of State with
respect to authorized copyrights obtained by state agencies.
b. Copyrighted material obtained by agencies
e federal copyright law vests in the owner of a copyright, subject to certain limitations,
the exclusive right to do or to authorize, among other things, the reproduction of the copyrighted
work and the distribution of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of
ownership. See AGO 97-84, citing to pertinent federal law and interpretive cases. However, the
Attorney General’s Oce has concluded that the fact that material received by a state agency may
be copyrighted does not preclude the material from constituting a public record. For example,
AGO 90-102 advised that copyrighted data processing software which was not specically
designed or created for the county but was being used by the county in its ocial capacity for
ocial county business fell within the denition of “public record.”
Moreover, in State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy,
636 So. 2d 1377, 1382-1383 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), the court rejected a state agency’s argument
that a transcript of a hearing that had been copyrighted by the court reporter and led with the
agency should not be copied without the copyright holder’s permission. e court stated that the
agency was under a statutory obligation to preserve all testimony in the proceeding and make a
transcript available in accordance with the fees set forth in Ch. 119, F.S. And see AGO 75-304
(agency may not enter into agreement with court reporter to refer all requests for copies of agency
proceedings to court reporter who originally transcribed proceedings; agency must provide copies
of transcripts in accordance with charges set forth in Public Records Act).
e federal copyright law, when read together with Ch. 119, F.S., authorizes and requires
the custodian of records of the Department of State to make maintenance manuals supplied to
that agency pursuant to law, available for examination and inspection purposes. AGO 03-26.
“With regard to reproducing, copying, and distributing copies of these maintenance manuals
which are protected under the federal copyright law, state law must yield to the federal law on
the subject.” Id. e custodian should advise individuals seeking to copy such records of the
limitations of the federal copyright law and the consequences of violating its provisions; such
notice may take the form of a posted notice that the making of a copy may be subject to the
copyright law. AGOs 03-26 and 97-84. However, it is advisable for the custodian to refrain
from copying such records himself or herself. AGO 03-26. But see State v. Allen, 14 F.L.W. Supp.
172a (Fla. 7th Cir. Ct. November 2, 2006), in which the court found that the defendant was
entitled to inspect and copy copyrighted operating manual for the radar unit used by the police
“pursuant to Florida Constitution, Article I section 24 and/or Defendant’s fundamental right to
due process of law.” e court noted that if the police department declined to make copies, the
defendant or his representative should be allowed reasonable access to the documents and a copy
machine to make copies.
Moreover, as noted by the court in State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
v. Southpointe Pharmacy, supra, once a transcript of an administrative hearing conducted by or
on behalf of an agency has been led with the agency, the transcript becomes a public record,
without regard to who ordered the transcription or bore its expense. e agency which is under
a statutory obligation to preserve all testimony can charge neither the parties nor the public more
than the charges authorized by Ch. 119, F.S., regardless of the fact that the court reporter may
have copyrighted the transcript.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
183
G. FEES FOR INSPECTING AND COPYING PUBLIC RECORDS
1. Inspection of public records
Providing access to public records is a statutory duty imposed by the Legislature upon all
record custodians and should not be considered a prot-making or revenue-generating operation.
AGO 85-03. us, public information must be open for inspection without charge unless
otherwise expressly provided by law. See State ex rel. Davis v. McMillan, 38 So. 666 (Fla. 1905).
See also AGOs 84-03 and 76-34 (only those fees or charges which are authorized by statute may
be imposed upon an individual seeking access to public records). Cf. AGO 75-50 (the fact that
the record sought to be inspected is a tape recording as opposed to a written document is of no
import insofar as the imposition of a fee for inspection is concerned).
Section 119.07(4)(d), F.S., however, authorizes the imposition of a special service charge
when the nature or volume of public records to be inspected is such as to require extensive use
of information technology resources, or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance, or both. e
charge must be reasonable and based on the labor or computer costs actually incurred by the
agency. See Board of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2008) (special service charge applies to requests for both inspection and copies of public
records when extensive clerical assistance is required).
In addition, an agency may adopt a policy imposing a reasonable special service charge
based on the actual labor cost for clerical personnel who are required, due to the nature or
volume of a public records request, to safeguard such records from loss or destruction during their
inspection. AGO 00-11. For example, in AGO 00-11, the requested records were described
as “original documents that have no recorded or maintained counterparts, such that, by their
nature, they would need a heightened degree of protection from alteration or destruction.” A
determination of whether the nature or volume of the public records requires such extensive
assistance must be made on a case-by-case basis; the special service charge may not be routinely
imposed. Id.
Moreover, it would be dicult to justify the imposition of a fee for extensive clerical or
supervisory assistance if the personnel providing such assistance were simultaneously performing
regular duties. Id. And see Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So.
3d 120 (Fla. 2016) (arming trial court nding that two conditions—an hourly photocopying
fee and an hourly supervisory fee—were imposed in violation of s. 119.07, F.S.).
2. Copies of public records
If no fee is prescribed elsewhere in the statutes, s. 119.07(4)(a)1., F.S., authorizes the
custodian to charge a fee of up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for copies that are 14 inches by
81/2 inches or less. An agency may charge no more than an additional 5 cents for each two-
sided duplicated copy. Section 119.07(4)(a)2., F.S. And see s. 119.011(7), F.S., dening the
term “duplicated copies” to mean “new copies produced by duplicating, as dened in s. 283.30,”
F.S. “Duplicating” means “the process of reproducing an image or images from an original to
a nal substrate through the electrophotographic, xerographic, laser, or oset process or any
combination of these processes, by which an operator can make more than one copy without
rehandling the original.” Section 283.30(3), F.S.
A charge of up to $1.00 per copy may be assessed for a certied copy of a public record.
Section 119.07(4)(c), F.S.
For other copies, the charge is limited to the actual cost of duplication of the record.
Section 119.07(4)(a)3., F.S. e phrase “actual cost of duplication” is dened to mean “the cost
of the material and supplies used to duplicate the public record, but does not include the labor
cost and overhead cost associated with such duplication.” Section 119.011(1),F.S. An exception,
however, exists for copies of county maps or aerial photographs supplied by county constitutional
184
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
ocers which may include a reasonable charge for the labor and overhead associated with their
duplication. Section 119.07(4)(b), F.S. Cf. AGO 13-03 (while agency may charge “actual cost
of duplication” if it sends public records via e-mail, agency did not identify any actual costs of
duplication involved in forwarding copies of electronic mail in lieu of photocopying and “the
denition [of actual cost of duplication] does not allow for the imposition of labor costs or
associated overhead costs”).
3. Special service charge for extensive use of clerical or supervisory labor or extensive
information technology resources
Section 119.07(4)(d), F.S. provides that if the nature or volume of public records to be
inspected or copied requires the extensive use of information technology resources or extensive
clerical or supervisory assistance, or both, the agency may charge, in addition to the actual cost
of duplication, a reasonable service charge based on the cost actually incurred by the agency
for such extensive use of information technology resources or personnel. When warranted, the
special service charge applies to requests for both inspection and copies of public records. Board
of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).
us, while an agency may not refuse to allow inspection or copying of public records based
upon the amount of records requested or the span of time which is covered by the public records
request, if extensive use of information technology resources or clerical or supervisory personnel
is needed in order to produce the requested records, the agency may impose a reasonable special
service charge that reects the actual costs incurred for the extensive use of such resources or
personnel. See AGOs 92-38 and 90-07. Cf. Trout v. Bucher, 205 So. 3d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
(supervisor of elections authorized to charge a reasonable fee based on the labor costs “actually
incurred” to comply with Trout’s request to inspect ballots in accordance with s. 119.07[5], F.S.).
a. Meaning of the term “extensive”
Section 119.07(4)(d), F.S., “does not identify the Legislature’s intent as to what may
constitute ‘extensive use’ and provides no denition of that term.” AGO 13-03. In 1991,
a divided First District Court of Appeal upheld a hearing ocer’s order rejecting an inmate
challenge to a Department of Corrections rule that dened “extensive” for purposes of the special
service charge to mean that it would take more than 15 minutes to locate, review for condential
information, copy and rele the requested material. Florida Institutional Legal Services, Inc. v.
Florida Department of Corrections, 579 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), review denied, 592 So. 2d
680 (Fla. 1991). e court agreed with the hearing ocer that the burden was on the challenger
to show that the administrative rule was invalid under Ch. 120, F.S, and the record did not
indicate that the ocer’s ruling was “clearly erroneous” in this case.
In light of the lack of clear direction in the statute as to the meaning of the term “extensive,”
the Attorney General’s Oce has suggested that agencies implement the service charge
authorization “in a manner that reects the purpose and intent of the Public Records Act and that
does not constitute an unreasonable infringement upon the public’s statutory and constitutional
right of access to public records.” AGO 13-03. In addition, the Attorney General’s Oce also
strongly encourages agencies to adopt a public records procedure that addresses imposition of
special service charge. Id.
Moreover, the statute mandates that the special service charge be “reasonable.” See Carden v.
Chief of Police, 696 So. 2d 772, 773 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), in which the court reviewed a challenge
to a service charge that exceeded $4,000 for sta time involved in responding to a public records
request, and said that an “excessive charge could well serve to inhibit the pursuit of rights conferred
by the Public Records Act.” Accordingly, the court remanded the case and required the agency
to “explain in more detail the reason for the magnitude of the assessment.” Id. And see Board of
Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120, 129 (Fla. 2016), noting
that “excessive, unwarranted special service charges deter individuals seeking public records from
gaining access to the records to which they are entitled.”
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
185
b. Meaning of the term “information technology resources”
“Information technology resources” is dened as data processing hardware and software
and services, communications, supplies, personnel, facility resources, maintenance and training.
Section 119.011(9), F.S. e term does not include a videotape or a machine to view a videotape.
AGO 88-23. e fact that the request involves the use of information technology resources is
not sucient to incur the imposition of the special service charge; rather, extensive use of such
resources is required. AGOs 13-03 and 99-41.
c. Cost to review records for exempt information
An agency is not ordinarily authorized to charge for the cost to review records for statutorily
exempt material. AGO 84-81. However, the special service charge may be imposed for this work
if the volume of records and the number of potential exemptions make review and redaction of
the records a time-consuming task. See Florida Institutional Legal Services v. Florida Department
of Corrections, 579 So. 2d at 269. And see Agency for Health Care Administration v. Zuckerman
Spaeder, LLP, 221 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (prior court decisions as well as the language
in s. 119.07[4], F.S., dictate that the requester, who had submitted several voluminous public
records requests for records which included condential information “should be required to pay
for the cost of searching, review, and redaction of exempted information prior to production”).
Accordingly, because “the Public Records Act requires a records custodian to determine
whether the requested records exist, locate the records, and review each record to determine if any
of those records are exempt from production,” the agency may charge the special service charge
as authorized under s. 119.071(4)(d), F.S. for the cost to review voluminous requested records
for exempt material. City of St. Petersburg v. Dorchester Holdings, LLC, 331 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2021). [Emphasis supplied by the court].
d. Calculation of labor cost
In Board of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2008), the court approved a county’s special service charge pursuant to s. 119.07(4), F.S.,
which included both an employee’s salary and benets in calculating the labor cost for the special
service charge, recognizing, however, that the charge must be reasonable and based upon the
actual labor costs incurred by or attributable to the county. See Trout v. Bucher, 205 So. 3d 876
(Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (supervisor of elections not required to charge the lowest hourly rate of
the employee capable of doing the work needed to comply with Trout’s request to inspect ballots
in accordance with s. 119.07[5], F.S., because s. 119.07[4][d] allows the agency to charge the
labor cost of the personnel that is “actually incurred” by the agency where extensive assistance is
required).
e term “supervisory assistance” has not been widely interpreted. See Herskovitz v. Leon
County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9, 1998), available online in the Cases database at
the open government site at myoridalegal.com, concluding that an appropriate charge for
supervisory review is “reasonable” in cases involving a large number of documents that contain
some exempt information. In State v. Gudinas, No. CR 94-7132 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. June 1, 1999),
available online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, the
circuit judge approved a rate based on an agency attorney’s salary when the attorney was required
to review exempt material in a voluminous criminal case le. e court noted that “only an
attorney or paralegal” could responsibly perform this type of review because of the “complexity
of the records reviewed, the various public record exemptions and possible prohibitions, and the
necessary discretionary decisions to be made with respect to potential exemptions.”
e. Reasonable deposit or advance payment
Section 119.07(4)(a)1., F.S., states that the custodian of public records shall furnish a copy
or a certied copy of the record “upon payment of the fee prescribed by law . . . .” See Wootton
v. Cook, 590 So. 2d 1039, 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (if a requestor “identies a record with
186
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
sucient specicity to permit [the agency] to identify it and forwards the appropriate fee, [the
agency] must furnish by mail a copy of the record.”) (e.s.); and Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v.
Sundy 145 So. 3d 980, 983 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (a records custodian may delay production “if
the requesting party fails to remit the appropriate fees”).
Accordingly, an agency’s policy of requiring the payment of a deposit prior to redaction
and delivery of hundreds of telephone recordings related to a criminal trial was determined to
be “facially reasonable.” Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 154 So. 3d 528, 534 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2015), review denied, 163 So. 3d 512 (Fla. 2015). Accord Board of County Commissioners
of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31, 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008), noting that a “policy of
requiring an advance deposit seems prudent given the legislature’s determination that taxpayers
should not shoulder the entire expense of responding to an extensive request for public records.”
“[T]he reasonableness of a policy and its application — based on the facts in a particular case
— guides whether an abuse of discretion is shown.” Morris Publishing Group, LLC at 534. And
see Agency for Health Care Administration v. Zuckerman Spaeder, LLP, 221 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2017) (lower court abused its discretion by ordering the agency to produce a large number
of responsive public records within 48 hours of the issuance of the order without requiring
advance payment of the agency’s invoices associated with production of the records); City of St.
Petersburg v. Dorchester Holdings, LLC, 331 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (trial court erred in
holding that the City’s prepayment request constituted an unlawful interference with requester’s
right of access to public records). Compare Miami Dade College v. Nader + Museu I, LLLP, 47
F.L.W. D1814 (Fla. 3d DCA August 31, 2022) (trial court properly denied agency’s requested
fees after production based on the agency’s failure to provide the requester with an estimate of the
anticipated costs to fulll the public records request or an invoice prior to production, as required
by agency policy, nor did the parties agree in advance to the charges).
An agency may refuse to produce additional records if the fees for a previous request for
records have not been paid by the requestor. See Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 995 So. 2d
1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (s. 119.07[4], F.S., “does not require the City to do any more than
what it did in this case,” i.e., require Lozman to pay the bill for the rst group of records he
requested before the city would make any further documents available). And see AGO 05-28
(custodian authorized to bill the requestor for any shortfall between the deposit and the actual
cost of copying the public records when the copies have been made and the requesting party
subsequently advises the city that the records are not needed). Compare, Smith v. State, 335 So.
3d 795 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (Smith’s failure to timely pay fees to obtain requested public records
does not permit the agency to ban him from ever obtaining records in the future, provided Smith
pays the amount owing for the rst request).
4. Requests for information regarding costs to obtain public records
In order to comply with the statutory directive that an agency provide copies of public
records upon payment of the statutory fee, an agency must respond to requests for information as
to copying costs. Wootton v. Cook, supra. See also Woodard v. State, 885 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA
2004), remanding a case for further proceedings where the custodian forwarded only information
relating to the statutory fee schedule rather than the total cost to copy the requested records.
And see, Herskovitz v. Leon County, No. 98-22 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. June 9, 1998), available online in
the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com, in which the court said
that if an agency is asked for a large number of records, the fee should be communicated to the
requestor before the work is undertaken. “If the agency gives the requesting party an estimate of
the total charge, or the hourly rate to be applied, the party can then determine whether it appears
reasonable under the circumstances.” Id.
In Miami Dade College v. Nader + Museu I, LLLP, 47 F.L.W. D1814 (Fla. 3d DCA August
31, 2022), the court armed the trial court’s refusal to grant an agency’s motion to collect fees
under s. 119.07(4)(d), F.S., because the agency failed to provide the requester with an estimate
or invoice prior to production thereby violating both its own policies and procedures and the
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
187
language of s. 119.07(4), F.S. And see AGO 13-03, in which the Attorney General’s Oce
strongly encouraged agencies to adopt a public records procedure that addresses imposition of
special service charge.
5. Requests for free copies of public records
An agency is not precluded from choosing to provide informational copies of public
records without charge. AGO 90-81.
However, chapter 119, F.S., does not contain a provision that prohibits agencies from
charging indigent persons or inmates the applicable statutory fee to obtain copies of public
records. See Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1, 3 (Fla. 1993) (indigent inmate not entitled to receive
copies of public records free of charge nor to have original state attorney les mailed to him in
prison; prisoners are “in the same position as anyone else seeking public records who cannot pay”
the required costs); Potts v. State, 869 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (no merit to inmate’s
contention that Ch. 119, F.S., entitles him to free copies of all records generated in his case);
Bennett v. Clerk of Circuit Court Citrus County, 150 So. 3d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (authority
providing indigent criminal defendants with free copies does not extend beyond the direct appeal
of judgment and sentence and transcripts of evidentiary hearings held on postconviction claims);
Milner v. State, 196 So. 3d 569 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (indigent prisoners are not entitled to free
copies of records under the Public Records Act); and Yanke v. State, 588 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 2d DCA
1991), review denied, 595 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1992), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1592 (1992) (prisoner
must pay copying and postage charges to have copies of public records mailed to him). And see
State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377,
1382n.7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (indigent person “is not relieved by his indigency” from paying
statutory costs to obtain public records). Cf. Siegmeister v. Johnson, 240 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA
2018) (Public Records Act does not require government ocials to move records from where they
are being maintained to a dierent place convenient to the requester, citing to Roesch v. State).
Similarly, a labor union must pay the costs stipulated in Ch. 119, F.S., for copies of
documents it has requested from a public employer for collective bargaining purposes because
“[a] labor union seeking information from the employer with whom it is locked in collective
bargaining negotiations is not exempt from the Florida Public Records Act.” City of Miami
Beach v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 937 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). And see
Inf. Op. to Garganese, April 14, 1998 (authority to charge city council member for copies of
public records).
A school district is under no statutory obligation to provide copies of public records free of
charge to individual members of a school advisory council, but a school district may formulate a
policy for the distribution of such records. AGO 99-46. If it is found that the advisory council
needs certain school records in order to carry out its statutory functions, such records should be
provided to the council in the same manner that records related to agenda items are provided to
school board members. Id. Cf. Inf. Op. to Martin, November 21, 2006 (school board policy
requiring that a request for information by an individual board member requiring more than
sixty minutes of sta time to prepare must be presented to the school board for approval would be
invalid if the school board member is asking under public records law; however, the school board
member would be subject to any charges allowed by Chapter 119, F.S.).
6. Authority to charge for development, travel or overhead costs
An agency should not consider the furnishing of public records to be a “revenue-generating
operation.” AGO 85-03. See also AGO 89-93 (city not authorized to sell copies of its growth
management book for $35.00 each when the actual cost to reproduce the book is $15.10 per
copy; city is limited to charging only the costs authorized by Ch. 119, F.S.).
e Public Records Act does not authorize the addition of overhead costs such as utilities
or other oce expenses to the charge for public records. AGO 99-41. Similarly, an agency
188
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
may not charge for travel time to obtain public records stored o-premises. AGO 90-07. For
example, if municipal pension records are stored in a records storage facility outside city limits,
the city may not pass along to the public records requester the costs to retrieve the records. Inf.
Op. to Sugarman, September 5, 1997. Cf. Cone & Graham, Inc. v. State, No. 97-4047 (Fla. 2d
Cir. Ct. October 7, 1997), available online in the Cases database at the open government site at
myoridalegal.com (an agency’s decision to “archive” older e-mail messages on tapes so that they
could not be retrieved or printed without a systems programmer was analogous to an agency’s
decision to store records o-premises in that the agency rather than the requester must bear the
costs for retrieving the records).
An agency may not assess fees designed to recoup the original cost of developing or
producing the records. AGO 88-23 (state attorney not authorized to impose a charge to recover
part of costs incurred in production of a training program; the fee to obtain a copy of the
videotape of such program is limited to the actual cost of duplication of the tape). And see State,
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377,
1382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (once a transcript of an administrative hearing is led with the
agency, the transcript becomes a public record regardless of who ordered the transcript or paid
for the transcription; the agency can charge neither the parties nor the public a fee that exceeds
the charges authorized in the Public Records Act). Cf. s. 119.07(4)(b), F.S., providing that
the charge for copies of county maps or aerial photographs supplied by county constitutional
ocers may also include a reasonable charge for the labor and overhead associated with their
duplication.
erefore, unless a specic request for copies requires extensive clerical or supervisory
assistance or extensive use of information technology resources so as to trigger the special
service charge authorized by s. 119.07(4)(d), F.S., an agency may charge only the actual cost
of duplication for copies of computerized public records. AGO 99-41. e imposition of the
service charge, however, is dependent upon the nature or volume of records requested, not on
the cost to either develop or maintain the records or the database system. Id.
7. Fees to obtain agency records held by private companies
Although an agency may contract with private companies to provide information
also obtainable through the agency, it may not abdicate its duty to produce such records for
inspection and copying by requiring those seeking public records to do so only through its
designee and then paying whatever fee that company may establish for its services. AGO 02-
37. e agency is the custodian of its public records and, upon request, must produce such
records for inspection and copy such records at the statutorily prescribed fee. Id. Accord AGO
13-03. And see AGO 05-34 (while the property appraiser may provide public records, excluding
exempt or condential information, to a private company, the property appraiser may receive
only those fees that are authorized by statute and may not, in the absence of statutory authority,
enter into an agreement with the private company where the property appraiser provides such
records in exchange for either in-kind services or a share of the prots or proceeds from the sale
of the information by the private company). Cf. s. 119.0701(2)(b)2., F.S., requiring that certain
contracts contain a provision stipulating that upon request from the public agency’s custodian
of public records, the contractor must provide the public agency with a copy of the requested
records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does
not exceed the cost provided in ch. 119 or as otherwise provided by law.
8. Sales tax
In AGO 86-83, the Attorney General’s Oce advised that the sales tax imposed pursuant
to s. 212.05, F.S., is not applicable to the fee charged for providing copies of records under s.
119.07, F.S. See s. 5(a) of Department of Revenue Rule 12A-1.041, F.A.C., stating that “[t]he
fee prescribed by law, or the actual cost of duplication, for providing copies of public records . .
. under Chapter 119, F.S., is exempt from sales tax.”
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
189
9. Condential records
Unless another fee to obtain a particular record is prescribed by law, an agency may not
charge fees that exceed those in Ch. 119, F.S, when providing copies of condential records to
persons who are authorized to obtain them. For example, in AGO 03-57, the Attorney General’s
Oce advised that persons who are authorized by statute to obtain otherwise condential
autopsy photographs should be provided copies in accordance with the provisions of the Public
Records Act, i.e., s. 119.07(4), F.S. e medical examiner is not authorized to charge a fee that
exceeds those charges. Id.
10. Requester makes his/her own copies
Section 119.07(3)(a), F.S., provides a “right of access to public records for the purpose of
making photographs of the record while such record is in the possession, custody, and control of
the custodian of public records.” is subsection “applies to the making of photographs in the
conventional sense by use of a camera device to capture images of public records but excludes the
duplication of microlm in the possession of the clerk of the circuit court” if the clerk can provide
a copy of the microlm. Section 119.07(3)(b), F.S.
e photographing is to be done in the room where the public records are kept. Section
119.07(3)(d), F.S. However, if in the custodian’s judgment, this is impossible or impracticable,
the copying shall be done in another room or place, as close as possible to the room where the
public records are kept. Id. Where provision of another room or place is necessary, the expense of
providing the same shall be paid by the person who wants to copy the records. Id. e custodian
may charge the person making the copies for supervision services. Section 119.07(4)(e)2., F.S.
In such cases the custodian may not charge the copy charges authorized in s. 119.07(4)(a), F.S.,
but may charge only the supervision service charge authorized in s. 119.07(4)(e)2., F.S. See AGO
82-23. Cf. Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120, 122
(Fla. 2016) (arming trial court nding that two conditions—“an hourly photocopying fee and
an hourly supervisory fee”—were imposed in violation of s. 119.07, F.S.).
11. Fee issues relating to specic records
a. Clerk of court records
(1) County records
Pursuant to s. 125.17, F.S., the clerk of the circuit court serves as the ex ocio clerk
to the board of county commissioners. Records maintained by the clerk which relate to this
function (e.g., county resolutions, budgets, minutes, etc.) are public records which are subject to
the copying fees set forth in Ch. 119, F.S., and not the service charges set forth in Ch. 28, F.S.
AGO 85-80. Accord AGO 94-60 (documents such as minutes of public meetings, which are in
the custody of the clerk as ex ocio clerk of the board of county commissioners, are not subject
to the $1.00 per page charge prescribed in Ch. 28). See also AGO 82-23 (when members of the
public use their own photographic equipment to make their own copies, the clerk is not entitled
to the fees prescribed in s. 28.24, F.S., but is entitled only to the supervisory service charge now
found in s. 119.07[4][e]2., F.S.).
(2) Judicial records
When the clerk is exercising his or her duties derived from Article V of the Constitution,
the clerk is not subject to legislative control. Times Publishing Company v. Ake, 660 So. 2d 255
(Fla. 1995). us, when the clerk is acting in his or her capacity as part of the judicial branch of
government, access to the judicial records under the clerk’s control is governed exclusively by Fla.
R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420, Public Access to and Protection of Judicial Records. Id. See
Fla. R. Gen Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.420(b)(2), dening the term “judicial branch” for purposes of
the rule, to include “the clerk of court when acting as an arm of the court.”
190
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.420(m)(3) states that “[f]
ees for copies of records in all entities in the judicial branch of government, except for copies of
court records, shall be the same as those provided in section 119.07, Florida Statutes.” (e.s.). e
fees to obtain copies of court records are set forth in s. 28.24, F.S. is statute establishes fees
that are generally higher than those in Ch. 119, F.S. For example, the charge to obtain copies of
court records is $1.00 per page, rather than 15 cents per page as established in s. 119.07(4)(a)1.,
F.S. And see s. 28.222(7), F.S., providing that the Ocial Records are open to the public, but
the clerk is not required to perform any service in connection with the making of copies without
payment of service charges as provided in s. 28.24, F.S. Cf. WFTV, Inc. v. Wilken, 675 So. 2d 674
(Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
b. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles crash reports
In the absence of statutory provision, the charges authorized in s. 119.07(4), F.S., govern
the fees to obtain copies of crash reports from law enforcement agencies. However, there are
specic statutes which apply to fees to obtain copies of reports from the Department of Highway
Safety and Motor Vehicles. Section 321.23(2)(a), F.S., provides that the fee to obtain a copy
of a crash report from the department is $10.00 per copy. A copy of a homicide report is $25
per copy. Section 321.23(2)(b), F.S. Separate charges are provided for photographs. Section
321.23(2)(d), F.S.
H. REMEDIES AND PENALTIES
1. Voluntary mediation program
Section 16.60, F.S., establishes an informal mediation program within the Oce of
the Attorney General as an alternative for resolution of open government disputes. For more
information about the voluntary mediation program, please contact the Oce of the Attorney
General at the following address: e Oce of the Attorney General, PL-01, e Capitol,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050; telephone (850)245-0140; or you may visit the Oce of the
Attorney General website: www.myfloridalegal.com.
2. Civil action
a. Remedies
A person denied the right to inspect and/or copy public records under the Public Records
Act may bring a civil action against the agency to enforce the terms of Ch. 119, F.S. Cf. s.
119.07(8), F.S. (s. 119.07, F.S., may not be used by an inmate as the basis for failing to timely
litigate any postconviction action).
Before ling a lawsuit, the petitioner must have furnished a public records request to the
agency. Villarreal v. State, 687 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), review denied, 694 So. 2d 741
(Fla. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 316 (1997) (improper to order agency to produce records
before it has had an opportunity to comply); and Maraia v. State, 685 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA
1995) (public records action dismissed where petitioner failed to le a request for public records
with the records custodian before ling suit). Cf. Coconut Grove Playhouse, Inc. v. Knight-Ridder,
Inc., 935 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (trial court order departed from essential requirements
of law by requiring defendant in a public records action to produce its records as a sanction for
failure to respond to a discovery subpoena).
Where a multi-agency law enforcement task force had been created by a mutual aid
agreement and the agreement did not indicate an intent to create a separate legal entity capable
of being sued in its own name, a requestor could not sue the task force for production of records;
however, as the agreement did not specify which agency would be responsible for responding
to public records requests, an action could be brought against any of the member agencies to
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
191
produce records in the possession of the task force. Ramese’s, Inc. v. Metropolitan Bureau of
Investigation, 954 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).
e service of process requirements in s. 48.111, F.S., apply to civil actions to enforce the
public records law. See Department of Children and Families v. Panno, 312 So. 3d 1275 (Fla.
2d DCA 2021), interpreting the service of process requirements found in a prior version of s.
48.111.
(1) Mandamus
Mandamus is an appropriate remedy to enforce compliance with the Public Records Act.
See Chandler v. City of Greenacres, 140 So. 3d 1080, 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); Weeks v. Golden,
764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Smith v. State, 696 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Donner
v. Edelstein, 415 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). See also Farmer v. State, 927 So. 2d 1075
(Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (trial court should treat motion to compel production of public records as
petition for writ of mandamus); Major v. Hallandale Beach Police Department, 219 So. 3d 856
(Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (petition for writ of mandamus led against a governmental agency must
attach a copy of any record that supports the petition). Cf. Wilkinson v. State Attorney’s Oce, 345
So. 3d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that appellate court will
not entertain since petitioner has an adequate alternative remedy to enforce Ch. 119).
A petition for writ of mandamus is an appropriate vehicle to challenge the denial of a
public records request, even where an exemption has been asserted. Deeson Media, LLC v. City
of Tampa, 291 So. 3d 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). Cf. Agency for Health Care Administration v.
Zuckerman Spaeder, LLP, 221 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (mandamus relief ordering
agency to produce records within 48 hours and prior to requester’s payment of invoices or
agency’s opportunity to review and redact exempt material was improper because agency’s duty
was not “ministerial” and requester’s right to the records was not “indisputable”).
If the requester’s petition presents a prima facie claim for relief, an order to show cause
should be issued so that the claim may receive further consideration on the merits. Staton v.
McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Accord Gay v. State, 697 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1997). See Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (trial judge dismissal of
a writ of mandamus directed to clerk of court and court reporter who were alleged to be records
custodians was erroneous because trial judge did not issue an alternative writ of mandamus
requiring the clerk and court reporter to show cause why the writ should not be issued, and
because there was no sworn evidence refuting the petitioner’s allegations). Compare Scott v. Lee
County School Board, 310 So. 3d 163 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (trial court properly dismissed facially
insucient petition that did not attach the requester’s public records request).
us, a petition for writ of mandamus should not have been dismissed based on the
agency’s response that the requested records “would have been destroyed” in accordance with
agency policy. Brown v. State, 152 So. 3d 739, 741 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). Similarly, the trial
judge erred in dismissing a petition seeking records relating to the chain of custody for a weapon
without issuing an alternative writ of mandamus. Tracy v. State, 219 So. 3d 958 (Fla. 1st DCA
2017). e agency had produced an evidence card showing that the weapon in question had
been destroyed; accordingly, the trial court concluded that dismissal was appropriate as there were
no records to produce. However, because the petitioner contended that additional records were
available, the appellate court found that “factual disputes remain.” On remand, “if the [agency]
fails to provide sworn evidence that all available information has been provided, the trial court
must conduct an evidentiary hearing on the issue prior to denying the claim.”
Mandamus is a “one time order by the court to force public ocials to perform their
legally designated employment duties.” Town of Manalapan v. Rechler, 674 So. 2d 789, 790 (Fla.
4th DCA 1996), review denied, 684 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 1996). us, a trial court erred when
it retained continuing jurisdiction to oversee enforcement of a writ of mandamus granted in a
192
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
public records case. Id. See also Stone v. Ward, 752 So. 2d 100, 101 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (“It is
well-settled that mandamus is not appropriate to control or regulate a general course of conduct
for an unspecied period of time”). Cf. Areizaga v. Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough
County, 935 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), review denied, 958 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 2007) (circuit
courts may not refer extraordinary writs to mediation; thus, trial judge should not have ordered
mediation of petition for writ of mandamus seeking production of public records).
(2) Injunction
Injunctive relief may be available upon an appropriate showing for a violation of Ch. 119, F.S.
See Daniels v. Bryson, 548 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (injunctive relief appropriate where there
is a demonstrated pattern of noncompliance with the Public Records Act, together with a showing
of likelihood of future violations; mandamus would not be an adequate remedy since mandamus
would not prevent future harm). However, an injunction is not appropriate if the acts complained of
have already been committed and there is not a well-grounded probability of similar future conduct.
Id. See Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v. Sundy, 145 So. 3d 980, 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
(3) Declaratory relief sought by agencies
Historically, some agencies would seek guidance from the court by ling an action for
declaratory relief rather than comply with a pending public records request or asserting an
exemption. See, e.g., Butler v. City of Hallandale Beach, 68 So. 3d 278, 279 (Fla. 4th DCA
2011) (“Michael Butler appeals from a nal judgment in a declaratory action led by e City of
Hallandale Beach [the City] . . . which sought a declaration that a list of recipients of a personal
email . . . was not sent in connection with the discharge of any municipal duty and therefore, is
not a public record under Florida’s Public Records Law”). Cf. Askew v. City of Ocala, 348 So. 2d
308 (Fla. 1977) (trial court properly dismissed complaint for declaratory relief for failure to state
a cause of action where public ocials disagreed with Attorney General’s advisory opinion and
sought dierent judicial opinion).
However, s. 119.07(9), F.S., now reads: “After receiving a request to inspect or copy a record,
an agency may not respond to that request by ling an action for declaratory relief against the
requester to determine whether the record is a public record as dened by s. 119.011, or the
status of the record as condential or exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1),” F.S.
(4) Damages
Section 119.12, F.S. does not create a private right of action authorizing the award of
monetary damages for a person who brings an action to enforce the provisions of Ch. 119, F.S.
Section 119.12(4), F.S. Payments by the responsible agency may include only the reasonable
costs of enforcement, including reasonable attorney fees, directly attributable to a civil action
brought to enforce the provisions of Ch. 119, F.S. Id.
b. Procedural issues
(1) Discovery
In the absence of an evident abuse of power, the trial court’s exercise of discretion in
matters associated with pretrial discovery in a public records action will not be disturbed.
Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330, 1333 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 475 So. 2d 695
(Fla. 1985). In Lorei, the appellate court upheld the trial judge’s denial of a request to permit
discovery pertaining to the agency’s procedures for maintaining public records. Id. e court
noted that the interrogatories related to “the mechanics associated with the department’s record
maintenance, the internal policies or actions which lead to the development of les,” and other
matters which were not relevant to the question of whether the requested records were exempt
from disclosure. Id.
e court cautioned, however, that “discovery in a context such as the one at hand may
well be appropriate in the circumstance where a good faith belief exists that the public agency
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
193
may be playing ‘fast and loose’ with the requesting party or the court, once its statutorily
delegated authority is activated.” Id. Cf. Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d 725, 727 (Fla. 1997) (trial
court’s denial of motion to depose custodian armed because there were “no allegations that any
documents had been removed”); and Johnson v. State, 769 So. 2d 990, 995 (Fla. 2000) (discovery
not warranted based on “bare allegations” that additional records “should” exist).
(2) Hearing
Section 119.11(1), F.S., mandates that actions brought under Ch. 119 are entitled to an
immediate hearing and take priority over other pending cases. See Board of Trustees, Jacksonville
Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120, 124 (Fla. 2016), in which the Court observed
that “an accelerated civil action plays a critical role in the enforcement of the Public Records Act
as is reected in the title of section 119.11— ‘Accelerated hearing; immediate compliance.’” See
also Matos v. Oce of the State Attorney for the 17th Judicial Circuit, 80 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2012) (an “immediate hearing does not mean one scheduled within a reasonable time, but
means what the statute says: immediate”); and Woodfaulk v. State, 935 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 5th DCA
2006) (s. 119.11, F.S., does not place specic requirements on a party requesting public records
to obtain an accelerated hearing except the ling of an action to enforce the public records law).
e purpose of the hearing “is to allow the court to hear argument from the parties and
resolve any dispute as to whether there are public records responsive to the request and whether
an exemption from disclosure applies in whole or in part to the requested records.” Kline v.
University of Florida, 200 So. 3d 271 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). For example, an order dismissing a
public records complaint led against a sheri was overturned on appeal because the judge failed
to hold a hearing before entering the order. “Although the sheri may ultimately not be able
to retrieve these records, because of their age or another reason, the order in this case, entered
without an evidentiary hearing, was premature.” Grace v. Jenne, 855 So. 2d 262, 263 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2003). And see Rogers v. State, 271 So. 3d 79, 80 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (hearing required
where “there remains a disputed factual issue as to whether the State possesses the requested
records”); Ferrier v. Public Defender’s Oce, Second Judicial Circuit of Florida, 171 So. 3d 744
(Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (circuit court erred in not conducting an evidentiary hearing “on the
contested issue of whether [the agency] had the requested materials in its possession”); and Holley
v. Bradford County Sheri’s Department, 171 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (because petitioner
disputed the agency’s “unsworn claim that it did not possess the requested records, the trial court
could not deny [the] petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing on this issue”). e
failure to hold a hearing may be remedied by a petition for writ of certiorari. See Martinez v.
State, 969 So. 2d 1174, 1174-75 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Cf. Paylan v. Oce of the State Attorney,
310 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (petitioner was denied due process when the judge issued an
order scheduling a case management conference and then conducted an evidentiary hearing on
the petition; the order did not give the petitioner notice that the judge would actually conduct a
nal evidentiary hearing and decide the petition on the merits.)
“A motion to dismiss tests the legal suciency of a complaint and does not resolve factual
issues.” Clay County Education Association v. Clay County School Board, 144 So. 3d 708, 709 (Fla.
1st DCA 2014). erefore, the trial judge erred when he granted the agency’s motion to dismiss
based on the agency’s “unsworn response . . . that it either had already provided the documents,
did not have the information in the format requested, or could not produce the documents
because they did not exist.” Id. e appellate court remanded the case “for an immediate hearing
under section 119.11[1] and, if necessary, further proceedings to resolve any factual disputes that
remain between the parties’ complaint and answer.” Id.
us, “resolution of such disputed issues as notice and compliance must be litigated in
an evidentiary setting.” Human Rights Defense Center v. Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc.,
336 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). See also McDonough v. City of Homestead, 305 So. 3d 316
(Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (absent waiver, an order denying mandamus relief without a hearing is
premature); Williams v. State, 163 So. 3d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (where petitioner asserted
194
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
that the record produced by the agency was not the record he requested, trial judge erred by
denying prison inmate’s petition for writ of mandamus without issuing an alternative writ to
show cause and failing to hold an evidentiary hearing to resolve disputed issues of fact). Cf.
Morgan v. Wagner, 73 So. 3d 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011), in which the Fourth District said it
was “compelled to arm” the lower court order dismissing the petitioner’s public records action
because there was no transcript or documentation in the appendix to show that petitioner had
preserved “what may have been a valid procedural argument.”
(3) In camera inspection
Section 119.07(1)(g), F.S., provides that in any case in which an exemption is alleged to
exist pursuant to s. 119.071(1)(d) or (f), (2)(d), (e), or (f), or (4)(c), F.S., the public record or
part of the record in question shall be submitted to the trial court for an in camera examination.
See City of St. Petersburg v. Romine ex rel. Dillinger, 719 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (in
camera review mandated when condential informant exemption now found at s. 119.071[2]
[f], F.S., is asserted); Walton v. Dugger, 634 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1993); Lopez v. Singletary, 634 So.
2d 1054 (Fla. 1993) (records claimed by state attorney to constitute exempted work product
must be produced for an in camera inspection); and Environmental Turf, Inc. v. University of
Florida Board of Trustees, 83 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (in camera inspection required
where university claimed that records were exempt pursuant to s. 119.071[1][d], F.S. [attorney
work product] and s. 1004.22, F.S. [proprietary research records]). And see Weeks v. Golden, 764
So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“We fail to see how the trial court can [determine whether
an agency is entitled to a claimed exemption] without examining the records”). Cf. Agrosource,
Inc. v. Florida Department of Citrus, 148 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (trial court nding
after in camera review that certain prelitigation emails were exempt attorney work product was
supported by competent substantial evidence).
An in camera inspection is also required so that the trial judge can determine whether the
records can be redacted to remove exempt information. See Holley v. Bradford County Sheri’s
Department, 171 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (trial court must conduct an in camera
inspection of the records to determine whether they could be redacted to remove information
identifying condential informants); and Gonzalez v. State, 240 So. 3d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
(in the absence of an in camera inspection of the requested CDs, the circuit court could not
conclude that their contents are exempt from disclosure under s. 119.071[3][a][2] or section
281.301; nor could it determine whether redaction was possible). Cf. Executive Oce of the
Governor v. AHF MCO of Florida, Inc., 257 So. 3d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (reversing trial
judge order which found prospective information relating to Governor’s detailed schedule and
travel plans to be public even though the judge did not inspect the records and despite special
agent’s undisputed adavit that premature disclosure of such information would reveal state law
enforcement agency’s “surveillance techniques, procedures, and personnel” made exempt under
s. 119.071(2)(d), F.S., and jeopardize the security of the Governor and the agents who protect
him). And see City of Miami v. Blanco, 336 So. 3d 1268 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (trial court departed
from essential requirements of law by failing to conduct in camera review before granting
defendant’s motion to compel and/or for a subpoena for video camera recordings taken at police
station following his arrest; without an in camera inspection, the judge could not determine
whether the video recordings fell within the security plan exemptions in ss. 119.071(3)(a) and
281.301, F.S.)
Similarly, the Fourth District held that “it is fundamental error” for a trial court to decide
whether a statutory exemption from disclosure for mediation communications required that
such communications be redacted from the otherwise public transcript of a closed attorney
client session without conducting an in camera hearing to assess whether the redactions were
appropriately applied. Everglades Law Center v. South Florida Water Management District, 290
So. 3d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). e appellate court also observed that the trial court was “led
astray by the parties’ agreement that an in camera review of the transcript was not needed.” Id.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
195
While s. 119.07(1)(g), F.S., states that an in camera inspection is “discretionary” in cases
where an exemption is alleged under s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S. (the exemption for active criminal
investigative or intelligence information), it has been held that an in camera inspection is
necessary in order for the court to determine whether the exemption applies to the records at
issue. For example, in Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765, 768-769 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), review
denied, 786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2001), the Fifth District noted that the state attorney had not
presented “evidence to meet its burden that the records are exempt” under s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S.;
therefore, an “in camera inspection by the lower court is . . . required so that the trial judge will
have a factual basis to decide if the records are exempt. . . .” See also Garrison v. Bailey, 4 So. 3d
683 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). Compare Althouse v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 89 So. 3d
288, 289 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (while trial court’s failure to conduct an in camera inspection
usually constitutes reversible error, in this case petitioner objected to an inspection and thereby
precluded judge from conducting “an intelligent review of the documents;” accordingly, appellate
court was “compelled to arm” trial court’s denial of a petition seeking documents relating to a
pending criminal investigation).
Similarly, if a public records request involves electronic information stored on privately-
owned devices, an agency’s reasons for its lack of disclosure, “whether for reasons related to
relevancy, the application of possible privileges, or otherwise, necessitates a judicial review of
the available communications to identify those which are subject to disclosure and any defenses
to allegations of noncompliance.” O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 257 So. 3d 1036, 1042 (Fla.
4th DCA 2018).
(4) Mootness
In Puls v. City of Port St. Lucie, 678 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), the court, noting
that “[p]roduction of the records after the [public records] lawsuit was led did not moot the
issues raised in the complaint,” remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing on whether there
was an unlawful refusal of access to public records. See also Times Publishing Company v. City
of St. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487, 491 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (while courts do not ordinarily
resolve disputes unless a case or controversy exists, “since the instant situation is capable of
repetition while evading review, we nd it appropriate to address the issues before us concerning
applicability of the Public Records Act for future reference”); Mazer v. Orange County, 811 So.
2d 857, 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“the fact that the requested documents were produced in
the instant case after the action was commenced, but prior to nal adjudication of the issue
by the trial court, does not render the case moot or preclude consideration of [the petitioner’s]
entitlement to fees under the statute”); Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA
2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (because damage occurred when city refused to
produce canvassing board minutes until approved by city commission, production after the fact
did nothing to mollify appellants’ injury and therefore issue was not moot as city’s refusal “denied
any realistic access for the only purpose appellants sought to achieve--review of the Minutes
before the Commission meeting.”); and Schweickert v. Citrus County, Florida Board, 193 So. 3d
1075, 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (“We agree that Appellant’s case was not rendered moot simply
because the Board produced the requested documents after the ling of the initial complaint but
prior to ling the amended complaint”). Accord O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 257 So. 3d 1036,
1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (public records case did not become moot after the town provided
unredacted records prior to the hearing, because there were collateral issues “yet to be decided
by the trial court—specically a determination whether the Town’s initial redactions . . . were
proper and whether any reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses, should be awarded”).
Compare, State v. Ingram, 170 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 2015) (opinion of district court of appeal holding
that prison inmate was entitled to unredacted version of videotaped statement of minor victim
vacated following State’s uncontested representation at oral argument before the Supreme Court
that the videotape does not exist).
Similarly, in Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review
denied, 902 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005), the court found that
196
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
a public records lawsuit over a custodian’s requirement that a commercial company obtain a
licensing agreement before using the records did not become moot when the custodian provided
the company with the requested data after the lawsuit was led. Because the data was delivered
subject to a condition that it was for personal use only, a controversy remained concerning the
validity of the custodian restriction on the use of the data. And see Southern Coatings, Inc. v. City
of Tamarac, 916 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (federal court’s dismissal of pendent claims based
on state public records law is not a judgment on the merits and, therefore, not res judicata in a
subsequent lawsuit in state court).
(5) Stay
If the person seeking public records prevails in the trial court, the public agency must
comply with the court’s judgment within 48 hours unless otherwise provided by the trial court
or such determination is stayed within that period by the appellate court. Section 119.11(2),
F.S. An automatic stay shall exist for 48 hours after the ling of a notice of appeal for public
records and public meeting cases, which stay may be extended by the lower tribunal or the court
on motion. Fla. R. App. P. 9.310(b)(2). Cf. City of Sunny Isles Beach v. Gatto, 338 So. 3d 1045
(Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (party seeking disclosure in public records litigation in which a stay has been
granted ordinarily does not have possession of the challenged documents unless and until it has
been determined, with nality, that the documents are subject to disclosure).
(6) Venue
e general rule is that a lawsuit against the state or an agency of the state is proper only
in the county in which the defendant maintains its principal headquarters. Florida Department
of Children and Families v. Sun-Sentinel, Inc., 865 So. 2d 1278, 1286 (Fla. 2004). However,
there is an exemption to the “home venue privilege” for Ch. 119 actions that involve access
to condential records and a good cause petition is led to access those records. Id. Cf. Scott
v. ompson, 326 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 1st DCA, 2021), nding that elections supervisors in eight
Florida counties were entitled to exercise the home venue privilege in litigation led against
them seeking to order the supervisors to retain digital copies of paper ballots, and distinguishing
Florida Department of Children and Families v. Sun-Sentinel Inc., because the lawsuit against the
Department of Children and Families involved access to condential records that could not be
made public without a determination of good cause, whereas the suit against the supervisors did
not.
c. Attorney fees and costs
Section 119.12, F.S., provides authority for an award of reasonable costs of enforcement,
including reasonable attorney fees, in civil actions led to enforce the provisions of the Public
Records Act, provided that certain conditions are met. Cf. Managed Care of North America, Inc. v.
Florida Healthy Kids Corporation, 268 So. 3d 856, 862 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)(s. 119.12 does not
provide authority to award attorney’s fees to a third party intervenor in a case where the litigation
involved a request for a declaratory judgment to determine whether portions of bid documents
constituted trade secrets); Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Martin, 574 So.
2d 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (error to award attorney’s fees where order requiring production
of records was entered pursuant to Adult Protective Services Act, rather than the Public Records
Act). See also O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 341 So. 3d 335 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) and Downs
v. Austin, 559 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 574 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1990)
(s. 119.12, F.S. does not constitute authority for attorney’s fees for litigating the amount of
fee provided by that statute). Cf. AGO 16-16 (hospital district not authorized to reimburse an
individual board member’s attorney fees incurred by her in responding to a public records request
pertaining to her board service when no suit, claim, charge, or action has been instituted against
the commissioner during the time the attorney fees were incurred).
A successful pro se litigant may recover reasonable costs under this section. Weeks v. Golden,
764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Wisner v. City of Tampa Police Department, 601 So. 2d 296
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
197
(Fla. 2d DCA 1992). And see Weeks v. Golden, 846 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (awarding
costs associated with postage, envelopes and copying, as well as ling and service of process fees,
incurred by inmate who prevailed in public records lawsuit). Accord Yasir v. Forman, 149 So. 3d
107 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).
Section 119.12(1), F.S., provides that, if a civil action is led against an agency to enforce
the provisions of this chapter the court shall assess and award the reasonable costs of enforcement
including reasonable attorney fees against the responsible agency if the court determines that the
agency unlawfully refused to permit a public record to be inspected or copied and the complainant
provided written notice of the public records request to the agency’s custodian of public records at
least 5 business days before ling the civil action. See Bracci v. School Board of Lee County, No. 20-
CA-5205 (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. January 12, 2021), available online in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com (complainant who provided written notice of the public
records request to the records custodian 5 days before the lawsuit was led was not required to also
telephone the custodian prior to ling suit, citing to Oce of the State Attorney for the irteenth
Judicial Circuit v. Gonzalez, 953 So. 2d 759 [Fla. 2d DCA 2007]).
However, notice is not required if the agency fails to prominently post the contact
information for the agency’s custodian of public records in the agency’s primary administrative
building in which public records are routinely created, sent, received, maintained, and requested
and on the agency’s website, if the agency has a website. Section 119.12(2), F.S.
e court must also determine whether the complainant made the public records request
or participated in the civil action for an improper purpose. Section 119.12(3), F.S. If the court
determines that there was an improper purpose, the court may not award attorney fees or the
costs of enforcement, to the complainant, and shall assess and award against the complainant
and to the agency the reasonable costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the agency
in responding to the civil action. Id. e term “improper purpose” means “a request to inspect
or copy a public record or to participate in the civil action primarily to cause a violation of this
chapter or for a frivolous purpose.” Id.
Section 119.12, F.S., is designed to encourage voluntarily compliance with the requirements
of Ch. 119, F.S. “If public agencies are required to pay attorney’s fees and costs to parties who
are wrongfully denied access to the records of such agencies, then the agencies are less likely to
deny proper requests for documents.” New York Times Company v. PHH Mental Health Services,
Inc., 616 So. 2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1993). Stated another way, the statute “has the dual role of both
deterring agencies from wrongfully denying access to public records and encouraging individuals
to continue pursuing their right to access public records.” Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police &
Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120, 125 (Fla. 2016). ere is no additional requirement
that the court nd that the “public agency did not act in good faith, acted in bad faith or acted
unreasonably.” Lee, 189 So. 3d at 122.
However, as noted previously, s. 119.12, F.S., species other conditions which must be
met prior to an award of fees and costs under this statute. And see State, Department of Economic
Opportunity v. Consumer Rights, LLC, 181 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), rejecting appellee’s
argument that the requirements in s. 284.30, F.S. (establishing procedures to be followed by those
seeking to have attorney’s fees paid by the state or any of its agencies) are inapplicable to public
records cases. Cf. Woliner v. State, 320 So. 3d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (notice requirement in
s. 284.30, F.S., does not preclude the prevailing party in a public records action from obtaining
costs).
An “unlawful refusal” for purposes of s. 119.12 may include unlawful conditions or
requirements imposed by an agency for obtaining public records. As the Supreme Court explained
in Lee: “Unlawful conditions or excessive, unwarranted special service charges deter individuals
seeking public records from gaining access to the records to which they are entitled . . . . Even if
198
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
not malicious or done in bad faith, the Pension Fund’s actions—which were found be unlawful-
-had the eect of frustrating Lee’s constitutional right to access public records and required him
to turn to the courts to vindicate that right.” Lee, 189 So. 3d at 129-130. Cf. B & L Service, Inc.
v. Broward County, 300 So. 3d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (trial court did not err in refusing to
award attorney’s fees, because petitioner waived issue of whether county unlawfully refused its
public records request by failing to cross-appeal the trial court’s initial ruling that the county had
not violated the public records law, even though the trial court subsequently modied its prior
order by granting the petitioner’s motion for rehearing in part).
An “unjustied failure to respond to a public records request until after an action has been
commenced to compel compliance amounts to an unlawful refusal” for purposes of s. 119.12, F.S.
Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). See also Mazer v. Orange County, 811 So. 2d
857, 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“[T]he fact that the requested documents were produced in the
instant case after the action was commenced, but prior to nal adjudication of the issue by the trial
court, does not render the case moot or preclude consideration of [the petitioner’s] entitlement to
fees under the statute.); Bareld v. Town of Eatonville, 675 So. 2d 223, 224 (appellant entitled to
attorney’s fees because “[t]he evidence clearly establishes that it was only after the appellant led a
lawsuit that the documents he had previously sought by written request to the Town were nally
turned over to him); Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v. Sundy, 145 So. 3d 980, 984 (Fla. 1st DCA
2014) “) (an agency’s “production of the records on the eve of the enforcement hearing did not
cure its unjustied delay”); and Schweickert v. Citrus County, Florida Board, 193 So. 3d 1075, 1080
(Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (county’s failure to produce a complaint alleging inappropriate conduct by
a county commissioner until litigation was led was an unlawful refusal because the exemption
for records relating to an investigation of alleged discrimination did not apply to the complaint;
court rejected the county’s argument that the delay was justied because the investigation into
the complaint might have ultimately produced records which related to discriminatory behavior).
Stated another way, a delay in disclosing records can rise to the level of a refusal if “there
was no good reason for the delay.” Consumer Rights, LLC v. Union County, 159 So. 3d 882, 885
(Fla. 1st DCA 2015), review denied, 177 So. 3d 1264 (Fla. 2015). For example, in Bareld v.
Town of Eatonville, 675 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), the court held that a town was liable for
attorney’s fees even if the delay in providing records was due to either the intentional wrongdoing
or ineptitude of its clerk. And see Oce of the State Attorney for the irteenth Judicial Circuit of
Florida v. Gonzalez, 953 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (attorney’s fees authorized even if failure
to turn over the records was due to a mistake or ineptitude). Cf. Hewlings v. Orange County,
Florida, 87 So. 3d 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (the mere fact that a county quickly responded to
public records request via voicemail and fax is not dispositive of whether the county’s 45-day delay
in complying with the request was justied).
“However, it is equally clear that a delay does not in and of itself create liability under
s. 119.12, F.S.” Consumer Rights, LLC v. Union County, 159 So. 3d at 885. See also Lilker v.
Suwannee Valley Transit Authority, 133 So. 3d 654, 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (where delay is the
issue, the court must determine whether the delay was justied under the facts of the particular
case). and McLendon v. Palm Beach County Oce of Inspector General, 286 So. 3d 375 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2019) (trial court correctly denied attorney’s fees because the requested record was exempt at
the time that the request was made and did not become public until the investigation conducted
pursuant to s. 112.3188 (2)(b), F.S., was concluded). Cf. Citizens Awareness Foundation, Inc. v.
Wantman Group, Inc., 195 So. 3d 396, 401 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“e public records law should
not be applied in a way that encourages the manufacture of public records requests designed to
obtain no response, for the purpose of generating attorney’s fees.”).
A lawyer may recover fees for his or her assistance of a pro se litigant before entering a
notice of appearance provided that the complaint requested attorney’s fees and disclosed that it
was prepared with the assistance of counsel. O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 341 So. 3d 343 (Fla.
4th DCA 2022). However, s. 119.12, F.S., “does not provide for (1) an award of attorney’s fees for
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
199
litigating the amount of the fees or (2) an award of fees attributable to the non-testifying associates
of an attorney fee expert.” O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 341 So. 3d 335 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022).
[Emphasis supplied by the court].
As to calculation of the reasonable costs of enforcement including reasonable attorney fees
to which the prevailing party is entitled, “the trial judge is in a better position than the appellate
court to make “a factual determination regarding the objectives sought by the [prevailing party],
the extent of statutory enforcement obtained, and the time expended in achieving those results.”
Daniels v. Bryson, 548 So. 2d 679, 682 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). And see Grapski v. City of Alachua,
134 So. 3d 987 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), review denied, 118 So. 3d 220 (Fla. 2012) (the trial court’s
ndings of fact on the issue of attorney’s fees are presumed correct; the standard of review is abuse
of discretion). However, where the contract between the client and attorney provided that the
attorney would be compensated on a flat hourly basis regardless of the outcome at trial, the trial
court erred in awarding an enhanced fee based upon a contingency risk multiplier. Id.
A dierent rule has been applied when it is unclear whether a private corporation is an
“agency” for purposes of the Public Records Act. Section 119.12, F.S., “was not intended to
force private entities to comply with the inspection requirements of chapter 119 by threatening
to award attorney’s fees against them.” New York Times Company v. PHH Mental Health Services,
Inc., 616 So. 2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1993). Accord Fox v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 545 So.
2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
us, attorney fees “are not warranted when the [private] entity in charge of the public
records at issue was reasonably and understandably unsure of its status as an agency.” Lee v.
Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund, 113 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013),
approved, 189 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2016). And see Economic Development Commission v. Ellis, 178 So.
3d 118, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (“attorney’s fees should not be awarded in those cases where
the party refusing to provide documents acted on the good-faith belief that it was not an agent,
subject to compliance with the [Public Records] Act”). Cf. s. 119.0701(4), F.S., providing for
an award of attorney fees against a “contractor” as dened in s. 119.0701(a), F.S., found to have
unlawfully refused to comply with a public records request within a reasonable time, provided that
the plainti has complied with the conditions set forth in the statute.
Attorney fees may also be awarded for a successful appeal of a denial of access, provided
that at the time of appeal a motion is led in accordance with the appellate rules. Downs v. Austin,
supra. And see Oce of the State Attorney v. Gonzalez, supra (where motion seeking appellate
attorney fees is granted by appellate court and remanded only for calculation of such fees, lower
court required to follow court’s mandate without further consideration); and Cf. Johnson v. Jarvis,
107 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (trial court erred in denying motion for costs based on
appellant’s failure to comply with the notice requirement in s. 284.30, F.S; “[f]or purposes of
appellate costs, the appellant was the prevailing party . . . and is entitled to an award of his costs
incurred therein”).
Appellate attorney fees were also considered in State Attorney’s Oce of the Seventeenth
Judicial Circuit v. Cable News Network, Inc., 254 So.3d 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). In that case,
the court denied the media’s request for appellate attorney’s fees from the state attorney’s oce
and school board. e agencies had appealed the lower court’s order allowing the media to access
certain video footage taken by security cameras at a high school where a gunman killed students
and sta. Although the media prevailed in the appeal, the court observed that the video footage
was condential security information under s. 119.071(3)(a), F.S. e media obtained access
because a judge found “good cause” to release the video footage as authorized by a statutory
exception to the condentiality provision. us, the school board’s conduct was not ‘unlawful’
for purposes of s.119.12(1)(a), F.S. Additionally, the court refused to award fees against the state
attorney because the state attorney was not the custodian of the records at issue; the state attorney
was only an intervenor in the lawsuit below.
200
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
3. Criminal and noncriminal infraction penalties
Section 119.10(1)(b), F.S., states that a public ocer who knowingly violates the provisions of
s. 119.07(1), F.S., is subject to suspension and removal or impeachment and commits a misdemeanor
of the rst degree, punishable by possible criminal penalties of one year in prison, or $1,000 ne, or
both. See State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (s. 119.10[1][b] authorizes a conviction
for violating s. 119.07 only if a defendant is found to have committed such violation “knowingly”;
statute cannot be interpreted as allowing a conviction based on mere negligence).
Section 119.10(1)(a), F.S., provides that a violation of any provision of Ch. 119, F.S.,
by a public ocer is a noncriminal infraction, punishable by ne not exceeding $500. Cf.
s. 838.022(1)(b), F.S. (unlawful for a public servant or public contractor, to knowingly and
intentionally obtain a benet for any person or to cause unlawful harm to another, by concealing,
covering up, destroying, mutilating, or altering any ocial record or ocial document, except
as authorized by law or contract, or causing another person to perform such an act).
A state attorney may prosecute suits charging public ocials with violations of the Public
Records Act, including those violations which may result in a nding of guilt for a noncriminal
infraction. AGO 91-38.
I. MAINTENANCE, STORAGE AND RETENTION REQUIREMENTS
1. Maintenance and storage of records
All public records should be kept in the buildings in which they are ordinarily used.
Section 119.021(1)(a), F.S. Moreover, insofar as practicable, a custodian of public records of
vital, permanent, or archival records shall keep them in reproof and waterproof safes, vaults, or
rooms tted with noncombustible materials and in such arrangement as to be easily accessible
for convenient use. Section 119.021(1)(b), F.S. Records that are in need of repair, restoration,
or rebinding may be authorized by the head of the governmental entity to be removed from the
building or oce in which such records are ordinarily kept for the length of time required to
repair, restore, or rebind them. Section 119.021(1)(c), F.S.
us, public records may not routinely be removed from the building or oce in which
such records are ordinarily kept except for ocial purposes. AGO 93-16. e retention of
such records in the home of a public ocial would appear to circumvent the public access
requirements of the Public Records Act and compromise the rights of the public to inspect and
copy such records. Id. And see AGO 04-43 (mail addressed to city ocials at City Hall and
received at City Hall should not be forwarded unopened to the private residences of the ocials,
but rather the original or a copy of the mail that constitutes a public record should be maintained
at city oces); and AGO 07-14 (“Although the Public Records Law does not prescribe a location
at which public records must be maintained, it does suggest that such records be kept where
they are ordinarily used”). Cf. Inf. Op. to Sola, March 9, 2010 (municipal election records
are municipal records which should be maintained by city even though election conducted by
county supervisor of elections) and AGO 88-26 (while Ch. 119, F.S., does not require a county to
transport microlmed copies of public records maintained in a storage facility outside the county
to the county courthouse when the originals are available at the courthouse, the microlmed
copies must be available for copying at their location outside the county).
2. Delivery of records to successor
Section 119.021(4)(a), F.S., provides that whoever has custody of public records shall
deliver such records to his or her successor at the expiration of his or her term of oce or, if there
is no successor, to the records and information management program of the Division of Library
and Information Services of the Department of State. See Maxwell v. Pine Gas Corporation, 195
So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967) (state, county, and municipal records are not the personal
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
201
property of a public ocer); AGO 98-59 (records in the les of the former city attorney which
were made or received in carrying out her duties as city attorney and which communicate,
perpetuate, or formalize knowledge constitute public records and are required to be turned over
to her successor); and AGO 75-282 (public records regardless of usefulness or relevancy must
be turned over to the custodian’s successor in oce or to the Department of State). And see
s. 119.021(4)(b), F.S., providing that “[w]hoever is entitled to custody of public records shall
demand them from any person having illegal possession of them, who must forthwith deliver the
same to him or her.”
In the absence of contrary direction in the legislation dissolving a special taxing district,
the district’s records should be delivered to the Department of State. AGO 95-03. Compare
AGO 09-39, stating that in light of a court order holding that an independent special district is
the successor-in-interest to the powers and duties of a municipal services benet unit [MSBU],
the records of the MSBU should be delivered to the special district. Cf. s. 257.36(2)(b), F.S.,
specifying procedures for disposition of agency records stored in the state records center in the
event that the agency is dissolved or its functions are transferred to another agency.
3. Transition records of certain ocers-elect
Section 119.035(4), F.S., states that “upon taking the oath of oce, the ocer-elect shall,
as soon as practicable deliver to the person or persons responsible for records and information
management in such oce all public records kept or received in the transaction of ocial business
during the period following election to public oce.” e term “ocer-elect” for purposes of this
section means the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, the Attorney General, the Chief Financial
Ocer, and the Commissioner of Agriculture. Section 119.035(5), F.S.
4. Retention and disposal of records
a. Retention schedules
Section 119.021(2)(a), F.S. requires the Division of Library and Information Services
(division) of the Department of State to adopt rules establishing retention schedules and a disposal
process for public records. Each agency must comply with these rules. Section 119.021(2)(b),
F.S. See generally Chs. 1B-24 and 1B-26, Florida Administrative Code. e approved records
retention schedule for state and local governmental entities is located online at dlis.dos.state..us/
barm/genschedules/GS1-SL.pdf. Cf. L.R. v. Department of State, Division of Archives, History and
Records Management, 488 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (an aected party seeking to challenge
an agency’s approved records retention schedule may be entitled to a hearing pursuant to Ch.
120, F.S).
Retention schedules for judicial branch records are established by court rule. See Fla.
R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.430 (court records) and Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin.
2.440 (judicial branch administrative records). Similarly, procedures for maintenance and
destruction of legislative records are established in legislative rules. Legislative rules may be
accessed online at www.senate.gov (Florida Senate) and www.myoridahouse.gov (Florida
House of Representatives).
b. Disposal of records
Section 257.36(6), F.S., states that a “public record may be destroyed or otherwise disposed
of only in accordance with retention schedules established by the division.” Section 119.021(2)
(c), F.S., provides that public ocials must “systematically dispose” of records no longer needed,
subject to the consent of the division in accordance with s. 257.36, F.S. Compare s. 119.021(3),
F.S., stating that notwithstanding the provisions of Chs. 119 or 257, F.S., certain orders that
comprise nal agency action must be permanently maintained.
us, for example, a municipality may not remove and destroy disciplinary notices,
with or without the employee’s consent, during the course of resolving collective bargaining
202
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
grievances, except in accordance with the statutory restrictions on disposal of records. AGO
94-75. See also AGOs 09-19 (city must follow public records retention schedules established
by law for information on its Facebook page which constitutes a public record); 96-34 (e-mail
messages are subject to statutory limitations on destruction of public records); and 75-45 (tape
recordings of proceedings before a public body must be preserved in compliance with statutory
record retention and disposal restrictions). And see Raydient LLC v. Nassau County, Florida, No.
2019-CA-000054 (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. August 24, 2021), available in the Cases database at the open
government site at myoridalegal.com, nding that the “routine and indiscriminate destruction
of text messages by [county commission] members and certain county employees, regardless of
the content of each message, violated s. 119.021, F.S.,” requiring that public records be kept in
accordance with a retention schedule adopted by the Florida Department of State.
Similarly, registration and disciplinary records stored in a national association securities
dealers database and used by state banking department for regulatory purposes are public
records and may not be destroyed merely because an arbitration panel of the national association
has ordered that they be expunged; such records are subject to statutory mandates governing
destruction of records. AGO 98-54. Accord Inf. Op. to Hernandez, July 1, 2003 (agency not
authorized to purge or expunge documents it created while carrying out what it perceived to be
its ocial duty based upon an accusation that the agency may have been mistaken in such an
assessment). Cf. AGO 91-23 (clerk of court not authorized to expunge a court order from the
Ocial Records, in the absence of a court order directing such action).
c. Exempt records
e statutory restrictions on destruction of public records apply even if the record is exempt
from disclosure. For example, in AGO 81-12, the Attorney General’s Oce concluded that
the City of Hollywood could not destroy or dispose of licensure, certication, or employment
examination question and answer sheets except as authorized by statute. And see AGO 87-48
(statutory prohibition against placing anonymous materials in the personnel le of a school district
employee did not permit the destruction of such materials received in the course of ocial school
business, absent compliance with statutory restrictions on destruction of records). An exemption
only removes the records from public access requirements, it does not exempt the records from the
other provisions of Ch. 119, F.S., such as those requiring that public records be kept in a safe place
or those regulating the destruction of public records. AGO 93-86. See s. 119.021, F.S.
Moreover, if an assertion is made by the custodian that a requested record is not a public
record subject to public inspection or copying, the requested record may not be disposed of for a
period of 30 days after the date on which a written request to inspect or copy the record was made
to the custodian; if a civil action is instituted within the 30-day period to enforce the provisions
of this section with respect to the requested record, the custodian may not dispose of the record
except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction after notice to all aected parties. Section
119.07(1)(h), F.S
d. Evidence obtained by law enforcement agencies
Documentary evidence obtained by a police department is a public record subject to
retention schedules approved by the division. AGO 04-51. Accord Inf. Op. to Blair, August
24, 2011 (evidence that constitutes a public record may be destroyed only in accordance with
retention schedules established by the division and noting that the division has adopted a General
Records Schedule GS2 for law enforcement agencies).
However, “the disposition of evidence not constituting a public record within the meaning
of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, would appear to be dependent upon an agency’s determination
that it is no longer needed.” Inf. Op. to Blair, August 24, 2011. (e.s.) Cf. Church of Scientology
Flag Service Org., Inc. v. Wood, No. 97-688CI-07 (Fla. 6th Cir. Ct. February 27, 1997), available
online in the Cases database at the open government site at myoridalegal.com (physical
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
203
specimens relating to an autopsy are not public records because in order to constitute a “public
record” for purposes of Ch. 119, “the record itself must be susceptible of some form of copying”).
e. Duplicate records
Section 257.36(6), F.S., requires the division to adopt rules which, among other things,
establish “[s]tandards for the reproduction of records for security or with a view to the disposal of
the original record.” See AGO 18-04 (according to a division rule, “an agency that designates an
electronic or microlmed copy as the record (master) copy may then designate the paper original
as a duplicate and dispose of it in accordance with the retention requirement for duplicates in
the applicable retention schedule unless another law, rule, or ordinance specically requires its
retention”).
Accordingly, the division is responsible for determining whether an agency may dispose
of an audiotape of a witness statement without regard to the retention schedule, if there is also a
transcript of the statement. Inf. Op. to Mathews, July 12, 2004. Cf. AGO 91-09 (if a facsimile
document is subsequently copied by the receiving agency, the facsimile document is considered
an intermediate document which may be destroyed; the copy of the facsimile then is retained
as a public record). See also AGO 92-85, stating that individual school board members are
not required to retain copies of public records which are regularly maintained in the course of
business by the clerk of the school board in the school board administrative oces.
204
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
APPENDICES
A. PUBLIC RECORDS AND MEETINGS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Article I, Section 24, Florida Constitution
Section 24. Access to public records and meetings.
(a) Every person has the right to inspect or copy any public record made or received in
connection with the ocial business of any public body, ocer, or employee of the state,
or persons acting on their behalf, except with respect to records exempted pursuant to this
section or specically made condential by this Constitution. is section specically
includes the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government and each agency
or department created thereunder; counties, municipalities, and districts; and each
constitutional ocer, board, and commission, or entity created pursuant to law or this
Constitution.
(b) All meetings of any collegial public body of the executive branch of state government or
of any collegial public body of a county, municipality, school district, or special district, at
which ocial acts are to be taken or at which public business of such body is to be transacted
or discussed, shall be open and noticed to the public and meetings of the legislature shall be
open and noticed as provided in Article III, Section 4(e), except with respect to meetings
exempted pursuant to this section or specically closed by this Constitution.
(c) is section shall be self-executing. e legislature, however, may provide by general
law passed by a two-thirds vote of each house for the exemption of records from the
requirements of subsection (a) and the exemption of meetings from the requirements
of subsection (b), provided that such law shall state with specicity the public necessity
justifying the exemption and shall be no broader than necessary to accomplish the stated
purpose of the law. e legislature shall enact laws governing the enforcement of this
section, including the maintenance, control, destruction, disposal, and disposition of
records made public by this section, except that each house of the legislature may adopt
rules governing the enforcement of this section in relation to records of the legislative
branch. Laws enacted pursuant to this subsection shall contain only exemptions from the
requirements of subsections (a) or (b) and provisions governing the enforcement of this
section, and shall relate to one subject.
(d) All laws that are in eect on July 1, 1993 that limit public access to records or meetings
shall remain in force, and such laws apply to records of the legislative and judicial branches,
until they are repealed. Rules of court that are in eect on the date of adoption of this
section that limit access to records shall remain in eect until they are repealed.
B. GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW AND RELATED STATUTES
286.011 Public meetings and records; public inspection; criminal and civil penalties.—
(1) All meetings of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any
agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision, except
as otherwise provided in the Constitution, including meetings with or attended by any
person elected to such board or commission, but who has not yet taken oce, at which
ocial acts are to be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all
times, and no resolution, rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken
or made at such meeting. e board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all
such meetings.
(2) e minutes of a meeting of any such board or commission of any such state agency or
authority shall be promptly recorded, and such records shall be open to public inspection.
e circuit courts of this state shall have jurisdiction to issue injunctions to enforce the
purposes of this section upon application by any citizen of this state.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
205
(3) (a)Any public ocer who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a noncriminal
infraction, punishable by ne not exceeding $500.
(b) Any person who is a member of a board or commission or of any state agency or authority
of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision who knowingly violates
the provisions of this section by attending a meeting not held in accordance with the
provisions hereof is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided
in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(c) Conduct which occurs outside the state which would constitute a knowing violation of
this section is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082
or s. 775.083.
(4) Whenever an action has been led against any board or commission of any state agency
or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political
subdivision to enforce the provisions of this section or to invalidate the actions of any
such board, commission, agency, or authority, which action was taken in violation of this
section, and the court determines that the defendant or defendants to such action acted
in violation of this section, the court shall assess a reasonable attorney’s fee against such
agency, and may assess a reasonable attorney’s fee against the individual ling such an
action if the court nds it was led in bad faith or was frivolous. Any fees so assessed
may be assessed against the individual member or members of such board or commission;
provided, that in any case where the board or commission seeks the advice of its attorney
and such advice is followed, no such fees shall be assessed against the individual member or
members of the board or commission. However, this subsection shall not apply to a state
attorney or his or her duly authorized assistants or any ocer charged with enforcing the
provisions of this section.
(5) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority or any agency or
authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision appeals any court
order which has found said board, commission, agency, or authority to have violated this
section, and such order is armed, the court shall assess a reasonable attorney’s fee for
the appeal against such board, commission, agency, or authority. Any fees so assessed
may be assessed against the individual member or members of such board or commission;
provided, that in any case where the board or commission seeks the advice of its attorney
and such advice is followed, no such fees shall be assessed against the individual member
or members of the board or commission.
(6) All persons subject to subsection (1) are prohibited from holding meetings at any facility or
location which discriminates on the basis of sex, age, race, creed, color, origin, or economic
status or which operates in such a manner as to unreasonably restrict public access to such
a facility.
(7) Whenever any member of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or
any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision
is charged with a violation of this section and is subsequently acquitted, the board or
commission is authorized to reimburse said member for any portion of his or her reasonable
attorney’s fees.
(8) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), any board or commission of any state
agency or authority or any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or
political subdivision, and the chief administrative or executive ocer of the governmental
entity, may meet in private with the entity’s attorney to discuss pending litigation to which
the entity is presently a party before a court or administrative agency, provided that the
following conditions are met:
(a) e entity’s attorney shall advise the entity at a public meeting that he or she desires advice
concerning the litigation.
(b) e subject matter of the meeting shall be conned to settlement negotiations or strategy
206
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
sessions related to litigation expenditures.
(c) e entire session shall be recorded by a certied court reporter. e reporter shall record
the times of commencement and termination of the session, all discussion and proceedings,
the names of all persons present at any time, and the names of all persons speaking. No
portion of the session shall be o the record. e court reporter’s notes shall be fully
transcribed and led with the entity’s clerk within a reasonable time after the meeting.
(d) e entity shall give reasonable public notice of the time and date of the attorney-client
session and the names of persons who will be attending the session. e session shall
commence at an open meeting at which the persons chairing the meeting shall announce
the commencement and estimated length of the attorney-client session and the names of
the persons attending. At the conclusion of the attorney-client session, the meeting shall
be reopened, and the person chairing the meeting shall announce the termination of the
session.
(e) e transcript shall be made part of the public record upon conclusion of the litigation.
Related sections read as follows:
286.0105 Notices of meetings and hearings must advise that a record is required to
appeal.—
Each board, commission, or agency of this state or of any political subdivision thereof shall
include in the notice of any meeting or hearing, if notice of the meeting or hearing is required,
of such board, commission, or agency, conspicuously on such notice, the advice that, if a person
decides to appeal any decision made by the board, agency, or commission with respect to any
matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and
that, for such purpose, he or she may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is
made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
e requirements of this section do not apply to the notice provided in s. 200.065(3).
286.0111 Legislative review of certain exemptions from requirements for public
meetings and recordkeeping by governmental entities.—
e provisions of s. 119.15, the Open Government Sunset Review Act, apply to the
provisions of law which provide exemptions to s. 286.011, as provided in s. 119.15.
286.0113 General exemptions from public meetings.—
(1) at portion of a meeting that would reveal a security or resafety system plan or portion
thereof made condential and exempt by s. 119.071(3)(a) is exempt from s. 286.011 and s.
24(b), Art. I of the State Constitution. is subsection is subject to the Open Government
Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2,
2023, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(2) (a) For purposes of this subsection:
1. “Competitive solicitation” means the process of requesting and receiving sealed bids,
proposals, or replies in accordance with the terms of a competitive process, regardless of
the method of procurement.
2. “Team” means a group of members established by an agency for the purpose of conducting
negotiations as part of a competitive solicitation.
(b)1. Any portion of a meeting at which a negotiation with a vendor is conducted pursuant
to a competitive solicitation, at which a vendor makes an oral presentation as part of a
competitive solicitation, or at which a vendor answers questions as part of a competitive
solicitation is exempt from s. 286.011 and s. 24(b), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. Any portion of a team meeting at which negotiation strategies are discussed is exempt from
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
207
s. 286.011 and s. 24(b), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(c)1. A complete recording shall be made of any portion of an exempt meeting. No portion of
the exempt meeting may be held o the record.
2. e recording of, and any records presented at, the exempt meeting are exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency
provides notice of an intended decision or until 30 days after opening the bids, proposals,
or nal replies, whichever occurs earlier.
3. If the agency rejects all bids, proposals, or replies and concurrently provides notice of its
intent to reissue a competitive solicitation, the recording and any records presented at
the exempt meeting remain exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision
concerning the reissued competitive solicitation or until the agency withdraws the reissued
competitive solicitation. A recording and any records presented at an exempt meeting are
not exempt for longer than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all bids,
proposals, or replies.
(3)(a) at portion of a meeting held by a utility owned or operated by a unit of local government
which would reveal information that is exempt under s. 119.0713(5) is exempt from s.
286.011 and s. 24(b), Art. I of the State Constitution. All exempt portions of such a
meeting must be recorded and transcribed. e recording and transcript of the meeting are
exempt from disclosure under s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a) of the State Constitution unless
a court of competent jurisdiction, following an in-camera review, determines that the
meeting was not restricted to the discussion of data and information made exempt by this
section. In the event of such a judicial determination, only the portion of the recording or
transcript which reveals nonexempt data and information may be disclosed to a third party.
(b) is subsection is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with
s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2024, unless reviewed and saved from
repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(4)(a) Any portion of a meeting that would reveal building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings,
or diagrams, including draft, preliminary, and nal formats, which depict the structural
elements of 911, E911, or public safety radio communication system infrastructure,
including towers, antennae, equipment or facilities used to provide 911, E911, or public
safety radio communication structures or facilities made exempt by s. 119.071(3)(e)1.a. is
exempt from s. 286.011 and s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(b) Any portion of a meeting that would reveal geographical maps indicating the actual
or proposed locations of 911, E911, or public safety radio communication system
infrastructure, including towers, antennae, equipment or facilities used to provide 911,
E911, or public safety radio communication structures or facilities made exempt by s.
119.071(3)(e)1.b. is exempt from s. 286.011 and s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(c) No portion of an exempt meeting under paragraphs (a) or (b) may be o the record. All
exempt portions of such meeting shall be recorded and transcribed. Such recordings and
transcripts are condential and exempt from disclosure under s. 119.07(1) and s 24(a),
Art. I of the State Constitution unless a court of competent jurisdiction, after an in-camera
review, determines that the meeting was not restricted to the discussion of the information
made exempt by s. 119.071(3)(e)1a. or b. In the event of such a judicial determination,
only that portion of the recording and transcript which reveals nonexempt information
may be disclosed to a third party.
(d) For purposes of this subsection, the term “public safety radio” is dened as the means of
communication between and among 911 public safety answering points, dispatchers, and
rst responder agencies using those portions of the radio frequency spectrum designated by
the Federal Communications Commission under 47 C.F.R 90 for public safety purposes.
208
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(e) is subsection is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with
s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2025, unless reviewed and saved from
repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
286.0114 Public meetings; reasonable opportunity to be heard; attorney fees.—
(1) For purposes of this section, “board or commission” means a board or commission of any
state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of a county, municipal corporation,
or political subdivision.
(2) Members of the public shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard on a proposition
before a board or commission. e opportunity to be heard need not occur at the same
meeting at which the board or commission takes ocial action on the proposition if the
opportunity occurs at a meeting that is during the decisionmaking process and is within
reasonable proximity in time before the meeting at which the board or commission takes
the ocial action. is section does not prohibit a board or commission from maintaining
orderly conduct or proper decorum in a public meeting. e opportunity to be heard is
subject to rules or policies adopted by the board or commission, as provided in subsection
(4).
(3) e requirements in subsection (2) do not apply to:
(a) An ocial act that must be taken to deal with an emergency situation aecting the public
health, welfare or safety, if compliance with the requirements would cause an unreasonable
delay in the ability of the board or commission to act;
(b) An ocial act involving no more than a ministerial act, including, but not limited to,
approval of minutes and ceremonial proclamations.
(c) A meeting that is exempt from s. 286.011; or
(d) A meeting during which the board or commission is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity.
is paragraph does not aect the right of a person to be heard as otherwise provided by
law.
(4) Rules or policies of a board or commission which govern the opportunity to be heard are
limited to those that:
(a) Provide guidelines regarding the amount of time an individual has to address the board or
commission;
(b) Prescribe procedures for allowing representatives of groups or factions on a proposition to
address the board or commission, rather than all members of such groups or factions, at
meetings in which a large number of individuals wish to be heard;
(c) Prescribe procedures or forms for an individual to use in order to inform the board or
commission of a desire to be heard; to indicate his or her support, opposition, or neutrality
on a proposition; and to indicate his or her designation of a representative to speak for him
or her or his or her group on a proposition if he or she so chooses; or
(d) Designate a specied period of time for public comment.
(5) If a board or commission adopts rules or policies in compliance with this section and
follows such rules or policies when providing an opportunity for members of the public to
be heard, the board or commission is deemed to be acting in compliance with this section.
(6) A circuit court has jurisdiction to issue an injunction for the purpose of enforcing this
section upon the ling of an application for such injunction by a citizen of this state.
(7)(a) Whenever an action is led against a board or commission to enforce this section, the
court shall assess reasonable attorney fees against such board or commission if the court
determines that the defendant to such action acted in violation of this section. e court
may assess reasonable attorney fees against the individual ling such an action if the court
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
209
nds that the action was led in bad faith or was frivolous. is paragraph does not
apply to a state attorney or his or her duly authorized assistants or an ocer charged with
enforcing this section.
(b) Whenever a board or commission appeals a court order that has found the board or
commission to have violated this section, and such order is armed, the court shall assess
reasonable attorney fees for the appeal against such board or commission.
(8) An action taken by a board or commission which is found to be in violation of this section
is not void as a result of that violation.
286.01141 Criminal justice commissions; public meetings exemption.—
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Duly constituted criminal justice commission” means an advisory commission created by
municipal or county ordinance whose membership is comprised of individuals from the
private sector and the public sector and whose purpose is to examine local criminal justice
issues.
(b) “Active” has the same meaning as provided in s. 119.011.
(c) “Criminal intelligence information” has the same meaning as provided in s. 119.011.
(d) “Criminal investigative information” has the same meaning as provided in s. 119.011.
(2) at portion of a meeting of a duly constituted criminal justice commission at which
members of the commission discuss active criminal intelligence information or active
criminal investigative information that is currently being considered by, or which may
foreseeably come before, the commission is exempt from s. 286.011 and s. 24(b), Art.
I of the State Constitution, provided that at any public meeting of the criminal justice
commission at which such matter is being considered, the commission members publicly
disclose the fact that the matter has been discussed.
286.012 Voting requirement at meetings of governmental bodies.—
A member of a state, county, or municipal governmental board, commission, or agency
who is present at a meeting of any such body at which an ocial decision, ruling, or other
ocial act is to be taken or adopted may not abstain from voting in regard to any such decision,
ruling, or act; and a vote shall be recorded or counted for each such member present, unless,
with respect to any such member, there is, or appears to be, a possible conict of interest under
s. 112.311, s. 112.313, s. 112.3143, or additional or more stringent standards of conduct, if
any, adopted pursuant to s. 112.326. If there is, or appears to be, a possible conict under s.
112.311, s. 112.313, or s. 112.3143, the member shall comply with the disclosure requirements
of s. 112.3143. If the only conict or possible conict is one arising from the additional or more
stringent standards adopted pursuant to s. 112.326, the member shall comply with any disclosure
requirements adopted pursuant to s. 112.326. If the ocial decision, ruling, or act occurs in the
context of a quasi-judicial proceeding, a member may abstain from voting on such matter if the
abstention is to assure a fair proceeding free from potential bias or prejudice.
286.26 Accessibility of public meetings to the physically handicapped.—
(1) Whenever any board or commission of any state agency or authority, or of any agency or
authority of any county, municipal corporation, or other political subdivision, which has
scheduled a meeting at which ocial acts are to be taken receives, at least 48 hours prior to
the meeting, a written request by a physically handicapped person to attend the meeting,
directed to the chairperson or director of such board, commission, agency, or authority,
such chairperson or director shall provide a manner by which such person may attend the
meeting at its scheduled site or reschedule the meeting to a site which would be accessible
210
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
to such person.
(2) If an aected handicapped person objects in the written request, nothing contained in
the provisions of this section shall be construed or interpreted to permit the use of human
physical assistance to the physically handicapped in lieu of the construction or use of ramps
or other mechanical devices in order to comply with the provisions of this section.
C. THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (SELECTED PORTIONS ONLY)
CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES
119.01 General state policy on public records.—
(1) It is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal records are open for
personal inspection and copying by any person. Providing access to public records is a
duty of each agency.
(2)(a) Automation of public records must not erode the right of access to those records. As each
agency increases its use of and dependence on electronic recordkeeping, each agency must
provide reasonable public access to records electronically maintained and must ensure that
exempt or condential records are not disclosed except as otherwise permitted by law.
(b) When designing or acquiring an electronic recordkeeping system, an agency must consider
whether such system is capable of providing data in some common format such as, but not
limited to, the American Standard Code for Information Interchange.
(c) An agency may not enter into a contract for the creation or maintenance of a public records
database if that contract impairs the ability of the public to inspect or copy the public
records of the agency, including public records that are online or stored in an electronic
recordkeeping system used by the agency.
(d) Subject to the restrictions of copyright and trade secret laws and public records exemptions,
agency use of proprietary software must not diminish the right of the public to inspect and
copy a public record.
(e) Providing access to public records by remote electronic means is an additional method of
access that agencies should strive to provide to the extent feasible. If an agency provides
access to public records by remote electronic means, such access should be provided in the
most cost-eective and ecient manner available to the agency providing the information.
(f) Each agency that maintains a public record in an electronic recordkeeping system shall
provide to any person, pursuant to this chapter, a copy of any public record in that system
which is not exempted by law from public disclosure. An agency must provide a copy of
the record in the medium requested if the agency maintains the record in that medium,
and the agency may charge a fee in accordance with this chapter. For the purpose of
satisfying a public records request, the fee to be charged by an agency if it elects to provide
a copy of a public record in a medium not routinely used by the agency, or if it elects to
compile information not routinely developed or maintained by the agency or that requires
a substantial amount of manipulation or programming, must be in accordance with s.
119.07(4).
(3) If public funds are expended by an agency in payment of dues or membership contributions
for any person, corporation, foundation, trust, association, group, or other organization, all
the nancial, business, and membership records of that person, corporation, foundation,
trust, association, group, or other organization which pertain to the public agency are
public records and subject to the provisions of s. 119.07.
119.011 Denitions.— As used in this chapter, the term:
(1) “Actual cost of duplication” means the cost of the material and supplies used to duplicate
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
211
the public record, but does not include labor cost or overhead cost associated with such
duplication.
(2) “Agency” means any state, county, district, authority, or municipal ocer, department,
division, board, bureau, commission, or other separate unit of government created or
established by law including, for the purposes of this chapter, the Commission on Ethics,
the Public Service Commission, and the Oce of Public Counsel, and any other public or
private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or business entity acting on behalf of any
public agency.
(3)(a) “Criminal intelligence information” means information with respect to an identiable
person or group of persons collected by a criminal justice agency in an eort to anticipate,
prevent, or monitor possible criminal activity.
(b) “Criminal investigative information” means information with respect to an identiable
person or group of persons compiled by a criminal justice agency in the course of
conducting a criminal investigation of a specic act or omission, including, but not limited
to, information derived from laboratory tests, reports of investigators or informants, or any
type of surveillance.
(c) “Criminal intelligence information” and “criminal investigative information” shall not
include:
1. e time, date, location, and nature of a reported crime.
2. e name, sex, age, and address of a person arrested or of the victim of a crime except as
provided in s. 119.071(2)(h) or (o).
3. e time, date, and location of the incident and of the arrest.
4. e crime charged.
5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested,
except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h) or (m), and, except that the court in a criminal
case may order that certain information required by law or agency rule to be given to the
person arrested be maintained in a condential manner and exempt from the provisions of
s. 119.07(1) until released at trial if it is found that the release of such information would:
a. Be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or would jeopardize the safety of
such victim or witness; and
b. Impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant.
6. Informations and indictments except as provided in s. 905.26.
(d) e word “active” shall have the following meaning:
1. Criminal intelligence information shall be considered “active” as long as it is related to
intelligence gathering conducted with a reasonable, good faith belief that it will lead to
detection of ongoing or reasonably anticipated criminal activities.
2. Criminal investigative information shall be considered “active” as long as it is related to
an ongoing investigation which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of
securing an arrest or prosecution in the foreseeable future.
In addition, criminal intelligence and criminal investigative information shall be considered
“active” while such information is directly related to pending prosecutions or appeals. e
word “active” shall not apply to information in cases which are barred from prosecution
under the provisions of s. 775.15 or other statute of limitation.
(4) “Criminal justice agency” means:
(a) Any law enforcement agency, court, or prosecutor;
(b) Any other agency charged by law with criminal law enforcement duties;
(c) Any agency having custody of criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information for the purpose of assisting such law enforcement agencies in the conduct of
212
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
active criminal investigation or prosecution or for the purpose of litigating civil actions
under the Racketeer Inuenced and Corrupt Organization Act, during the time that such
agencies are in possession of criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information pursuant to their criminal law enforcement duties; or
(d) e Department of Corrections.
(5) “Custodian of public records” means the elected or appointed state, county, or municipal
ocer charged with the responsibility of maintaining the oce having public records, or
his or her designee.
(6) “Data processing software” means the programs and routines used to employ and control the
capabilities of data processing hardware, including, but not limited to, operating systems,
compilers, assemblers, utilities, library routines, maintenance routines, applications, and
computer networking programs.
(7) “Duplicated copies” means new copies produced by duplicating, as dened in s. 283.30.
(8) “Exemption” means a provision of general law which provides that a specied record or
meeting, or portion thereof, is not subject to the access requirements of s. 119.07(1), s.
286.011, or s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(9) “Information technology resources” means data processing hardware and software and
services, communications, supplies, personnel, facility resources, maintenance, and
training.
(10) “Paratransit” has the same meaning as provided in s. 427.011.
(11) “Proprietary software” means data processing software that is protected by copyright or
trade secret laws.
(12) “Public records” means all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs,
lms, sound recordings, data processing software, or other material, regardless of the
physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission, made or received pursuant to law
or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of ocial business by any agency.
(13) “Redact” means to conceal from a copy of an original public record, or to conceal from an
electronic image that is available for public viewing, that portion of the record containing
exempt or condential information.
(14) “Sensitive,” for purposes of dening agency-produced software that is sensitive, means only
those portions of data processing software, including the specications and documentation,
which are used to:
(a) Collect, process, store, and retrieve information that is exempt from s. 119.07(1);
(b) Collect, process, store, and retrieve nancial management information of the agency, such
as payroll and accounting records; or
(c) Control and direct access authorizations and security measures for automated systems.
(15) “Utility” means a person or entity that provides electricity, natural gas, telecommunications,
water, chilled water, reuse water, or wastewater.
119.021 Custodial requirements; maintenance, preservation, and retention of
public records.—
(1) Public records shall be maintained and preserved as follows:
(a) All public records should be kept in the buildings in which they are ordinarily used.
(b) Insofar as practicable, a custodian of public records of vital, permanent, or archival
records shall keep them in reproof and waterproof safes, vaults, or rooms tted with
noncombustible materials and in such arrangement as to be easily accessible for convenient
use.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
213
(c)1. Record books should be copied or repaired, renovated, or rebound if worn, mutilated,
damaged, or dicult to read.
2. Whenever any state, county, or municipal records are in need of repair, restoration, or
rebinding, the head of the concerned state agency, department, board, or commission; the
board of county commissioners of such county; or the governing body of such municipality
may authorize that such records be removed from the building or oce in which such
records are ordinarily kept for the length of time required to repair, restore, or rebind them.
3. Any public ocial who causes a record book to be copied shall attest and certify under oath
that the copy is an accurate copy of the original book. e copy shall then have the force
and eect of the original.
(2)(a) e Division of Library and Information Services of the Department of State shall adopt
rules to establish retention schedules and a disposal process for public records.
(b) Each agency shall comply with the rules establishing retention schedules and disposal
processes for public records which are adopted by the records and information management
program of the division.
(c) Each public ocial shall systematically dispose of records no longer needed, subject to the
consent of the records and information management program of the division in accordance
with s. 257.36.
(d) e division may ascertain the condition of public records and shall give advice and
assistance to public ocials to solve problems related to the preservation, creation, ling,
and public accessibility of public records in their custody. Public ocials shall assist the
division by preparing an inclusive inventory of categories of public records in their custody.
e division shall establish a time period for the retention or disposal of each series of
records. Upon the completion of the inventory and schedule, the division shall, subject to
the availability of necessary space, sta, and other facilities for such purposes, make space
available in its records center for the ling of semicurrent records so scheduled and in its
archives for noncurrent records of permanent value, and shall render such other assistance
as needed, including the microlming of records so scheduled.
(3) Agency nal orders rendered before July 1, 2015, that were indexed or listed pursuant to
s. 120.53, and agency nal orders rendered on or after July 1, 2015, that must be listed or
copies of which must be transmitted to the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant
to s. 120.53, have continuing legal signicance; therefore, notwithstanding any other
provision of this chapter or any provision of chapter 257, each agency shall permanently
maintain records of such orders pursuant to the applicable rules of the Department of
State.
(4)(a) Whoever has custody of any public records shall deliver, at the expiration of his or her
term of oce, to his or her successor or, if there be none, to the records and information
management program of the Division of Library and Information Services of the
Department of State, all public records kept or received by him or her in the transaction of
ocial business.
(b) Whoever is entitled to custody of public records shall demand them from any person
having illegal possession of them, who must forthwith deliver the same to him or her. Any
person unlawfully possessing public records must within 10 days deliver such records to
the lawful custodian of public records unless just cause exists for failing to deliver such
records.
119.035 Ocers-elect.—
(1) It is the policy of this state that the provisions of this chapter apply to ocers-elect upon
their election to public oce. Such ocers-elect shall adopt and implement reasonable
measures to ensure compliance with the public records obligations set forth in this chapter.
214
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(2) Public records of an ocer-elect shall be maintained in accordance with the policies and
procedures of the public oce to which the ocer has been elected.
(3) If an ocer-elect, individually or as part of a transition process, creates or uses an online or
electronic communication or recordkeeping system, all public records maintained on such
system shall be preserved so as not to impair the ability of the public to inspect or copy
such public records.
(4) Upon taking the oath of oce, the ocer-elect shall, as soon as practicable, deliver to the
person or persons responsible for records and information management in such oce all
public records kept or received in the transaction of ocial business during the period
following election to public oce.
(5) As used in this section, the term “ocer-elect” means the Governor, the Lieutenant
Governor, the Attorney General, the Chief Financial Ocer, and the Commissioner of
Agriculture.
119.07 Inspection and copying of records; photographing public records;
fees; exemptions.—
(1)(a) Every person who has custody of a public record shall permit the record to be inspected and
copied by any person desiring to do so, at any reasonable time, under reasonable conditions,
and under supervision by the custodian of the public records.
(b) A custodian of public records or a person having custody of public records may designate
another ocer or employee of the agency to permit the inspection and copying of public
records, but must disclose the identity of the designee to the person requesting to inspect or
copy public records.
(c) A custodian of public records and his or her designee must acknowledge requests to inspect
or copy records promptly and respond to such requests in good faith. A good faith response
includes making reasonable eorts to determine from other ocers or employees within
the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which the record can be
accessed.
(d) A person who has custody of a public record who asserts that an exemption applies to a
part of such record shall redact that portion of the record to which an exemption has been
asserted and validly applies, and such person shall produce the remainder of such record for
inspection and copying.
(e) If the person who has custody of a public record contends that all or part of the record is
exempt from inspection and copying, he or she shall state the basis of the exemption that he
or she contends is applicable to the record, including the statutory citation to an exemption
created or aorded by statute.
(f) If requested by the person seeking to inspect or copy the record, the custodian of public
records shall state in writing and with particularity the reasons for the conclusion that the
record is exempt or condential.
(g) In any civil action in which an exemption to this section is asserted, if the exemption is
alleged to exist under or by virtue of s. 119.071(1)(d) or (f ), (2)(d),(e), or (f), or (4)(c), the
public record or part thereof in question shall be submitted to the court for an inspection
in camera. If an exemption is alleged to exist under or by virtue of s. 119.071(2)(c), an
inspection in camera is discretionary with the court. If the court nds that the asserted
exemption is not applicable, it shall order the public record or part thereof in question to
be immediately produced for inspection or copying as requested by the person seeking such
access.
(h) Even if an assertion is made by the custodian of public records that a requested record is not
a public record subject to public inspection or copying under this subsection, the requested
record shall, nevertheless, not be disposed of for a period of 30 days after the date on which
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
215
a written request to inspect or copy the record was served on or otherwise made to the
custodian of public records by the person seeking access to the record. If a civil action is
instituted within the 30-day period to enforce the provisions of this section with respect to
the requested record, the custodian of public records may not dispose of the record except
by order of a court of competent jurisdiction after notice to all aected parties.
(i) e absence of a civil action instituted for the purpose stated in paragraph (g) does not
relieve the custodian of public records of the duty to maintain the record as a public record
if the record is in fact a public record subject to public inspection and copying under this
subsection and does not otherwise excuse or exonerate the custodian of public records from
any unauthorized or unlawful disposition of such record.
(2)(a) As an additional means of inspecting or copying public records, a custodian of public
records may provide access to public records by remote electronic means, provided exempt
or condential information is not disclosed.
(b) e custodian of public records shall provide safeguards to protect the contents of
public records from unauthorized remote electronic access or alteration and to prevent
the disclosure or modication of those portions of public records which are exempt or
condential from subsection (1) or s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(c) Unless otherwise required by law, the custodian of public records may charge a fee for
remote electronic access, granted under a contractual arrangement with a user, which
fee may include the direct and indirect costs of providing such access. Fees for remote
electronic access provided to the general public shall be in accordance with the provisions
of this section.
(3)(a) Any person shall have the right of access to public records for the purpose of making
photographs of the record while such record is in the possession, custody, and control of
the custodian of public records.
(b) is subsection applies to the making of photographs in the conventional sense by use of a
camera device to capture images of public records but excludes the duplication of microlm
in the possession of the clerk of the circuit court where a copy of the microlm may be
made available by the clerk.
(c) Photographing public records shall be done under the supervision of the custodian of
public records, who may adopt and enforce reasonable rules governing the photographing
of such records.
(d) Photographing of public records shall be done in the room where the public records
are kept. If, in the judgment of the custodian of public records, this is impossible or
impracticable, photographing shall be done in another room or place, as nearly adjacent as
possible to the room where the public records are kept, to be determined by the custodian
of public records. Where provision of another room or place for photographing is required,
the expense of providing the same shall be paid by the person desiring to photograph the
public record pursuant to paragraph (4)(e).
(4) e custodian of public records shall furnish a copy or a certied copy of the record upon
payment of the fee prescribed by law. If a fee is not prescribed by law, the following fees are
authorized:
(a)1. Up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for duplicated copies of not more than 14 inches by 8½
inches;
2. No more than an additional 5 cents for each two-sided copy; and
3. For all other copies, the actual cost of duplication of the public record.
(b) e charge for copies of county maps or aerial photographs supplied by county constitutional
ocers may also include a reasonable charge for the labor and overhead associated with
their duplication.
216
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(c) An agency may charge up to $1 per copy for a certied copy of a public record.
(d) If the nature or volume of public records requested to be inspected or copied pursuant to
this subsection is such as to require extensive use of information technology resources or
extensive clerical or supervisory assistance by personnel of the agency involved, or both, the
agency may charge, in addition to the actual cost of duplication, a special service charge,
which shall be reasonable and shall be based on the cost incurred for such extensive use of
information technology resources or the labor cost of the personnel providing the service
that is actually incurred by the agency or attributable to the agency for the clerical and
supervisory assistance required, or both.
(e)1. Where provision of another room or place is necessary to photograph public records, the
expense of providing the same shall be paid by the person desiring to photograph the
public records.
2. e custodian of public records may charge the person making the photographs for
supervision services at a rate of compensation to be agreed upon by the person desiring to
make the photographs and the custodian of public records. If they fail to agree as to the
appropriate charge, the charge shall be determined by the custodian of public records.
(5) When ballots are produced under this section for inspection or examination, no persons
other than the supervisor of elections or the supervisor’s employees shall touch the ballots.
If the ballots are being examined before the end of the contest period in s. 102.168, the
supervisor of elections shall make a reasonable eort to notify all candidates by telephone
or otherwise of the time and place of the inspection or examination. All such candidates, or
their representatives, shall be allowed to be present during the inspection or examination.
(6) An exemption contained in this chapter or in any other general or special law shall not limit
the access of the Auditor General, the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government
Accountability, or any state, county, municipal, university, board of community college,
school district, or special district internal auditor to public records when such person states
in writing that such records are needed for a properly authorized audit, examination, or
investigation. Such person shall maintain the exempt or condential status of that public
record and shall be subject to the same penalties as the custodian of that record for public
disclosure of such record.
(7) An exemption from this section does not imply an exemption from s. 286.011. e
exemption from s. 286.011 must be expressly provided.
(8) e provisions of this section are not intended to expand or limit the provisions of Rule
3.220, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding the right and extent of discovery
by the state or by a defendant in a criminal prosecution or in collateral postconviction
proceedings. is section may not be used by any inmate as the basis for failing to timely
litigate any postconviction action.
(9) After receiving a request to inspect or copy a record, an agency may not respond to
that request by ling an action for declaratory relief against the requester to determine
whether the record is a public record as dened by s. 119.011, or the status of the record
as condential or exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1).
119.0701 Contracts; public records.—
(1) For purposes of this section, the term:
(a) “Contractor” means an individual, partnership, corporation, or business entity that enters
into a contract for services with a public agency and is acting on behalf of the public agency
as provided under s. 119.011(2).
(b) “Public agency” means a state, county, district, authority, or municipal ocer, or
department, division, board, bureau, commission, or other separate unit of government
created or established by law.
(2) CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS— In addition to other contract requirements provided
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
217
by law, each public agency contract for services entered into or amended on or after July 1,
2016, must include:
(a) e following statement, in substantially the following form, identifying the contact
information of the public agency’s custodian or public records in at least 14-point boldfaced
type:
IF THE CONTRACTOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION
OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR’S DUTY TO
PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT
THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT (telephone number, e-mail address,
and mailing address).
(b) A provision that requires the contractor to comply with public records laws, specically to:
1. Keep and maintain public records required by the public agency to perform the service.
2. Upon request from the public agency’s custodian of public records, provide the public
agency with a copy of the requested records, or allow the records to be inspected or copied
within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in this chapter or
as otherwise provided by law.
3. Ensure that public records that are exempt or condential and exempt from public records
disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of
the contract term and following completion of the contract if the contractor does not
transfer the records to the public agency.
4. Upon completion of the contract, transfer, at no cost, to the public agency all public
records in possession of the contractor or keep and maintain public records required by the
public agency to perform the service. If the contractor transfers all public records to the
public agency upon completion of the contract, the contractor shall destroy any duplicate
public records that are exempt or condential and exempt from public records disclosure
requirements. If the contractor keeps and maintains public records upon completion of
the contract, the contractor shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public
records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the public agency, upon
request from the public agency’s custodian of public records, in a format that is compatible
with the information technology systems of the public agency.
(3) REQUEST FOR RECORDS; NONCOMPLIANCE. —
(a) A request to inspect or copy public records relating to a public agency’s contract for services
must be made directly to the public agency. If the public agency does not possess the
requested records, the public agency shall immediately notify the contractor of the request,
and the contractor must provide the records to the public agency or allow the records to be
inspected or copied within a reasonable time.
(b) If a contractor does not comply with a public agency’s request for records, the public
agency shall enforce the contract provisions in accordance with the contract.
(c) A contractor who fails to provide the public records to the public agency within a reasonable
time may be subject to penalties under s. 119.10.
(4) CIVIL ACTION. —
(a) If a civil action is led against a contractor to compel production of public records relating
to a public agency’s contract for services, the court shall assess and award against the
contractor the reasonable costs of enforcement, including reasonable attorney fees, if:
1. e court determines that the contractor unlawfully refused to comply with the public
records request within a reasonable time; and
2. At least 8 business days before ling the action, the plainti provided written notice of the
public records request, including a statement that the contractor has not complied with the
request, to the public agency and to the contractor.
218
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(b) A notice complies with subparagraph (a)2., if it is sent to the public agency’s custodian of
public records and to the contractor at the contractor’s address listed on its contract with
the public agency or to the contractor’s registered agent. Such notices must be sent by
common carrier delivery services or by registered, Global Express Guaranteed, or certied
mail, with postage or shipping paid by the sender and with evidence of delivery, which
must be in an electronic format.
(c) A contractor who complies with a public records request within 8 business days after the
notice is sent is not liable for the reasonable costs of enforcement.
NOTE: Due to space limitations, the exemptions from disclosure found in ss.
119.071, 119.0711, 119.0712, 119.0713, 119.0715, and 119.0725, F.S. are
summarized in pages 233-239 of Appendix D. To review the complete text of these
exemptions, please access the Florida Statutes at leg.state..us
119.0714 Court les; court records; ocial records.—
(1) COURT FILES.—Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to exempt from s. 119.07(1)
a public record that was made a part of a court le and that is not specically closed by
order of court, except:
(a) A public record that was prepared by an agency attorney or prepared at the attorney’s
express direction as provided in s. 119.071(1)(d).
(b) Data processing software as provided in s. 119.071(1)(f ).
(c) Any information revealing surveillance techniques or procedures or personnel as provided
in s. 119.071(2)(d).
(d) Any comprehensive inventory of state and local law enforcement resources, and any
comprehensive policies or plans compiled by a criminal justice agency, as provided in s.
119.071(2)(d).
(e) Any information revealing the substance of a confession of a person arrested as provided in
s. 119.071(2)(e).
(f ) Any information revealing the identity of a condential informant or condential source
as provided in s. 119.071(2)(f ).
(g) Any information revealing undercover personnel of any criminal justice agency as provided
in s. 119.071(4)(c).
(h) Criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information that is condential
and exempt as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h) or (m).
(i) Social security numbers as provided in s. 119.071(5)(a).
(j) Bank account numbers and debit, charge, and credit card numbers as provided in s.
119.071(5)(b).
(k)1. A petition, and the contents thereof, for an injunction for protection against domestic
violence, repeat violence, dating violence, sexual violence, stalking, or cyberstalking that is
dismissed without a hearing, dismissed at an ex parte hearing due to failure to state a claim
or lack of jurisdiction, or dismissed for any reason having to do with the suciency of the
petition itself without an injunction being issued on or after July 1, 2017, is exempt from
s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. A petition, and the contents thereof, for an injunction for protection against domestic
violence, repeat violence, dating violence, sexual violence, stalking, or cyberstalking that is
dismissed without a hearing, dismissed at an ex parte hearing due to failure to state a claim
or lack of jurisdiction, or dismissed for any reason having to do with the suciency of the
petition itself without an injunction being issued before July 1, 2017, is exempt from s.
119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution only upon request by an individual
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
219
named in the petition as a respondent. e request must be in the form of a signed,
legibly written request specifying the case name, case number, document hearing, and page
number. e request must be delivered by mail, facsimile, or electronic transmission or in
person to the clerk of court. A fee may not be charged for such request.
3. Any information that can be used to identify a petitioner or respondent in a petition for
an injunction against domestic violence, repeat violence, dating violence, sexual violence,
stalking, or cyberstalking, and any adavits, notice of hearing, and temporary injunction,
is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution
until the respondent has been personally served with a copy of the petition for injunction,
adavits, notice of hearing, and temporary injunction.
(l) Personal identifying information and annuity contract numbers of a payee of a structured
settlement as dened in s. 626.99296(2) and the names of family members, dependents,
and beneciaries of such payee contained within a court le relating to a proceeding for
the approval of the transfer of structured settlement payment rights under s. 626.99296.
Such information shall remain exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State
Constitution during the pendency of the transfer proceeding and for 6 months after the
nal court order approving, or not approving, the transferee’s application. is paragraph
is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and
shall stand repealed on October 2, 2027, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through
reenactment by the Legislature.
(2) COURT RECORDS.—
(a) Until January 1, 2012, if a social security number or a bank account, debit, charge, or
credit card number is included in a court le, such number may be included as part of the
court record available for public inspection and copying unless redaction is requested by
the holder of such number or by the holder’s attorney or legal guardian.
(b) A request for redaction must be a signed, legibly written request specifying the case name,
case number, document heading, and page number. e request must be delivered by
mail, facsimile, electronic transmission, or in person to the clerk of the court. e clerk of
the court does not have a duty to inquire beyond the written request to verify the identity
of a person requesting redaction.
(c) A fee may not be charged for the redaction of a social security number or a bank account,
debit, charge, or credit card number pursuant to such request.
(d) e clerk of the court has no liability for the inadvertent release of social security numbers,
or bank account, debit, charge, or credit card numbers, unknown to the clerk of the court
in court records led on or before January 1, 2012.
(e)1. e clerk of the court must keep social security numbers condential and exempt as
provided for in s. 119.071(5)(a), and bank account, debit, charge, and credit card numbers
exempt as provided for in s. 119.071(5)(b), without any person having to request redaction.
2. Section 119.071(5)(a)7. and 8. does not apply to the clerks of the court with respect to
court records.
(f) A request for maintenance of a public records exemption in s. 119.071(4)(d)2. made
pursuant to s. 119.071(4)(d)3. must specify the document type, name, identication
number, and page number of the court record that contains the exempt information.
(g) e clerk of the court is not liable for the release of information that is required by the
Florida Rules of Judicial Administration to be identied by the ler as condential if the
ler fails to make the required identication of the condential information to the clerk of
the court.
(3) OFFICIAL RECORDS.—
A person who prepares or les a record for recording in the ocial records as provided
220
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
in chapter 28 may not include in that record a social security number or a bank account, debit,
charge, or credit card number unless otherwise expressly required by law.
(a) If a social security number or a bank account, debit, charge, or credit card number is
included in an ocial record, such number may be made available as part of the ocial
records available for public inspection and copying unless redaction is requested by the
holder of such number or by the holder’s attorney or legal guardian.
1. If such record is in electronic format, on January 1, 2011, and thereafter, the county
recorder must use his or her best eort, as provided in paragraph (d), to keep social
security numbers condential and exempt as provided for in s. 119.071(5)(a), and to keep
complete bank account, debit, charge, and credit card numbers exempt as provided for in
s. 119.071(5)(b), without any person having to request redaction.
2. Section 119.071(5)(a)7. and 8. does not apply to the county recorder with respect to
ocial records.
(b) e holder of a social security number or a bank account, debit, charge, or credit card
number, or the holder’s attorney or legal guardian, may request that a county recorder
redact from an image or copy of an ocial record placed on a county recorder’s publicly
available Internet website or on a publicly available Internet website used by a county
recorder to display public records, or otherwise made electronically available to the public,
his or her social security number or bank account, debit, charge, or credit card number
contained in that ocial record.
1. A request for redaction must be a signed, legibly written request and must be delivered by
mail, facsimile, electronic transmission, or in person to the county recorder. e request
must specify the identication page number of the record that contains the number to be
redacted.
2. e county recorder does not have a duty to inquire beyond the written request to verify
the identity of a person requesting redaction.
3. A fee may not be charged for redacting a social security number or a bank account, debit,
charge, or credit card number.
(c) A county recorder shall immediately and conspicuously post signs throughout his or her
oces for public viewing, and shall immediately and conspicuously post on any Internet
website or remote electronic site made available by the county recorder and used for the
ordering or display of ocial records or images or copies of ocial records, a notice
stating, in substantially similar form, the following:
1. On or after October 1, 2002, any person preparing or ling a record for recordation in the
ocial records may not include a social security number or a bank account, debit, charge,
or credit card number in such document unless required by law.
2. Any person has a right to request a county recorder to remove from an image or copy of
an ocial record placed on a county recorder’s publicly available Internet website or on a
publicly available Internet website used by a county recorder to display public records, or
otherwise made electronically available to the general public, any social security number
contained in an ocial record. Such request must be made in writing and delivered by
mail, facsimile, or electronic transmission, or delivered in person, to the county recorder.
e request must specify the identication page number that contains the social security
number to be redacted. A fee may not be charged for the redaction of a social security
number pursuant to such a request.
(d) If the county recorder accepts or stores ocial records in an electronic format, the county
recorder must use his or her best eorts to redact all social security numbers and bank
account, debit, charge, or credit card numbers from electronic copies of the ocial
record. e use of an automated program for redaction is deemed to be the best eort
in performing the redaction and is deemed in compliance with the requirements of this
subsection.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
221
(e) e county recorder is not liable for the inadvertent release of social security numbers, or
bank account, debit, charge, or credit card numbers, led with the county recorder.
(f) A request for maintenance of a public records exemption in s. 119.071(4)(d)2. made
pursuant to s. 119.071(4)(d)3. must specify the document type, name, identication
number, and page number of the ocial record that contains the exempt information.
119.084 Copyright of data processing software created by governmental agencies;
sale price and licensing fee.—
(1)
As used in this section, “agency” has the same meaning as in s. 119.011(2), except that the
term does not include any private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or business
entity.
(2) An agency is authorized to acquire and hold a copyright for data processing software
created by the agency and to enforce its rights pertaining to such copyright, provided that
the agency complies with the requirements of this subsection.
(a) An agency that has acquired a copyright for data processing software created by the agency
may sell or license the copyrighted data processing software to any public agency or private
person. e agency may establish a price for the sale and a licensing fee for the use of such
data processing software that may be based on market considerations. However, the prices
or fees for the sale or licensing of copyrighted data processing software to an individual
or entity solely for application to information maintained or generated by the agency
that created the copyrighted data processing software shall be determined pursuant to s.
119.07(4).
(b) Proceeds from the sale or licensing of copyrighted data processing software shall be
deposited by the agency into a trust fund for the agency’s appropriate use for authorized
purposes. Counties, municipalities, and other political subdivisions of the state may
designate how such sale and licensing proceeds are to be used.
(c) e provisions of this subsection are supplemental to, and shall not supplant or repeal, any
other provision of law that authorizes an agency to acquire and hold copyrights.
119.092 Registration by federal employer’s registration number.—
Each state agency which registers or licenses corporations, partnerships, or other business
entities shall include, by July 1, 1978, within its numbering system, the federal employer’s
identication number of each corporation, partnership, or other business entity registered or
licensed by it. Any state agency may maintain a dual numbering system in which the federal
employer’s identication number or the state agency’s own number is the primary identication
number; however, the records of such state agency shall be designed in such a way that the record
of any business entity is subject to direct location by the federal employer’s identication number.
e Department of State shall keep a registry of federal employer’s identication numbers of all
business entities, registered with the Division of Corporations, which registry of numbers may
be used by all state agencies.
119.10 Violation of chapter; penalties.—
(1) Any public ocer who:
(a) Violates any provision of this chapter commits a noncriminal infraction, punishable by
ne not exceeding $500.
(b) Knowingly violates the provisions of s. 119.07(1) is subject to suspension and removal or
impeachment and, in addition, commits a misdemeanor of the rst degree, punishable as
provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) Any person who willfully and knowingly violates:
222
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(a) Any of the provisions of this chapter commits a misdemeanor of the rst degree, punishable
as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(b) Section 119.105 commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.
775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
119.105 Protection of victims of crimes or accidents.—
Police reports are public records except as otherwise made exempt or condential. Every
person is allowed to examine nonexempt or noncondential police reports. A person who comes
into possession of exempt or condential information contained in police reports may not use
that information for any commercial solicitation of the victims or relatives of the victims of the
reported crimes or accidents and may not knowingly disclose such information to any third
party for the purpose of such solicitation during the period of time that information remains
exempt or condential. is section does not prohibit the publication of such information to
the general public by any news media legally entitled to possess that information or the use of
such information for any other data collection or analysis purposes by those entitled to possess
that information.
119.11 Accelerated hearing; immediate compliance.—
(1) Whenever an action is led to enforce the provisions of this chapter, the court shall set an
immediate hearing, giving the case priority over other pending cases.
(2) Whenever a court orders an agency to open its records for inspection in accordance with
this chapter, the agency shall comply with such order within 48 hours, unless otherwise
provided by the court issuing such order, or unless the appellate court issues a stay order
within such 48-hour period.
(3) A stay order shall not be issued unless the court determines that there is a substantial
probability that opening the records for inspection will result in signicant damage.
(4) Upon service of a complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim in a civil action brought to
enforce the provisions of this chapter, the custodian of the public record that is the subject
matter of such civil action shall not transfer custody, alter, destroy, or otherwise dispose of
the public record sought to be inspected and examined, notwithstanding the applicability
of an exemption or the assertion that the requested record is not a public record subject
to inspection and examination under s. 119.07(1), until the court directs otherwise. e
person who has custody of such public record may, however, at any time permit inspection
of the requested record as provided in s. 119.07(1) and other provisions of law.
119.12 Attorney fees.—
(1) If a civil action is led against an agency to enforce the provisions of this chapter, the court
shall assess and award the reasonable costs of enforcement, including reasonable attorney
fees, against the responsible agency if the court determines that:
(a) e agency unlawfully refused to permit a public record to be inspected or copied; and
(b) e complainant provides written notice identifying the public record request to the
agency’s custodian of public records at least 5 business days before ling the civil action,
except as provided under subsection (2). e notice period begins on the day the written
notice of the request is received by the custodian of public records, excluding Saturday,
Sunday, and legal holidays, and runs until 5 business days have elapsed.
(2) e complainant is not required to provide written notice of the public record request to
the agency’s custodian of public records as provided in paragraph (1)(b) if the agency does
not prominently post the contact information for the agency’s custodian of public records
in the agency’s primary administrative building in which public records are routinely
created, sent, received, maintained, and requested and on the agency’s website, if the
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
223
agency has a website.
(3) e court shall determine whether the complainant requested to inspect or copy a public
record or participated in the civil action for an improper purpose. If the court determines
there was an improper purpose, the court may not assess and award the reasonable costs of
enforcement, including reasonable attorney fees, to the complainant, and shall assess and
award against the complainant and to the agency the reasonable costs, including reasonable
attorney fees, incurred by the agency in responding to the civil action. For purposes of
this subsection, the term “improper purpose” means a request to inspect or copy a public
record or to participate in the civil action primarily to cause a violation of this chapter or
for a frivolous purpose.
(4) is section does not create a private right of action authorizing the award of monetary
damages for a person who brings an action to enforce the provisions of this chapter.
Payments by the responsible agency may include only the reasonable costs of enforcement,
including reasonable attorney fees, directly attributable to a civil action brought to enforce
the provisions of this chapter.
119.15 Legislative review of exemptions from public meeting and public records
requirements.—
(1) is section may be cited as the “Open Government Sunset Review Act.”
(2) is section provides for the review and repeal or reenactment of an exemption from s. 24,
Art. I of the State Constitution and s. 119.07(1) or s. 286.011. is act does not apply to
an exemption that:
(a) Is required by federal law; or
(b) Applies solely to the Legislature or the State Court System.
(3) In the 5th year after enactment of a new exemption or substantial amendment of an
existing exemption, the exemption shall be repealed on October 2nd of the 5th year, unless
the Legislature acts to reenact the exemption.
(4)(a) A law that enacts a new exemption or substantially amends an existing exemption must
state that the record or meeting is:
1. Exempt from s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution;
2. Exempt from s. 119.07(1) or s. 286.011; and
3. Repealed at the end of 5 years and that the exemption must be reviewed by the Legislature
before the scheduled repeal date.
(b) For purposes of this section, an exemption is substantially amended if the amendment
expands the scope of the exemption to include more records or information or to include
meetings as well as records. An exemption is not substantially amended if the amendment
narrows the scope of the exemption.
(c) is section is not intended to repeal an exemption that has been amended following
legislative review before the scheduled repeal of the exemption if the exemption is not
substantially amended as a result of the review.
(5)(a) By June 1 in the year before the repeal of an exemption under this section, the Oce of
Legislative Services shall certify to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House
of Representatives the language and statutory citation of each exemption scheduled for
repeal the following year.
(b) An exemption that is not identied and certied to the President of the Senate and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives is not subject to legislative review and repeal under
this section. If the oce fails to certify an exemption that it subsequently determines should
have been certied, it shall include the exemption in the following year’s certication after
that determination.
224
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
(6)(a) As part of the review process, the Legislature shall consider the following:
1. What specic records or meetings are aected by the exemption?
2. Whom does the exemption uniquely aect, as opposed to the general public?
3. What is the identiable public purpose or goal of the exemption?
4. Can the information contained in the records or discussed in the meeting be readily
obtained by alternative means? If so, how?
5. Is the record or meeting protected by another exemption?
6. Are there multiple exemptions for the same type of record or meeting that it would be
appropriate to merge?
(b) An exemption may be created, revised, or maintained only if it serves an identiable
public purpose, and the exemption may be no broader than is necessary to meet the public
purpose it serves. An identiable public purpose is served if the exemption meets one of
the following purposes and the Legislature nds that the purpose is suciently compelling
to override the strong public policy of open government and cannot be accomplished
without the exemption:
1. Allows the state or its political subdivisions to eectively and eciently administer a
governmental program, which administration would be signicantly impaired without the
exemption;
2. Protects information of a sensitive personal nature concerning individuals, the release of
which information would be defamatory to such individuals or cause unwarranted damage
to the good name or reputation of such individuals or would jeopardize the safety of
such individuals. However, in exemptions under this subparagraph, only information that
would identify the individuals may be exempted; or
3. Protects information of a condential nature concerning entities, including, but not limited
to, a formula, pattern, device, combination of devices, or compilation of information
which is used to protect or further a business advantage over those who do not know or use
it, the disclosure of which information would injure the aected entity in the marketplace.
(7) Records made before the date of a repeal of an exemption under this section may not
be made public unless otherwise provided by law. In deciding whether the records shall
be made public, the Legislature shall consider whether the damage or loss to persons or
entities uniquely aected by the exemption of the type specied in subparagraph (6)(b)2.
or subparagraph (6)(b)3. would occur if the records were made public.
(8)
Notwithstanding s. 768.28 or any other law, neither the state or its political subdivisions nor any
other public body shall be made party to any suit in any court or incur any liability for the repeal
or revival and reenactment of an exemption under this section. e failure of the Legislature to
comply strictly with this section does not invalidate an otherwise valid reenactment.
D. EXEMPT AND CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS AND MEETINGS EXEMPTION
SUMMARIES.
It is recommended that these summaries be used as a reference only—interested parties
should refer to the full text in the Florida Statutes before drawing legal conclusions.
Section 11.0431(2), F.S. – e text of s. 11.0431, F.S., relating to exemptions from
disclosure for legislative records, is set forth in Appendix E.
Section 11.045(5)(b), F.S. – e legislative committee responsible for ethical conduct of
lobbyists shall make sucient deletions in advisory opinions issued pursuant to this subsection
to prevent disclosing the identity of persons in the decisions or opinions.
Section 11.26(1), F.S. – Subject to s. 11.0431, legislative employees may not reveal to
anyone outside the area of their direct responsibility the contents or nature of any request for
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
225
services made by a legislator except with the consent of the member making the request.
Section 11.45(3)(i), F.S. – e identity of a donor or prospective donor to Enterprise
Florida, Inc., who desires to remain anonymous is condential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 11.45(3)(j), F.S. – e identity of a donor or prospective donor to the capital
development board who desires to remain anonymous is condential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 11.45(4)(c), F.S. – Audit reports prepared by the Auditor General become
public records when nal. Audit workpapers and notes are not public records; however, those
materials necessary to support the computations in the nal audit report may be made available
by majority vote of the Legislative Auditing Committee after a public hearing showing proper
cause.
Section 11.51(4), F.S. -- Work papers held by the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and
Government Accountability (OPPAGA) which relate to an authorized project or a research
product are exempt.
Section 14.28, F.S. – All records developed or received by a state entity relating to a Board
of Executive Clemency investigation are condential and exempt from disclosure; however, such
records may be released upon the approval of the Governor.
Section 15.07, F.S. – e journal of the executive session of the Senate shall be kept free
from inspection or disclosure except upon order of the Senate or court of competent jurisdiction.
Section 16.716(1)(2), F.S. – Any information obtained by the Florida Gaming Control
Commission which is exempt or condential shall retain its exempt or condential status. e
information may be released by the commission to a governmental entity under the conditions
prescribed in the exemption. Any portion of a commission meeting during which exempt or
condential information is discussed is exempt provided certain requirements are met.
Section 17.0401, F.S. – Except as otherwise provided by this section, information
relative to an investigation by the Chief Financial Ocer pursuant to s. 17.04 is condential
and exempt from disclosure until the investigation is complete or ceases to be active, or if the
Chief Financial Ocer submits such information to a law enforcement or prosecutorial agency,
until that agency’s investigation is complete or ceases to be active as that term is dened in the
section.
Section 17.076(5), F.S. – All direct deposit records made prior to October 1, 1986, are
exempt from s. 119.07(1). With respect to direct deposit records made on or after October
1, 1986, the names of the authorized nancial institutions and the account numbers of the
beneciaries, as dened in the section, are condential and exempt.
Section 17.325(3), F.S. – A caller on the governmental eciency hotline established by
the Chief Financial Ocer under this section may remain anonymous, and, if the caller provides
his or her name, the name is condential.
Section 20.055(6)(b), F.S. – Inspector general audit workpapers and reports are public
records to the extent that they do not include information which has been made condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1). However, when the inspector general or a member of the sta
receives from an individual a complaint or information that falls within the denition provided
in s. 112.3187(5), the name or identity of the individual shall not be disclosed to anyone else
without the individual’s written consent, unless the inspector general determines that such
disclosure is unavoidable during the course of the audit or investigation.
226
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 24.1051(1), F.S. – Specied information, including records relating to security,
lottery games and tickets, background checks, and nonpublic nancial information about an
entity that is provided in connection with nancial responsibility review by the Department of
the Lottery, is condential and exempt.
Section 24.1051(2), F.S. – e street address and telephone number of a winner are
condential and exempt from disclosure, unless the winner consents to the release of such
information, or as provided in cited statutes.
Section 24.1051(3), F.S. – e name of a winner of a prize valued at $250,000 or more is
condential and exempt from disclosure for 90 days from the date the prize is claimed unless the
winner consents to the release of his or her name or as provided for in cited statutes.
Section 24.108(7)(b), F.S. – e portion of the Lottery Department’s security report
that contains specic recommendations is condential and exempt from disclosure and may be
released only as authorized in the subsection.
Section 27.151, F.S. – An executive order assigning or exchanging state attorneys pursuant
to s. 27.14 or s. 27.15, if designated by the Governor to be condential, is condential and exempt
from disclosure. e Governor may make public any such executive order by a subsequent
executive order and at the expiration of a condential executive order or any extensions thereof,
the executive order and all associated orders and reports shall be open to the public pursuant to
Ch. 119 unless the information contained in the executive order is condential pursuant to cited
laws.
Section 28.222(3)(g), F.S. – Certied copies of death certicates authorized for issuance
by the Department of Health which exclude information made condential under s. 382.008
and certied death certicates issued by another state shall be recorded by the clerk of circuit
court.
Section 28.2221(5), F.S. – A county recorder may not place on a publicly available
Internet website for general public display information made exempt from inspection or copying
under s. 119.071 or a military discharge; death certicate; or court records relating to matters or
cases governed by Florida rules relating to family law, juvenile procedure, or probate.
Section 39.00145(4), F.S. – Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all state and
local agencies and programs that provide services to children or that are responsible for a child’s
safety, including the listed agencies, and any provider contracting with such agencies, may share
with each other condential records or information if the records or information are reasonably
necessary to ensure access to appropriate services for the child. However, records or information
made condential by federal law may not be shared. Also, this subsection does not apply to
information concerning clients and records of certied domestic violence centers which are
condential under s. 39.908 and privileged under s. 90.5036.
Section 39.0132(3), F.S. – e clerk shall keep ocial records required by this chapter
separate from other court records. e records may be inspected only upon court order by
persons deemed to have a proper interest therein, except that, subject to the provisions of s.
63.162, a child and the parents of the child and their attorneys, guardian ad litem, criminal
conict and civil regional counsels, law enforcement agencies, the Department of Children and
Families and its designees shall have a right to inspect and copy records pertaining to the child.
Section 39.0132(4)(a)1., F.S. -- All information obtained pursuant to this part in the
discharge of ocial duty by any of the ocials specied in the subsection is condential and may
not be disclosed to anyone other than persons entitled to receive such information under Ch. 39
or upon court order.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
227
Section 39.0132(4)(a)2., F.S. – e following information held by a guardian ad litem
is condential and exempt: medical, mental health, substance abuse, child care, education, law
enforcement, court, social services, and nancial records; and any other information maintained
by a guardian ad litem which is identied as condential information under Ch. 39, F.S. Such
condential and exempt information may not be disclosed to anyone except as authorized in the
exemption.
Section 39.101(3)(b), F.S. – e Department of Children and Families shall maintain the
condentiality of the telephone number, or Internet protocol (IP) address from which the report
was received by the central abuse hotline which is included in the abuse report pursuant to this
subsection in the same manner as given to the identity of the reporter pursuant to s. 39.202.
Section 39.202(1), F.S. – All records held by the Department of Children and Families
concerning reports of child abandonment, abuse or neglect including reports made to the central
abuse hotline and all records generated as a result of such reports are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be disclosed except as specically authorized by this chapter.
Such exemption from s. 119.07(1) applies to information in possession of those entities granted
access pursuant to this section.
Section 39.202(2)(o), F.S. – Access to records concerning reports of child abuse,
abandonment, or neglect shall be granted to any person in the event of the death of a child
determined to be a result of abuse, abandonment, or neglect. Information identifying the person
reporting abuse, abandonment, or neglect shall not be released, nor shall any information
otherwise made condential or exempt by law.
Section 39.202(5), F.S. – e name of, or other identifying information with respect to,
any person reporting child abuse, abandonment, or neglect shall not be released to any person
except as authorized in the subsection, without the written consent of the reporter.
Section 39.202(6), F.S. – All records and reports of the Child Protection Team of the
Department of Health are condential and exempt from ss. 119.07(1) and 456.057, and shall
not be disclosed, except as provided in the subsection.
Section 39.301(18), F.S. – When the initial interview with the child in a child protective
investigation or criminal investigation is conducted at school in the presence of school sta,
information received during the interview or from any other source regarding the alleged abuse or
neglect of the child shall be condential and exempt, except as otherwise provided by court order.
Section 39.507(2), F.S. – Dependency adjudicatory hearings are open to the public,
unless by special order the court determines that the public interest or welfare of the child is best
served by closing the hearing.
Section 39.510(4) and (5), F.S. – e case on appeal in a dependency proceeding and any
papers led in appellate court shall be entitled with child’s initials. e papers shall remain sealed
and shall not be open to public inspection. e original order of the appellate court with papers
led in an appeal shall be sealed and not open to inspection except by order of the appellate court.
Section 39.702(5)(d), F.S. – An independent not-for-prot agency authorized to
administer a citizen review panel established to make recommendations concerning foster care as
provided in this section shall ensure that all panel members have read, understood, and signed an
oath of condentiality relating to written or verbal information provided to members for review
hearings.
Section 39.809(4), F.S. – All hearings involving termination of parental rights are
condential and closed to the public.
228
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 39.814(3) and (4), F.S. – All court records required by this part (termination of
parental rights) shall be kept separate from other records. Such records are not open to public
inspection. All information obtained pursuant to this part by ocials specied therein shall be
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may not be disclosed to anyone other than the
authorized ocials and agencies, except by court order.
Section 39.815(4) and (5), F.S. – An appeal in a case involving a termination of parental
rights must be docketed, and any papers led in the appellate court must be titled with the
initials, but not the name, of the child and the court case number, and the papers must remain
sealed in the oce of the appellate court clerk when not in use by the court and may not be open
to public inspection. e original order of the appellate court, with all papers led in the case on
appeal, must remain in the clerk’s oce, sealed and not open to inspection except by court order.
Section 39.821(1), F.S. – Information collected pursuant to the security background
investigation for a guardian ad litem is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 39.827(4), F.S. – e hearing for appointment of a guardian advocate is
condential. e court records are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may be
inspected only upon court order or by the persons and entities identied in the subsection. All
information obtained pursuant to this part is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall
not be disclosed to anyone other than authorized personnel of the court or the Department of
Children and Families and its designees, except upon court order.
Section 39.908, F.S. – Information about clients received by the Department of Children
and Families or by authorized persons employed by or volunteering services to a domestic
violence center, through les, reports, inspection or otherwise is condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1). Except as provided in the section, information about the location of domestic
violence centers and facilities is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 40.50(2), F.S. – e court should emphasize the condentiality of notes taken by
jurors as provided in this subsection.
Section 44.102(3), F.S. – All written communications in a court-ordered mediation
proceeding, other than an executed settlement agreement, shall be exempt from the requirements
of Ch. 119.
Section 44.201(5), F.S. – Any information relating to a dispute which is obtained by any
person while performing any duties for a Citizen Dispute Settlement Center is exempt from s.
119.07(1).
Section 44.405(1), F.S. – Except as provided in the section, mediation communications,
as dened in the Mediation Condentiality and Privilege Act, are condential.
Section 44.407(9), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, eldercaring coordination
communications, as dened in the exemption, are condential.
Section 61.1827, F.S. – Any information that reveals the identity of applicants for or
recipients of child-support services, including the name, address, and telephone number of such
persons, held by a non-Title IV-D county child-support enforcement agency is condential and
exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 61.183(3), F.S. – Information concerning mediation proceedings involving
contested issues relating to custody parental responsibility, primary residence, access to, visitation
with, or support of a child pursuant to this section which is obtained by any person performing
mediation duties is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
229
Section 61.404, F.S. – A guardian ad litem shall maintain as condential all information
and documents received from any source described in s. 61.403(2) and may not disclose such
information or documents except, in the guardian ad litem’s discretion, in a report to the court or
as directed by the court.
Section 63.022(4)(i), F.S. – e records of all proceedings concerning custody and
adoption of a minor are condential and exempt except as provided in s. 63.162.
Section 63.0541, F.S. – All information contained in the Florida Putative Father Registry
is condential and exempt except as provided in the section.
Section 63.089(8), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, all records relating to a
petition to terminate parental rights pending adoption are subject to the provisions of s. 63.162,
F.S.
Section 63.102(1), F.S. – Except for a joint petition for the adoption of a stepchild, a
relative, or an adult, any name by which the minor was previously known may not be disclosed in
the petition for adoption, the notice of hearing, or the judgment of adoption, or the court docket
as provided in s. 63.162(3).
Section 63.162(1), F.S. – Hearings held in proceedings under the Florida Adoption Act
are closed.
Section 63.162(2), F.S. – All papers and records pertaining to an adoption are condential
and subject to inspection only upon court order except as provided in s. 63.162(4), authorizing
disclosure without a court order in certain circumstances. Adoption papers and records of the
Department of Children and Families, a court, or any other governmental agency are exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 63.162(6), F.S. – Except as provided in s. 63.162(4), identifying information
regarding birth parents, adoptive parents, and adoptees may not be disclosed unless a birth parent,
adoptive parent, or adoptee has authorized in writing the release of such information concerning
himself or herself.
Section 63.165(1), F.S. – Except as provided in this section, information in the state
registry of adoption information is condential and exempt.
Section 68.083(8), F.S. – e complaint and information held by the Department of Legal
Aairs pursuant to an investigation of a violation of the False Claims Act is condential and
exempt and may not be disclosed until the investigation is complete, or as otherwise provided in
the exemption.
Section 69.081(8), F.S. – Any portion of an agreement which conceals information relating
to the settlement or resolution of any claim or action against an agency is void, contrary to public
policy and may not be enforced.
Section 73.0155, F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, specied business information
provided by the owner of a business to a governmental condemning authority as part of an oer of
business damages is condential and exempt from disclosure requirements, if the owner requests
in writing that the business information be held condential and exempt.
Section 90.502(5), F.S. – Communications made by a person who seeks or receives services
from the Department of Revenue under the child support enforcement program to the attorney
representing the department shall be condential and privileged and shall not be disclosed to
anyone other than the agency except as provided in this section.
230
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 92.56, F.S. – e condential and exempt status of criminal intelligence
information or criminal investigative information made condential and exempt pursuant to s.
119.071(2)(h) must be maintained in court records pursuant to s. 119.0714(1)(h) and in court
proceedings, including testimony from witnesses.
Section 97.057(2)(a)4. and 5., F.S. – All declinations to register to vote pursuant to this
section (relating to voter registration by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles)
will remain condential and may be used only for voter registration purposes. e particular driver
license oce in which the person applies to register to vote or updates a voter registration record
will remain condential and may be used only for voter registration purposes.
Section 97.0585, F.S. – e following information held by an agency and obtained for
the purpose of voter registration is condential and exempt and may be used only for purposes
of voter registration: declinations to register to vote made pursuant to ss. 97.057 and 97.058;
information relating to the place where a person registered to vote or where a person updated a
voter registration; the social security number, driver license number, and Florida identication
number of a voter registration applicant or voter; and all information concerning preregistered
voter registration applicants who are 16 or 17 years of age. e signature of a voter registration
applicant or a voter is exempt from the copying requirements.
Section 98.045(3), F.S. – Each supervisor shall maintain for at least 2 years and make
available for public inspection and copying, all records concerning implementation of registration
list maintenance programs and activities conducted pursuant to cited statutes. e records must
include lists of the name and address of each person to whom a notice was sent and information as
to whether each such person responded to the mailing, but may not include any information that
is condential or exempt from public records requirements under the Election Code.
Section 98.075(2)(c), F.S. – Information received by the Department of State from
another state or the District of Columbia upon the department becoming a member of the
nongovernmental entity provided in this subsection to share and exchange information in order to
verify voter registration information, which is condential or exempt pursuant to the laws of that
state or the District of Columbia, is exempt from disclosure requirements.
Section 101.5607(1)(d), F.S. – Section 119.071(1)(f) which provides an exemption from
s. 119.07(1) for data processing software designated as sensitive, applies to all software on le with
the Department of State.
Section 101.62(3), F.S. – Information regarding a request for a vote-by-mail ballot that is
recorded by the supervisor of elections pursuant to this subsection is condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) and shall be made available to or reproduced only for the individuals and entities set
forth in the exemption, for political purposes only.
Section 106.0706, F.S. – All user identications and passwords held by the Department of
State pursuant to s. 106.0705 are condential and exempt from disclosure. Information entered in
the electronic ling system for purposes of generating a report pursuant to s. 106.0705 is exempt
but is no longer exempt once the report is generated and led with the Division of Elections.
Section 106.25(7), F.S. –
Except as otherwise provided in the subsection, sworn complaints
led pursuant to Ch. 106 with the Florida Elections Commission, investigative reports or other papers
of the commission relating to a violation of Chs. 106 or 104, and proceedings of the commission
relating to a violation of said chapters are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 286.011.
Section 110.1091(2), F.S. – A state employee’s personal identifying information contained
in records held by the employing agency relating to an employee’s participation in an employee
assistance program is condential and exempt.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
231
Section 110.1127(2)(d) and (e), F.S. – It is a rst degree misdemeanor to willfully use
information contained in records obtained pursuant to employment screening required for
certain positions for purposes other than background screening or investigation for employment,
or to release such information to other persons for purposes other than preemployment
screening or investigation. It is a felony of the third degree for any person willfully, knowingly,
or intentionally to use juvenile records information for any purpose other than those specied
in this section or to release such information to other persons for purposes other than those
specied in the section.
Section 110.123(5)(a), F.S. – A physician’s fee schedule used in the health and accident
plan is not available for inspection or copying by medical providers or other persons not involved
in the administration of the state group insurance program.
Section 110.123(10), F.S. – Patient medical records and medical claims records of state
employees, former state employees, and their eligible covered dependents, in the custody or
control of the state group insurance program are condential and exempt.
Section 110.12301(3), F.S. – Records collected for the purpose of dependent eligibility
verication services conducted for the state group insurance program and held by the Department
of Management Services are condential and exempt. is subsection does not apply to records
that are otherwise open for inspection and copying which are held by the Department for
purposes other than for the performance of dependent eligibility verication services.
Section 110.201(4), F.S. – All discussions between the Department of Management
Services and the Governor, and between the Department of Management Services and the
Administration Commission, or agency heads, or between any of their respective representatives,
relative to collective bargaining, are exempt from s. 286.011 and all work products relative
to collective bargaining developed in conjunction with such discussions are condential and
exempt.
Section 112.0455(8)(l), F.S. – All documentation relative to a state agency employer’s
explanation as to why a job applicant or employee’s explanation of positive drug test results is
unsatisfactory, along with the report of the positive test results, are condential and exempt.
Section 112.0455(8)(t), F.S. – e documentation prepared by a state agency employer
which formed the basis of the employer’s determination that reasonable suspicion existed to
warrant drug testing under this section is condential and exempt, except that a copy of this
documentation shall be given to the employee upon request.
Section 112.0455(11)(a), F.S. – Except as provided in the subsection, all information,
interviews, reports, statements, memoranda, and drug test results, written or otherwise, received
or produced as a result of a state agency’s drug testing program are condential and are exempt
from disclosure except as provided in this section.
Section 112.08(7), F.S. -- Medical records and medical claims records in the custody
of county or municipal government relating to county or municipal employees, former county
or municipal employees, or eligible dependents of such employees enrolled in a county or
municipal group insurance plan or self-insurance plan are condential and are exempt from s.
119.07(1). Such records shall not be furnished to any person other than the employee or the
employee’s legal representative, except as provided in the subsection.
Section 112.08(8), F.S. – Patient medical records and medical claims records of water
management district employees, former employees, and eligible dependents in the custody or
control of a water management district under its group insurance plan established pursuant to s.
373.605 are condential and exempt. Such records shall not be furnished to any person other
than the employee or the employee’s legal representative except as provided in the subsection.
232
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 112.21(1), F.S. – All records identifying individual participants in any contract
or account under s. 112.21 (relating to tax-sheltered annuities or custodial accounts for
governmental employees) and their personal account activities are condential and exempt.
Section 112.215(7), F.S. – All records identifying individual participants in any deferred
compensation plan and their personal account activities shall be condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 112.31446(6)(a), F.S. – All secure login credentials held by the Commission
on Ethics for the purpose of allowing access to the electronic ling system are exempt from
disclosure requirements.
Section 112.31446(6)(b), F.S., – Information entered in the electronic ling system for
purposes of nancial disclosure is exempt from disclosure requirements. e information is
no longer exempt once the disclosure of nancial interests or statement of nancial interests is
submitted to the Commission on Ethics or, in the case of a candidate, led with a qualifying
ocer, whichever occurs rst.
Section 112.3188(1), F.S. – e identity of an individual who discloses in good faith
to the Chief Inspector General, an agency inspector general, a local chief executive ocer,
or other appropriate local ocial information that alleges that an employee or agent of an
agency or independent contractor has violated certain laws or committed, or is suspected of
committing, specied acts may not be disclosed to anyone other than sta of the above ocials
without the written consent of the individual, unless such ocial determines that disclosure is
authorized for the reasons specied in the subsection.
Section 112.3188(2), F.S. – Except as specically authorized by s. 112.3189, or this
subsection, all information received by the Chief Inspector General or an agency inspector
general or information produced or derived from fact-nding or other investigations conducted
by the Department of Law Enforcement or the Florida Commission on Human Relations,
is condential and exempt from disclosure if the information is being received or derived
from allegations as set forth in subsection (1) and an investigation is active. All information
received by a local chief executive ocer or appropriate local ocial or information produced
or derived from fact-nding or investigations conducted by a local government pursuant to
s. 112.3187(8)(b), is condential and exempt if the information is received or derived from
allegations as set forth in s. 112.3188(1)(a) or (b) and the investigation is active.
Section 112.31901, F.S. – If certied pursuant to the exemption, an investigatory
record of the Chief Inspector General within the Oce of the Governor or of the employee
designated by an agency head as the agency inspector general under s. 112.3189 is exempt
from disclosure requirements for the time period specied in the exemption. e provisions of
this section do not apply to whistle-blower investigations conducted pursuant to the whistle-
blower act.
Section 112.3215(8)(b), F.S. – All proceedings, the complaint, and other records
relating to the investigation of a sworn complaint of a violation of this section which relates
to executive branch and Constitution Revision Commission lobbyists, and any meeting held
pursuant to the investigation, are condential and exempt from disclosure until the alleged
violator requests in writing that such investigation and associated records and meetings be
made public, or until the Ethics Commission determines whether probable cause exists to
believe that a violation has occurred.
Section 112.3215(8)(d), F.S. – Records relating to an audit of a lobbying rm
lobbying the executive branch or the Constitution Revision Commission or an investigation
of violations of the lobbying compensation reporting laws and any meetings held pursuant to
the investigation or at which such an audit is discussed are exempt from public records and
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
233
meetings requirements either until the lobbying rm requests in writing that such records and
meetings be made public or until the Commission on Ethics determines there is probable cause
that the audit reects a violation of the reporting laws.
Section 112.324(2), F.S. – e complaint and records relating to the complaint or to
any preliminary investigation held by the Ethics Commission or other specied entities are
condential and exempt from public disclosure. Written referrals and records relating to such
referrals held by the Commission and referring entities, and records relating to any preliminary
investigation of such referrals held by the Commission are condential and exempt. Any
portion of a proceeding conducted by the Commission or other specied entities pursuant to
a complaint or referral are exempt from open meetings requirements. e above exemptions
apply until: the complaint is dismissed as legally insucient; the alleged violator requests in
writing that such records and proceedings be made public; the Commission determines that
it will not investigate a referral; or the Commission or other listed entity determines whether
probable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred.
Section 112.532(4)(b), F.S. – e contents of the complaint and investigation shall
remain condential until such time as the employing law enforcement agency makes a nal
determination whether or not to issue a notice of disciplinary action consisting of suspension
with loss of pay, demotion, or dismissal.
Section 112.533(2)(a), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a
complaint led against a law enforcement ocer or correctional ocer with a law enforcement
agency or correctional agency and all information obtained pursuant to the investigation of
the complaint is condential until the investigation ceases to be active, or until the agency
head or agency head’s designee provides written notice to the ocer who is the subject of the
complaint, that the agency has either concluded the investigation with a nding not to proceed
with disciplinary action or to le charges; or concluded the investigation with a nding to
proceed with disciplinary action or to le charges.
Section 119.071(1)(a), F.S. – Examination questions and answer sheets of examinations
administered for the purpose of licensure, certication, or employment are exempt. A person
who has taken the examination has the right to review his or her own completed examination.
Section 119.071(1)(b), F.S. – Sealed bids, proposals, or replies received by an agency
pursuant to a competitive solicitation, as dened in the exemption, are exempt until such
time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision or until 30 days after opening the
bids, proposals, or nal replies, whichever is earlier. If an agency rejects all bids, proposals,
or replies submitted in response to a competitive solicitation and the agency concurrently
provides notice of its intent to reissue the competitive solicitation, the rejected bids, proposals,
or replies remain exempt until the agency provides notice of an intended decision concerning
the reissued competitive solicitation or until the agency withdraws the reissued competitive
solicitation. A bid, proposal, or reply is not exempt for longer than 12 months after the initial
agency notice rejecting all bids, proposals, or replies.
Section 119.071(1)(c), F.S. – Any nancial statement that an agency requires a
prospective bidder to submit in order to prequalify for bidding or for responding to a proposal
for a road or any other public works project is exempt.
Section 119.071(1)(d), F.S. – A public record prepared by an agency attorney or prepared
at the attorney’s express direction, that reects a mental impression, conclusion, litigation
strategy, or legal theory of the attorney or the agency, and that was prepared exclusively for
civil or criminal litigation or for adversarial administrative proceedings, or that was prepared
in anticipation of imminent litigation or proceedings, is exempt until the conclusion of the
litigation or proceedings.
234
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 119.071(1)(e), F.S. – Any videotape or video signal that, under an agreement
with an agency, is produced, made, or received by, or is in the custody of, a federally licensed
radio or television station or its agent is exempt.
Section 119.071(1)(f), F.S. – Agency-produced software that is sensitive is exempt.
Section 119.071(1)(g), F.S. – United States Census Bureau address information which is
held by an agency pursuant to the Local Update of Census Addresses Program authorized under
cited federal law, is condential and exempt. Disclosure is authorized under the circumstances
listed in the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(a), F.S. – All criminal intelligence and criminal investigative
information received by a criminal justice agency prior to January 25, 1979, is exempt.
Section 119.071(2)(b), F.S. – Whenever criminal intelligence information or criminal
investigative information held by a non-Florida criminal justice agency is available to a Florida
criminal justice agency only on a condential or similarly restricted basis, the Florida criminal
justice agency may obtain and use such information in accordance with the conditions imposed
by the providing agency.
Section 119.071(2)(c), F.S. – Active criminal intelligence information and active criminal
investigative information are exempt. A request by made by a law enforcement agency to inspect
or copy a public record that is in the custody of another agency and the custodian’s response to
the request, and any information that would identify whether a law enforcement agency has
requested or received that public record are exempt, during the period in which the information
constitutes active criminal intelligence information or active criminal investigative information.
Section 119.071(2)(d), F.S. – Any information revealing surveillance techniques
or procedures or personnel is exempt. Any comprehensive inventory of state and local law
enforcement resources compiled pursuant to cited statute, and any comprehensive policies
or plans compiled by a criminal justice agency pertaining to the mobilization, deployment,
or tactical operations involved in responding to an emergency, as dened in cited statute, are
exempt, and unavailable for inspection except by cited agencies.
Section 119.071(2)(e), F.S. – Any information revealing the substance of a confession
of a person arrested is exempt, until such time as the criminal case is nally determined by
adjudication, dismissal, or other nal disposition.
Section 119.071(2)(f), F.S. – Any information revealing the identity of a condential
informant or source is exempt.
Section 119.071(2)(g)1., F.S. – All complaints or other records in the custody of any
agency which relate to a complaint of discrimination relating to race, color, religion, sex, national
origin, age, handicap, or marital status in connection with specied employment related activities
are exempt until a nding is made relating to probable cause, the investigation of the complaint
becomes inactive, or the complaint or other record is made part of the ocial record of any
hearing or proceeding. e exemption does not aect any function or activity of the Florida
Commission on Human Relations. Disclosure is authorized to governmental agencies as
provided in the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(g)2., F.S. – If an alleged victim chooses not to le a complaint and
requests that records of the complaint remain condential all records relating to an allegation of
employment discrimination are condential and exempt.
Section 119.071(2)(h), F.S. – e following criminal intelligence information or criminal
investigative information is condential and exempt: any information that reveals the identity of
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
235
the victim of the crime of child abuse as dened by ch. 827, or that reveals the identity of a person
under the age of 18 who is the victim of the crime of human tracking proscribed in s. 786.06(3)
(a); any information which may reveal the identity of a victim of any sexual oense including
a sexual oense proscribed in cited statutes; a photograph, videotape, or image of any part of
the body of the victim of a sexual oense prohibited under cited statutes, regardless of whether
the photograph, videotape, or image identies the victim. Disclosure is authorized under the
circumstances cited in the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(i), F.S. – Any criminal intelligence information or criminal
investigative information that reveals the personal assets of the victim of a crime, other than
property stolen or destroyed during the commission of the crime, is exempt.
Section 119.071(2)(j)1., F.S. – Any document that reveals the identity, home or
employment telephone number, home or employment address, or personal assets of the victim
of a crime and identies that person as the victim of a crime, which document is received by an
agency that regularly receives information from or concerning the victims of crime, is exempt.
Any information not otherwise exempt which reveals specied information of a person who has
been a victim of stated crimes is exempt upon written request of the victim which must include
ocial verication that an applicable crime has occurred. e exemption ends 5 years after the
receipt of the written request.
Section 119.071(2)(j)2., F.S. – Any information in a videotaped statement of a minor
who is alleged to be or who is a victim of sexual battery, lewd acts, or other sexual misconduct
proscribed in cited statutes, which reveals specied information about that minor and identies
that minor as the victim of a crime described in cited statutes is condential and exempt.
Section 119.071(2)(k), F.S. – A complaint of misconduct led with an agency against
an agency employee and all information obtained pursuant to an investigation by the agency
of the complaint of misconduct is condential until the investigation ceases to be active or the
agency provides written notice to the employee who is the subject of the complaint in the manner
provided in the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(l), F.S. – A body camera recording, or portion thereof, is condential
and exempt if the recording is taken within the locations specied in the exemption. Disclosure
is authorized or required in specied circumstances.
Section 119.071(2)(m), F.S. – Criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information that reveals the personal identifying information of a witness to a murder, as described
in cited statute, is condential and exempt for 2 years after the date on which the murder is
observed by the witness. Criminal justice agencies are authorized to disclose the information
under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(2)(n), F.S. – Personal identifying information of the alleged victim in an
allegation of sexual harassment or the victim of sexual harassment is condential and exempt if
such information identies that person as an alleged victim or as a victim of sexual harassment.
Such information may be disclosed to another governmental entity in the furtherance of its
ocial duties. Condentiality may be waived in writing by the victim or the alleged victim.
Section 119.071(2)(o), F.S. – e address of a victim of an incident of mass violence
is exempt. For purposes of the exemption, the term “victim” means a person killed or injured
during an incident of mass violence, not including the perpetrator. e term “incident of mass
violence” means an incident in which 4 or more people, not including the perpetrator, are severely
injured or killed by an intentional and indiscriminate act of violence of another.
Section 119.071(2)(p), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, photographs, videos,
or audio recordings that depict or record the killing of a law enforcement ocer who was acting
236
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
in accordance with his or her ocial duties or the killing of a victim of mass violence as these
terms are dened in the exemption, are condential and exempt from public disclosure.
Section 119.071(2)(q), F.S. – Conviction integrity unit reinvestigation information, as
dened in the exemption, is exempt from disclosure for a reasonable period of time during an
active, ongoing, and good faith investigation of an actual innocence claim in a case that previously
resulted in the conviction of the accused person and until the claim is no longer capable of further
investigation.
Section 119.071(3)(a), F.S. – A security or resafety system plan, as dened in the
exemption, or a portion thereof for a property owned by or leased to the state or any of its political
subdivisions; or for any privately owned or leased property held by an agency is condential and
exempt. Disclosure is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(3)(b), F.S. – Building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings and diagrams
which depict the internal layout and structural elements of a building, arena, stadium, water
treatment facility, or other structure owned or operated by an agency are exempt. Disclosure is
authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(3)(c), F.S. – Building plans, blueprints, schematic drawings, and diagrams
which depict the internal layout or structural elements of an attractions and recreation facility,
entertainment or resort complex, industrial complex, retail and service development, oce
development, health care facility, or hotel or motel development, as these terms are dened in the
exemption, which records are held by an agency, are exempt. Disclosure is authorized under the
circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(3)(d), F.S. – Information relating to the National Public Safety Broadband
Network established in cited federal law which is held by an agency is condential and exempt if
disclosure would reveal information cited in the exemption
Section 119.071(3)(e), F.S. – Building plans and other specied records that depict the
structural elements of 911, E911, or public safety radio communication system infrastructure,
structures, or facilities owned and operated by an agency, and geographical maps showing the actual
or proposed locations of such communication system infrastructure, structures, or facilities are
exempt. Disclosure is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(4)(a), F.S. – e social security number of all current and former agency
employees which are held by the employing agency are condential and exempt. Disclosure is
authorized under the circumstances set forth in the section.
Section 119.071(4)(b)1., F.S. – Medical information pertaining to a prospective, current, or
former ocer or employee of an agency which, if disclosed, would identify that ocer or employee
is exempt. However, the information may be disclosed if the person to whom the information
pertains or the person’s legal representative provides written permission or pursuant to court order.
Section 119.071(4)(b)2., F.S. – Personal identifying information of a dependent child, as
dened in cited statute, of a current or former ocer of employee of an agency, which dependent
child is insured by an agency group insurance plan, is exempt.
Section 119.071(4)(c), F.S. – Any information revealing undercover personnel of any
criminal justice agency is exempt.
Section 119.071(4)(d), F.S. – Home addresses, telephone numbers, and other specied
personal information of specied current and former public employees and ocers and their
families are exempt. For more information, please refer to the text of the Florida Statutes at
www.leg.state..us or you may review pages 143-150 of this Manual.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
237
Section 119.071(4)(e), F.S. – Law enforcement geolocation information, as dened in the
exemption, that is held by a law enforcement agency is exempt. e exemption does not apply to
trac citations, crash reports, homicide reports, arrest reports, or any other ocial reports issued
by an agency which contain law enforcement geolocation information. Disclosure is authorized
under specied circumstances.
Section 119.071(5)(a), F.S. – Social security numbers held by an agency are condential
and exempt. Disclosure is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(5)(b), F.S. – Bank account numbers and debit, charge, and credit card
numbers held by an agency are exempt.
Section 119.071(5)(c), F.S. – Information that would identify or locate a child, as
that term is dened in the exemption, who participates in a government-sponsored recreation
program, as that term is dened in the exemption, is exempt. Information that would identify or
locate a parent or guardian of the child participant is exempt.
Section 119.071(5)(d), F.S. – All records supplied by a telecommunications company, as
dened by cited statute, to an agency which contain the name, address, and telephone number of
subscribers are condential and exempt.
Section 119.071(5)(e), F.S. – Any information provided to an agency for the purpose of
forming ridesharing arrangements, which information reveals the identity of an individual who
has provided his or her name for ridesharing, as dened in cited statute, is exempt.
Section 119.071(5)(f)1.a., F.S. – Medical history records and information related to
health or property insurance provided to the Department of Economic Opportunity, the Florida
Housing Finance Corporation, a county, a municipality, or a local housing nance agency by an
applicant for or a participant in a federal, state, or local housing assistance program are condential
and exempt. Disclosure is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(5)(f)1.b., F.S. – Property photographs and personal identifying
information of an applicant for or a participant in a federal, state, or local housing assistance
program for the purpose of disaster recovery assistance for a presidentially declared disaster that is
held by the Department of Economic Opportunity, the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, a
county, a municipality, or a local housing nance agency are condential and exempt. Disclosure
is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(5)(g), F.S. – Biometric identication information, as dened in the
exemption, held by an agency before, on, or after the eective date of this exemption is exempt.
Section 119.071(5)(h), F.S. – Personal identifying information of an applicant for or a
recipient of paratransit services which is held by an agency is condential and exempt. Disclosure
is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 119.071(5)(i), F.S. – Identication location information, as dened in the
exemption, of current or former federal prosecutors, judges, and magistrates and their spouses
and children is exempt, provided that certain conditions are met.
Section 119.071(5)(j), F.S. – Any information furnished by a person to an agency for the
purpose of being provided with emergency notication by the agency is exempt.
Section 119.0711, F.S. – When an agency of the executive branch of state government
seeks to acquire real property by purchase or through the exercise of eminent domain, all
appraisals, other reports relating to value, oers, and counter oers are exempt until execution
of a valid option contract, as dened in the exemption, or a written oer to sell that has been
238
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
conditionally accepted by the agency, at which time the exemption shall expire. An agency of
the executive branch may exempt title information, including names and addresses of property
owners whose property is subject to acquisition by purchase or through the exercise of the power
of eminent domain, from disclosure requirements to the same extent as appraisals, other reports
relating to value, oers, and counteroers.
Section 119.0712(1), F.S. – All personal identifying information contained in records
relating to an individual’s personal health or eligibility for health-related services held by the
Department of Health is condential and exempt from disclosure requirements. Information
made condential and exempt by this subsection shall be disclosed with the express written
consent of the individual or the individual’s legal authorized representative; in a medical
emergency, but only to the extent necessary to protect the health or life of the individual; by
court order upon good cause; or to a health research agency under the conditions set forth in the
subsection.
Section 119.0712(2)(b), F.S. – Personal information, including highly restricted personal
information as dened in cited federal law, contained in a motor vehicle record, as dened in the
exemption, is condential pursuant to the federal Driver’s Privacy Protection Act of 1994, 18
U.S.C. ss 2721 et. seq. Such information may be released only as authorized by that act; however,
information received pursuant to that act may not be used for mass commercial solicitation of
clients for litigation against motor vehicle dealers.
Section 119.0712(2)(c), F.S. – E-mail addresses collected by the Department of Highway
Safety and Motor Vehicles pursuant to cited statutes are exempt from disclosure requirements.
Section 119.0712(2)(d), F.S. – Emergency contact information contained in a motor
vehicle record, is condential and exempt. Without the express consent of the person to whom
such emergency contact information applies, the emergency contact information contained in
motor vehicle record may be released only to law enforcement agencies for purposes of contacting
those listed in an emergency, or to a receiving facility, hospital, or licensed detoxication or
addictions receiving facility pursuant to cited statutes for the sole purpose of informing a patient’s
emergency contacts of the patient’s whereabouts.
Section 119.0712(2)(f)1, F.S. – Secure login credentials, as dened in the exemption,
that are held by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles are exempt.
Section 119.0712(2)(f)2, F.S. – Internet protocol addresses, geolocation data, and other
information held by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles which describes the
location, computer, computer system, or computer network from which a user accesses a public-
facing portal, as dened in the exemption, and the dates and times that a user accesses the portal,
are exempt.
Section 119.0712(3), F.S. – e following information held by the Oce of Financial
Regulation is condential: Any information received from another state or federal regulatory,
administrative, or criminal justice agency that is otherwise condential or exempt pursuant to the
laws of that state or pursuant to federal law; any information received or developed by the Oce
as part of a joint or multiagency examination or investigation with such agencies.
Section 119.0712(4), F.S. – Information held by the Department of Military Aairs that
is stored in a United States Department of Defense system of records, transmitted using a United
States Department of Defense network or communications device, or pertaining to the United
States Department of Defense, pursuant to cited federal law, is exempt.
Section 119.0713(1), F.S. – All complaints and other records in the custody of any unit
of local government which relate to a complaint of discrimination relating to race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, age, handicap, marital status, sale or rental of housing, the provision of
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
239
brokerage services, or the nancing of housing are exempt until a nding is made relating to
probable case, the investigation of the complaint becomes inactive, or the complaint or other
record is made part of the ocial record of any hearing or court proceeding. is provision does
not aect any function or activity of the Florida Commission on Human Relations. Access by
specied agencies is authorized.
Section 119.0713(2) – e audit report of an internal auditor and the investigative report
of the inspector general prepared for or on behalf of a unit of local government, as dened in the
exemption, becomes a public record when the audit report or investigative report becomes nal.
An audit or investigation becomes nal when it is presented to the unit of local government.
Audit workpapers and notes related to such audit and information received, produced, or derived
from an investigation are condential until the audit or investigation is complete and the audit
report becomes nal or when the investigation is no longer active. An investigation is active if it is
continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of resolution and with reasonable dispatch.
Section 119.0713(3), F.S. – Any data, record, or document used directly or solely by a
municipally owned utility to prepare and submit a bid relative to the sale, distribution, or use of
any service, commodity, or tangible personal property to any customer or prospective customer is
exempt. e exemption commences when a municipal utility identies in writing a specic bid
to which it intends to respond, and no longer applies when the conditions occur as set forth in
the exemption.
Section 119.0713(4), F.S. – Proprietary condential information, as dened in the
exemption, which is held by an electric utility that is subject to Ch. 119 in conjunction with a
due diligence review of an electric project, as dened in cited statute, or a project to improve the
delivery, cost, or diversication of fuel or renewable energy resources is condential and exempt.
Section 119.0713(5)(a), F.S. – e following information held by a utility owned or
operated by a unit of local government is exempt from public disclosure requirements: Specied
security technology information and customer meter-derived data and billing information in
increments less than one billing cycle.
Section 119.0715, F.S. – A trade secret, as dened in s. 688.002, that is held by an agency
is condential and exempt. Disclosure is authorized to an ocer or employee of another agency or
governmental entity whose use of the trade secret is within the scope of his or her responsibilities.
Section 119.0725(2)(3)(5), F.S. – e following information held by an agency is
condential and exempt: Coverage limits and deductible or self-insurance amounts of insurance
or other risk mitigation coverages acquired for the protection of information technology systems,
operational technology systems, or data of an agency; information relating to critical infrastructure;
cybersecurity incident information reported pursuant to cited statutes; specied information that
identies detection, investigation, or response practices for suspected or conrmed cybersecurity
incidents, if disclosure would facilitate unauthorized access to or unauthorized modication,
disclosure, or destruction of data or information as specied in the exemption. Any portion of
a meeting revealing information made condential under subsection (2) is exempt from open
meetings requirements. e exempt portion may not be o the record and must be recorded
and transcribed; the recording and transcription are condential and exempt. Disclosure of
condential information is authorized as provided in the exemption.
Section 121.031(5), F.S. – e names and addresses of retirees are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) to the extent that no state or local governmental agency may provide the names
or addresses of such persons in aggregate, compiled, or list form to any person except as authorized
in the subsection.
Section 121.4501(19), F.S. – Personal identifying information of a member in the
investment plan contained in Florida Retirement System records held by the State Board of
240
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Administration or the Department of Management Services is exempt from public disclosure
requirements.
Section 125.0104(3)(h), F.S. – Department of Revenue records showing the amount of
tourist development taxes collected, including the amount of taxes collected for and from each
county in which the tourist development tax is applicable, are open for inspection except as
provided in s. 213.053.
Section 125.0104(9)(d)1., F.S. – Information given to a county tourism promotion agency
which, if released, would reveal the identity of persons or entities who provide information as
a response to a sales promotion eort, an advertisement, or a research project or whose names,
addresses, meeting or convention plan information or accommodations or other visitation needs
become booking or reservation list data, is exempt from disclosure.
Section 125.0104(9)(d)2., F.S. – When held by a county tourism promotion agency,
the following are exempt from disclosure: booking business records, as dened in s. 255.047;
trade secrets and commercial or nancial information gathered from a person and privileged or
condential, as dened and interpreted under 5 U.S.C. s. 552(b)(4).
Section 125.012(26), F.S. – Pursuant to authorization granted by this section concerning
certain transportation-related projects dened in s. 125.011, a board of county commissioners is
empowered to maintain the condentiality of trade information and data to the extent that such
information is protected under applicable federal and federally-enforced patent and copyright
laws.
Section 125.025, F.S. – Pursuant to authorization granted by this section concerning
operation of export trading companies, a board of county commissioners is empowered to
maintain the condentiality of trade information to the extent such information is protected
under applicable federal export trading company law, and under federal and federally enforced
patent and copyright laws.
Section 125.355(1), F.S. – Appraisals, oers, and counteroers relating to a county’s
purchase of real property pursuant to this section are not available for public disclosure and are
exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed or, if no option contract is executed,
until 30 days before a contract or agreement for purchase is considered for approval by the board
of county commissioners. If a contract or agreement for purchase is not submitted to the board
for approval, then the exemption from s. 119.07(1) expires 30 days after the negotiations end. A
county that does not utilize the exemptions provided in this section may follow any procedure
not in conict with Ch. 119 for the purchase of real property which is authorized in its charter or
established by ordinance.
Section 125.585(2), F.S. – A county employee’s personal identifying information contained
in records held by the employing county relating to that employee’s participation in an employee
assistance program is condential and exempt.
Section 125.901(11), F.S. – Personal identifying information of a child or the parent or
guardian of the child, held by a council on children’s services, juvenile welfare board, or other
similar entity created under this section or by special law, or held by a service provider or researcher
under contract with such entity, is exempt from disclosure requirements.
Section 163.01(15)(m), F.S. – Material received by a public agency in connection with its
joint ownership or right to the services, output, capacity, or energy of an electric project under
the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act, which is designated by the person supplying such material
as proprietary condential business information, as dened in the paragraph, or which a court
of competent jurisdiction has designated as condential or secret, shall be kept condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
241
Section 163.64, F.S. – An agency that participates in the creation or administration of
a collaborative client information system may share client information, including condential
client information, with other members of the collaborative system as long as the restrictions
governing the condential information are observed by any other agency granted access to the
condential information.
Section 166.0444, F.S. – A municipal employee’s personal identifying information
contained in records held by the employing municipality relating to that employee’s participation
in an employee assistance program is condential and exempt.
Section 166.045(1), F.S. – Appraisals, oers, and counteroers relating to a municipality’s
purchase of real property pursuant to this section are not available for public disclosure and
are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed or, if no option contract is
executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for purchase is considered for approval by
the governing body of the municipality. If a contract or agreement for purchase is not submitted
to the governing body for approval, then the exemption from s. 119.07(1) expires 30 days after
the negotiations end. A municipality that does not utilize the exemptions from Ch. 119 provided
in this section may follow any procedure not in conict with Ch. 119 for the purchase of real
property which is authorized in its charter or established by ordinance.
Section 192.0105(4), F.S. – Taxpayers have the right to have information kept condential,
including those records set forth in the exemption.
Section 192.105, F.S. – Federal tax information obtained pursuant to 26 U.S.C. s. 6103
is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 193.074, F.S. – All returns of property and returns required by former s. 201.022
submitted by the taxpayer pursuant to law shall be deemed to be condential in the hands of the
property appraiser, the clerk of the circuit court, the Department of Revenue, the tax collector,
the Auditor General, and the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability,
and their employees and persons acting under their supervision and control, except upon court
order or order of an administrative body having quasi-judicial powers in ad valorem tax matters.
Section 193.114(5), F.S. – For the purpose of furnishing copies of the tax roll under
119.07(1), the property appraiser is the custodian of the tax roll. e Department of Revenue or
any state or local agency may use copies of the tax roll received by it for ocial purposes and shall
permit inspection and examination thereof pursuant to s. 119.07(1), but is not required to furnish
copies of the records. A social security number submitted under s. 196.011(1) (application for
tax exemption) is condential and exempt.
Section 195.027(3), F.S. – Financial records produced by a taxpayer under this section
shall be condential in the hands of the property appraiser, the Department of Revenue, the tax
collector, and the Auditor General and shall not be divulged to any person, rm, or corporation,
except upon court order or order of an administrative body having quasi-judicial powers in ad
valorem tax matters, and such records are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 195.027(6), F.S. – e information form disclosing unusual fees, costs and terms
of nancing of the sale or purchase of property shall be led with the clerk of the circuit court
at the time of recording and shall be condential and exempt in the hands of all persons after
delivery to the clerk, except as provided in the subsection.
Section 195.084(1), F.S. – is section (authorizing the exchange of information among
the Department of Revenue, the property appraisers, the tax collector, the Auditor General, and
the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability) shall supersede statutes
prohibiting disclosure only with respect to those entities, but the Department of Revenue may
establish regulations setting reasonable conditions upon access to and custody of such information.
242
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
e Auditor General, the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability,
the tax collectors and the property appraisers shall be bound by the same requirements of
condentiality as the department.
Section 195.096(2)(e), F.S. – All data and samples developed or obtained by the
Department of Revenue in the conduct of assessment ratio studies are condential and exempt
until a presentation of the study ndings is made to the property appraiser.
Section 196.101(4)(c), F.S. – Records of gross income produced by a taxpayer claiming
exemption for totally and permanently disabled persons are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and are
condential in the hands of the property appraiser, the Department of Revenue, the tax collector,
the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, and the Auditor General
and shall not be divulged to any person, rm, or corporation, except upon court order or order of
an administrative body having quasi-judicial powers in ad valorem tax matters.
Section 197.3225, F.S. – A taxpayer’s e-mail address held by a tax collector for sending
specied tax notices or for obtaining the taxpayer’s consent to send notices is exempt from
disclosure requirements.
Section 202.195, F.S. – Proprietary condential business information, as dened in
the exemption, which is obtained from a telecommunications company or franchised cable
company for the purposes of imposing fees for occupying the public rights-of-way, assessing
the local communications services tax, or regulating the public rights-of-way, held by a local
government entity, is condential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. Maps or
other engineering data held by a local governmental entity that relate to the exact location and
capacity of facilities for the provision of communications services shall be exempt from disclosure
but only for 60 days after completion of construction of the facilities.
Section 206.27(2), F.S. – Any information concerning audits in progress or those records
or les of the Department of Revenue described in this section which are currently the subject
of pending investigation by the Department of Revenue or the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and are considered condential; and may not be
released except as authorized in the subsection.
Section 211.125(10), F.S. – All returns and information led with the Department of
Revenue under this part providing for a tax on production of oil and gas are condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1), and such returns or information shall be protected from unauthorized
disclosures as provided in s. 213.053.
Section 211.33(5), F.S. – e use of information contained in any tax return led by
a producer (i.e., a person severing solid minerals from the soils and waters of the state) or in
any books, records or documents of a producer shall be as provided in s. 213.053, and shall be
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 212.0305(3)(d), F.S. – Records of the Department of Revenue showing the
amount of taxes collected, including taxes collected from each county in which a resort tax
is levied, are subject to the provisions of s. 213.053, and are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1).
Section 213.015(9), F.S. – Unless otherwise specied by law, Florida taxpayers have the
right to have taxpayer tax information kept condential.
Section 213.053(2)(a), F.S. – All information contained in returns, reports, accounts,
or declarations received by the Department of Revenue, including investigative reports and
information and including letters of technical advice, is condential except for ocial purposes
and is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
243
Section 213.0532(8), F.S. – Any nancial records obtained pursuant to this section
relating to information-sharing arrangements between the Department of Revenue and
nancial institutions may be disclosed only for the purpose of, and to the extent necessary for,
administration and enforcement of the tax laws of this state.
Section 213.0535(5), F.S. – A provision of law imposing condentiality upon data shared
under this section (providing for the Registration Information Sharing and Exchange Program
within the Department of Revenue), including, but not limited to, a provision imposing penalties
for disclosure, applies to recipients of this data and their employees. Data exchanged under this
section may not be provided to a person or entity except as authorized in the exemption.
Section 213.21(3)(a), F.S. – e Department of Revenue shall maintain records of all
compromises of a taxpayer’s liability; the records of compromises shall not be subject to disclosure
pursuant to s. 119.07(1) and shall be considered condential information governed by s. 213.053.
Section 213.22(2), F.S. – e Department of Revenue may not disclose, pursuant to
s. 119.07(1), a technical assistance advisement or request therefor to any person other than
the person requesting the advisement or his or her representative, or for ocial departmental
purposes without deleting identifying details of the person to whom the advisement was issued.
Section 213.27(6), F.S. – Condential information shared by the Department of Revenue
with debt collection or auditing agencies under contract with the department is exempt from s.
119.07(1) and such debt collection or auditing agencies are bound by the same requirements of
condentiality as the department.
Section 213.28(6), F.S.
–
Certied public accountants entering into contracts with the
Department of Revenue are bound by the same condentiality requirements and subject to the same
penalties as the department under s. 213.053. Any return, return information, or documentation
obtained from the Internal Revenue Service under an information-sharing agreement is condential
and exempt from disclosure and shall not be divulged or disclosed in any manner by any department
ocer or employee to any certied public accountant under a contract authorized by this section
unless the department and the Internal Revenue Service mutually agree to such disclosure.
Section 215.4401(1), F.S.
–
Records and information of the State Board of Administration
relating to acquiring, hypothecating, or disposing of real property or specied related interests are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) in order to achieve certain stated purposes. Records
relating to value, oers, counteroers, or negotiations are condential and exempt until closing is
complete and all funds have been disbursed. Records relating to tenants, leases, and other specied
matters are condential and exempt until the executive director determines that release would not
be detrimental to the board’s interest or conict with its duciary responsibilities.
Section 215.4401(2), F.S.
–
Records and other information relating to investments made by
the State Board of Administration are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until 30 days after
completion of an investment transaction. However, if in the executive director’s opinion, it would
be detrimental to the board’s nancial interests or cause a conict with its duciary responsibilities,
information concerning service provider fees may be kept condential until 6 months after
negotiations relating to such fees have been terminated.
Section 215.4401(3)(b), F.S.
–
“Proprietary condential business information”, as dened
in the exemption, that is held by the State Board of Administration regarding alternative investments
is condential and exempt for a period of 10 years after the termination of the alternative investment
unless disclosure is permitted under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 215.555(4)(f), F.S.
–
Information described in 215.557 which is contained in
an examination report conducted on an insurer pursuant to this subsection, is condential and
exempt, as provided in s. 215.557.
244
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 215.557, F.S.
–
e reports of insured values under certain insurance policies by
zip code submitted to the State Board of Administration pursuant to s. 215.555 are condential
and exempt.
Section 220.242, F.S. – Estimated tax returns led under the Florida Income Tax Code are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 252.355(4), F.S. – Records relating to the registration of persons with special
needs for emergency management purposes pursuant to this section are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), except such information is available to other emergency response agencies, as
determined by the local emergency management director. Local law enforcement agencies shall
be given complete shelter roster information upon request.
Section 252.385(5), F.S. – e address and telephone number of a person provided public
emergency shelter during a storm or catastrophic event and held by the agency, as dened in s.
119.011, that provided the emergency shelter are exempt from disclosure.
Section 252.88(1), F.S. – Trade secret information which applicable federal law authorizes
an employer to exclude from materials submitted shall be furnished to the State Hazardous
Materials Emergency Response Commission upon request. However, such information shall be
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be disclosed by the Commission except
as authorized in the subsection.
Section 252.88(2) and (3), F.S. – When applicable law authorizes the withholding
of disclosure of the location of specic hazardous chemicals, such information is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1). All information, including, but not limited to, site plans and
specic location information on hazardous chemicals furnished to a re department pursuant to
applicable law, shall be condential and exempt while in the possession of the re department.
Section 252.905, F.S. – Any information furnished by a person or a business to the
Division of Emergency Management for the purpose of being provided assistance with emergency
planning is exempt.
Section 252.943, F.S. – In accordance with the federal Clean Air Act, trade secret
information provided to the Division of Emergency Management by the owner or operator of
a stationary source subject to the Accidental Release Prevention Program is condential and
exempt from disclosure, except as provided in the exemption.
Section 253.025(8)(f), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, appraisal reports
prepared for the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund or an agency are
condential and exempt until an option contract is executed or, if no option contract is executed,
until 2 weeks before a contract or agreement for purchase is considered for approval by the board
of trustees.
Section 253.025(9)(d), F.S. – All oers or counteroers shall be documented in writing
and shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed, or
if no option contract is executed, until 2 weeks before a contract or agreement for purchase is
considered for approval by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund.
Section 253.0341(8)(a), F.S. – A written valuation of land determined to be surplus
and related documents are condential and exempt. e exemption expires 2 weeks before the
contract or agreement regarding the disposition of the surplus land is rst considered for approval
by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. Prior to expiration of the
exemption, disclosure of certain information is authorized under the circumstances described in
the exemption.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
245
Section 255.047(2), F.S. – e booking business records (as dened in the section) of
a publicly owned or operated convention center, sports stadium, coliseum, or auditorium are
exempt from disclosure. However, such facility shall furnish its booking business records and
related information to the Department of Revenue upon the department’s request if necessary for
the department to administer its duties.
Section 257.261, F.S. – Registration and circulation records of public libraries, except
statistical reports of registration and circulation are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Except as authorized by court order, a person may not make known in any manner any
information contained in such records, except as provided in this section. Violation of this section
is a second degree misdemeanor.
Section 257.38(2) and (3), F.S. – Public records transferred to the Division of Library
and Information Services of the Department of State are subject to s. 119.07(1), except that
any record provided by law to be condential shall not be made accessible until 50 years after
creation of the record. Any nonpublic manuscript or other archival material which is placed in
the keeping of the division under special terms and conditions, shall be made accessible only in
accordance with such terms and conditions and shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the extent
necessary to meet the terms and conditions for a nonpublic manuscript or other archival material.
Section 257.38(4), F.S. – Any nonpublic manuscript or other archival material that is
donated to and held by an ocial archive of a municipality or county contingent upon special
terms and conditions that limit the right to inspect or copy such material is condential and
exempt from disclosure requirements except as otherwise authorized in the special conditions.
Such nonpublic manuscript or archival material shall be made available for inspection and
copying 50 years after the date of the creation of the nonpublic manuscript or material, at an
earlier date specied in the special terms and conditions, or upon a showing of good cause before
a court of competent jurisdiction.
Section 265.605(2), F.S. – Information which, if released, would identify donors and
amounts contributed by donors to the Cultural Endowment Program Trust Fund, or to the local
organization’s matching fund, is, at the request of the donor, condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). Information which, if released, would identify prospective donors is condential and
exempt unless the name has been obtained from another organization or source.
Section 265.7015, F.S. – If a donor or prospective donor of a donation made for the
benet of a publicly owned performing arts center, as dened in the exemption, desires to remain
anonymous, information that would identify the name, address, or telephone number of that
donor or prospective donor is condential and exempt.
Section 267.076, F.S. – Information identifying a donor or prospective donor to a publicly
owned house museum designated by the United States Department of the Interior as a National
Historic Landmark who desires to remain anonymous is condential and exempt.
Section 267.135, F.S. – Information identifying the location of an archaeological site
held by the Division of Historical Resources of the Department of State is exempt from public
disclosure if the division nds that disclosure will create a substantial risk of harm, theft, or
destruction at such site.
Section 267.17(3), F.S. – e identity of donors who desire to remain anonymous shall
be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and that anonymity shall be maintained in the
auditor’s report of a citizen support organization to the Division of Historical Resources of the
Department of State.
Section 267.1732(8), F.S. – e identity of a donor or prospective donor of property to a
direct-support organization of the University of West Florida which is established to support the
246
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
historic preservation eorts of the university, who desires to remain anonymous, is condential
and exempt from disclosure; and that anonymity must be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 267.1736(9), F.S. – Any information identifying a donor or prospective donor to
the direct-support organization, authorized by the University of Florida to assist it in the historic
preservation of the City of St. Augustine, who desires to remain anonymous, is condential and
exempt, and that anonymity must be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 279.11(1), F.S. – Records with regard to ownership of, or security interests in,
registered public obligations are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 280.16(3), F.S. – Any information contained in a report of a qualied public
depository required under this chapter or any rule adopted under this chapter, together with
any information required of a nancial institution that is not a qualied public depository, is, if
made condential by any law of the United States or of this state, condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) and not subject to dissemination to anyone other than the Chief Financial Ocer
under this chapter.
Section 281.301, F.S. – e following are condential and exempt from ss. 119.07(1)
and 286.011: Information relating to the security or resafety systems for any property owned
by or leased to the state or any of its political subdivisions; information relating to the security
or resafety systems for any privately owned or leased property which is in the possession of any
agency as dened in s. 119.011(2); and all meetings relating directly to or that would reveal such
systems or information. Information may be disclosed as provided in the exemption.
Section 282.318(4)(d)(e)(g), F.S. – e following information is condential and exempt
and may not be disclosed except as provided in the subsection: risk assessment information
to determine security threats to data, information, and information technology resources of
the agency; internal policies and procedures to assure the security of the data and information
technology resources that, if disclosed, could facilitate the unauthorized modication, disclosure,
or destruction of data, information, or information technology resources; and results of periodic
internal audits and evaluations of the information technology security program for an agency’s
data and information technology resources.
Section 282.318(5), F.S. – Portions of risk assessments and other reports of a state agency’s
cybersecurity program are condential and exempt if disclosure would facilitate unauthorized
access to or unauthorized modication, disclosure or destruction of data or information as
described in the exemption. Disclosure is authorized as provided in the exemption.
Section 282.318(7), F.S. – ose portions of a public meeting which would reveal records
which are condential under subsection (5) are exempt from s. 286.011. All exempt portions shall
be recorded and transcribed. Disclosure is authorized as provided in the exemption.
Section 284.40(2), F.S. – Claims les maintained by the Division of Risk Management
of the Department of Financial Services are condential, and shall be only for the use of the
Department of Financial Services in fullling its duties and are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
NOTE: DUE TO SPACE LIMITATIONS, THE EXEMPTIONS
FROM DISCLOSURE FOUND IN CHAPTER 286 ARE
NOT SUMMARIZED IN THIS APPENDIX. THE TEXT OF
THESE EXEMPTIONS IS CONTAINED IN APPENDIX B
(SUNSHINE LAW AND RELATED STATUTES).
Section 287.0595(3), F.S. – Bids submitted to the Department of Environmental
Protection for pollution response action contracts are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1),
until selection of a bidder on such contract has been made and a contract signed or until the bids
are no longer under active consideration.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
247
Section 287.137(8)(a), F.S. – All information received by the Attorney General or a law
enforcement agency pursuant to investigations into certain prohibited social media activities is
condential and exempt under such time as the investigation is completed or ceases to be active.
is exemption shall be construed in conformity with s. 119.071(2)(c).
Section 288.047(5)(e), F.S. – Information relating to wages and performance of
participants which is submitted pursuant to a grant agreement prepared by CareerSource Florida,
Inc., pursuant to the Quick-Response Training Program which, if released, would disclose the
identity of the person to whom the information pertains or the person’s employer is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.047(7), F.S. – In providing instruction pursuant to the Quick-Response
Training Program, materials relating to methods of manufacture or production, potential trade
secrets, business transactions, or proprietary information received or discovered by employees of
specied agencies are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.075(2)-(6), F.S. – If a private entity requests in writing before an economic
incentive agreement is signed that an economic development agency (EDA) maintain the
condentiality of information concerning the plans, intentions, or interests of the private entity
to locate, relocate or expand its business activities in Florida, the information is condential and
exempt from disclosure for 12 months after the EDA receives a request for condentiality or the
information is otherwise disclosed, whichever occurs rst. An EDA may extend the period of
condentiality for up to an additional 12 months under certain conditions. If a nal project order
for a signed economic development agreement is issued, then the information remains condential
and exempt for 180 days after the nal project order is issued, until a date specied in the nal
project order, or until the information is otherwise disclosed, whichever occurs rst. However, such
condentiality may not extend beyond the period of condentiality established in the exemption.
Trade secrets and the federal employer identication number, reemployment assistance account
number, or Florida sales tax registration number held by an EDA are condential and exempt, as
well as other records as described in the exemption. Specied information held by an EDA relating
to a specic business participating in an economic incentive program is no longer condential or
exempt 180 days after a nal project order for an economic incentive agreement is issued, until
a date specied in the nal project order, or if the information is otherwise disclosed, whichever
occurs rst.
Section 288.075(7), F.S. – Tax returns, nancial information, credit history information,
credit reports, and credit scores held by an economic development agency pursuant to its
administration of a state or federally funded small business loan program are exempt from
disclosure. Disclosure of information in an aggregated and anonymized format is not prohibited.
Section 288.1226(7), F.S. – e identity of a donor or prospective donor to the Florida
Tourism Industry Marketing Corporation who desires to remain anonymous and all information
identifying such donor or prospective donor are condential and exempt from disclosure, and such
anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 288.776(3)(d), F.S. – Personal nancial records, trade secrets or proprietary
information of applicants for loans extended by the Florida Export Finance Corporation are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.9520, F.S. – Materials that relate to methods of manufacture or production,
potential trade secrets, potentially patentable material, actual trade secrets, business transactions,
nancial and proprietary information and agreements or proposals to receive funding that are
received, generated, ascertained, or discovered by Enterprise Florida, Inc., including its aliates
and participants, are condential and exempt from disclosure, except that a recipient of Enterprise
Florida, Inc., research funds shall make available, upon request, the title and description of the
project, the name of the researcher, and the amount and source of funding provided for the project.
248
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 288.9607(5), F.S. – Personal nancial records, trade secrets or proprietary
information of applicants delivered to or obtained by the Florida Development Finance
Corporation are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 288.9626(2) and (3), F.S. – e following records held by the Florida
Opportunity Fund are condential and exempt: materials relating to methods of manufacture
or production, potential trade secrets, or patentable material received, generated, ascertained, or
discovered during the course of research or through research projects and that are provided by
a proprietor; information that would identify an investor or potential investor who desires to
remain anonymous in projects reviewed by the Fund; as well as proprietary condential business
information regarding alternative investments for 7 years after the termination of the alternative
investment. at portion of the meeting of the board of the Fund at which such condential
information is discussed is condential and exempt; the exempt portion of the meeting shall be
recorded and transcribed as provided therein. e transcript and minutes of the exempt meeting
are condential.
Section 288.9627(2) and (3), F.S. – e following records held by the Institute for
Commercialization of Florida Technology are condential and exempt: materials relating to
methods of manufacture or production, potential trade secrets, or patentable material received,
generated, ascertained, or discovered through research by universities and other publicly supported
organizations in this state and that are provided to the Institute by a proprietor; information that
would identify an investor or potential investor who desires to remain anonymous in projects
reviewed by the Institute for assistance; information received from a person in another state or
the Federal Government which is otherwise condential or exempt by law of that entity; and
proprietary condential business information for 7 years after the termination of the Institute’s
nancial commitment to the company. at portion of the meeting of the board of the Institute
at which such condential information is discussed is condential and exempt; the exempt
portion of the meeting shall be recorded and transcribed as provided therein. e transcript and
minutes of the exempt meeting are condential.
Section 288.985, F.S. – Specied information held by the Florida Defense Support Task
Force relating to selection criteria for the realignment and closure of military bases and missions
is exempt and that portion of Task Force meetings where exempt records are presented and
discussed is exempt as well as records generated during the closed meeting.
Section 292.055(9), F.S. – Any information identifying a donor or prospective donor
to the Department of Veterans’ Aairs direct-support organization who desires to remain
anonymous is condential and exempt; portions of meetings of the direct-support organization
during which the identity of such donor or potential donor is discussed are exempt.
Section 296.09(1), F.S. – e health record and annual reevaluation of residents of the
Veterans’ Domiciliary Home of Florida are condential and exempt from disclosure and must be
preserved for a period of time as determined by the director.
Section 310.102(3)(e) and (5)(a), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in the section, all
information obtained by the probable cause panel of the Board of Pilot Commissioners from
the consultant as part of an approved treatment program for impaired licensees is condential
and exempt. Except as otherwise provided in the section, all information obtained by the
consultant and the Department of Business and Professional Regulation pursuant to this section
is condential and exempt.
Section 311.13, F.S. – Seaport security plans created pursuant to s. 311.12 are exempt
from public disclosure. Materials that depict critical seaport operating facilities are also exempt
if the seaport reasonably determines that such items contain information that is not generally
known and that could jeopardize seaport security. e exemption does not apply to information
relating to real estate leases, layout plans, blueprints, and information related thereto.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
249
Section 315.18, F.S. – Any proposal or counterproposal exchanged between a deepwater
port listed in s. 311.09(1) and any nongovernmental entity, relating to the sale, use or lease of land
or of port facilities, and any nancial records submitted by any nongovernmental entity to such a
deepwater port for the purpose of the sale, use or lease of land or of port facilities, are condential
and exempt from disclosure until 30 days before such proposal or counterproposal is considered
for approval by the governing body of the deepwater port. If no proposal or counterproposal is
submitted to the governing body, the proposal or counterproposal shall cease to be exempt 90
days after the cessation of negotiations.
Section 316.066(2)(a)(b)(c)(f), F.S. – Crash reports that reveal the identity, home or
employment telephone number or home or employment address of, or other personal information
concerning the parties involved in the crash and that are held by an agency are condential for a
period of 60 days, except as authorized in the exemption. Reports may be released 60 days after
the report is led to authorized entities and agencies, or in accordance with specied provisions
of cited federal law.
Section 316.066(2)(g), F.S. – If crash reports are created by or submitted to an agency
electronically as data elements within a computerized database or if personal information from
a crash report is entered into a computerized database, such crash data held by an agency is
condential. Sixty days after the date the crash rep[ort is led, an agency may provide crash
data derived from the report which includes personal information to authorized entities or in
accordance with specied provisions of cited federal law.
Section 316.0777(2)(3), F.S. – Certain images and data obtained through the use of an
automated license plate recognition system and personal identifying information of an individual
in data generated from such images are condential and exempt. Disclosure is authorized in
specied circumstances.
Section 316.650(11), F.S. – Driver information, as dened in the exemption, contained
in a uniform trac citation is exempt from disclosure requirements. Driver information may be
released as provided in s. 119.0712(2)(b) and pursuant to the sale and redisclosure provisions in
cited federal law.
Section 319.1414(5), F.S. – Information received by the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles as a result of an investigation or examination conducted pursuant to this
section (department-authorized private rebuilt inspection providers) is condential and exempt
until the investigation or examination ceases to be active or administrative action taken by
the department has concluded or been made part of a hearing or court proceeding. Release is
authorized under the circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 319.25(7), F.S. – Information received by the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles as a result of an investigation or examination conducted pursuant to this
section (title certicates) is condential and exempt until the investigation or examination ceases
to be active or administrative action taken by the department has concluded or been made part
of a hearing or court proceeding. Release is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the
exemption.
Section 320.025(3), F.S. – All records relating to the registration application of a law
enforcement agency, Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, or public defender’s oce,
or any oce of criminal conict and civil regional counsel, for motor vehicle or vessel registration
and license plates or decals issued under ctitious names, are exempt from s. 119.07(1) as long as
the information is retained by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
Section 320.05(2), F.S. – Information on motor vehicle or vessel registration records of
the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall not be made available to a person
unless the person requesting the information furnishes positive proof of identication.
250
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 320.861(5), F.S. – Information received by the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles as a result of an investigation or examination conducted pursuant to this
section (motor vehicle licenses) is condential and exempt until the investigation or examination
ceases to be active or administrative action taken by the department has concluded or been made
part of a hearing or court proceeding. Release is authorized under the circumstances set forth in
the exemption.
Section 322.125(3) and (4), F.S. – When a member of the Medical Advisory Board
acts directly as a consultant to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, a board
member’s individual review of the physical and mental qualications of a licensed driver or
applicant is exempt from s. 286.011. Reports received or made by the board or its members
for the purpose of assisting the department in determining whether a person is qualied to be
licensed are for condential use of the board or department and may not be divulged to any
person except to the driver or applicant or used as evidence in any trial except proceedings under
s. 322.271 or s. 322.31.
Section 322.126(3), F.S. – Disability reports are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and may be used solely for the purpose of determining the qualications of any person
to operate a motor vehicle.
Section 322.142(4), F.S. – Reproductions of color photographic or digital imaged licenses
may be made and issued only for the purposes set forth in the subsection and are exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 322.20(3), F.S. – e release by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor
Vehicles of the driver history record, with respect to crashes involving a licensee, shall not include
any notation or record of the occurrence of a motor vehicle crash unless the licensee received a
trac citation as a direct result of the crash, and to this extent such notation or record is exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 322.20(9), F.S. – e Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shall
furnish without charge specied driver license information from its records to the courts for the
purpose of jury selection or to any state agency, state attorney, sheri or chief of police. Such
court, state agency, state attorney, or law enforcement agency may not sell, give away, or allow the
copying of such information.
Section 322.71(5), F.S. – Information received by the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles as a result of an investigation or examination conducted pursuant to this
section (driver licenses) is condential and exempt until the investigation or examination ceases
to be active or administrative action taken by the department has concluded or been made part
of a hearing or court proceeding. Release is authorized under the circumstances set forth in the
exemption.
Section 324.242, F.S. – Information as set forth in the exemption that pertains to personal
injury protection and property damage liability insurance policies held by the Department
of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles is condential and exempt. Specied disclosures are
authorized as set forth in the exemption.
Section 328.40(3), F.S. – All records kept or made by the Department of Highway Safety
and Motor Vehicles under the vessel registration law are public records except for condential
reports.
Section 331.22, F.S. – Airport security plans of an aviation authority or aviation
department of a county or municipality which operates an international airport are exempt from
disclosure. In addition, except as otherwise provided in the section, specied materials that depict
critical airport operating facilities are exempt to the extent that the authority or department
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
251
which operates an airport determines that such information is not generally known and could
jeopardize the security of the airport.
Section 334.049(4), F.S. – Information obtained by the Department of Transportation
as a result of research and development projects and revealing a method of process, production,
or manufacture which is a trade secret as dened by s. 688.002, is condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 337.14(1), F.S. – Financial information required by the Department of
Transportation pursuant to this subsection shall be condential and exempt.
Section 337.162, F.S. – Complaints submitted to the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation and maintained by the Department of Transportation pursuant
to this section relating to alleged violations of state professional licensing laws or rules shall
be condential and exempt. Any complaints submitted to the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation are condential and exempt.
Section 337.168, F.S. – e Department of Transportation’s ocial project cost estimates
and potential bidders’ identities are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) for a limited
period of time as prescribed therein. e department’s bid analysis and monitoring system is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 338.155(6), F.S. – Personal identifying information held by the Department of
Transportation, a county, a municipality, or an expressway authority for the purpose of paying,
prepaying, or collecting tolls and associated charges due for the use of toll facilities is exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 339.0805(1)(c), F.S. – e application and nancial information required for
certication by the Department of Transportation as a socially and economically disadvantaged
business enterprise are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 339.55(10), F.S. – Financial information, as dened in the exemption, of a private
entity applicant required by the Department of Transportation as part of the application process
for loans or credit enhancements from the state-funded infrastructure bank is exempt from s.
119.07(1). e exemption does not apply to records of an applicant who is in default of a loan
issued under this section.
Section 341.0521, F.S. – Personal identifying information held by a public transit
provider for the purpose of facilitating the prepayment of transit fares or the acquisition of a
prepaid transit fare card or similar device is exempt from disclosure.
Section 350.01(9), F.S. – ose portions of a hearing conducted by the Public Service
Commission wherein proprietary condential business information that is condential or
exempt from disclosure pursuant to cited statutes, is discussed are exempt from s. 286.011.
No exempt portion may be made o the record and all exempt portions shall be recorded and
transcribed. e recordings and transcripts are condential unless a court nds that the hearing
was not restricted to the discussion of proprietary condential information, in which case only
that portion which reveals nonexempt information may be disclosed to a third party.
Section 350.121, F.S. – Any records obtained by the Public Service Commission pursuant
to an inquiry are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) while such inquiry is pending. If,
at the conclusion of an inquiry the commission undertakes a formal proceeding, any matter
determined by the commission or by a court or administrative agency to be trade secrets or
condential proprietary business information coming into its possession pursuant to such inquiry
shall be condential and exempt.
252
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 364.107, F.S. – Personal identifying information of a participant in a
telecommunications carrier’s Lifeline Assistance Plan under s. 364.10 held by the Public Service
Commission is condential and exempt except as provided therein.
Section 364.183, F.S. – Records provided by a telecommunications company to the Public
Service Commission which are found by the commission to constitute proprietary condential
business information as dened in the section shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 365.171(12)(a) and (b), F.S. – Any record, recording, or information, or portions
thereof, obtained by a public agency or public safety agency for the purpose of providing emergency
services and which reveals the name, address, telephone number, or personal information about,
or information which may identify any person requesting emergency service or reporting an
emergency by accessing an emergency communications E911 system is condential and exempt
from public disclosure requirements except that such record or information may be disclosed to
a public safety agency. e exemption applies only to the name, address, telephone number, or
personal information which may identify any person requesting emergency services or reporting
an emergency while such information is in the custody of the public agency or public safety agency
providing emergency services. However, disclosure of the location of a coronary emergency to
a private person or entity that owns an automated external debrillator is authorized in some
circumstances, as set forth in the exemption.
Section 365.174, F.S. – Proprietary condential business information, as dened in the
exemption, that is submitted by a provider to the E911 Board, the Division of Telecommunications
within the Department of Management Services, or the Department of Revenue, is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may not be disclosed except as provided in the exemption.
Section 366.093, F.S. – Records provided by a public utility company to the Public
Service Commission which, upon the request of the public utility or any person, are found by the
commission to constitute proprietary condential business information as dened in the section
shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 367.156, F.S. – Records provided by a water or wastewater utility to the Public
Service Commission which, upon the request of the utility or any person, are found by the
commission to constitute proprietary condential business information as dened in the section
shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 368.108, F.S. – Records provided by a natural gas transmission company to the
Public Service Commission which, upon the request of the company or any other person, are
found by the commission to constitute proprietary condential business information as dened
in the section shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 373.089(1)(b)(c), F.S. – A written valuation of land determined to be surplus by
the governing board of a water management district pursuant to this section; related documents
used to form, or which pertain to, the valuation; and written oers to purchase such land are
condential and exempt. e exemption expires 2 weeks before the contract or agreement
regarding the purchase, exchange, or disposal of the surplus land is rst considered by the district.
Before expiration of the exemption, disclosure is authorized as provided in the exemption.
Section 373.139(3)(a), F.S. – Appraisal reports, oers, and counteroers for the
acquisition of real property by water management districts created under Ch. 373 are condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed, or, if no option contract is
executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for purchase is considered for approval by
the governing board. However, disclosure is authorized under some circumstances as described
in the subsection. If negotiations are terminated by the district, the appraisal report, oers and
counteroers shall become available pursuant to s. 119.07(1).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
253
Section 373.69ArticleXIII(a)(8) and (9), F.S. – e mediator selected by parties to
the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin Compact shall not divulge condential
information disclosed to the mediator by the parties or by witnesses in the course of the mediation.
All records received by a mediator while serving as mediator shall be considered condential and
each party to the mediation shall maintain the condentiality of the information.
Section 377.075(4)(f), F.S. – Company data collected by the State Geologist from
specied agencies may be maintained as condential subject to the same requirements as that
required by the federal agency of jurisdiction or, if no specic language exists in federal law, the
condential period shall not exceed 10 years.
Section 377.22(2)(h), F.S. – Information required by this paragraph relating to oil and gas
resources, at the request of the operator, shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1) and held condential
by the Division of Resource Management of the Department of Environmental Protection for a
period of 1 year after the completion of a well.
Section 377.2408(3), F.S. – Any information relating to the location of the geophysical
operation and other information relating to leasing plans, exploration budgets, and other
proprietary information that could provide an economic advantage to competitors shall be kept
condential by the Department of Environmental Protection for 10 years and exempt from s.
119.07(1), and shall not be released to the public without the consent of the person submitting
the application to conduct geophysical operations.
Section 377.2409, F.S. – Information on geophysical activities conducted on state-
owned mineral lands received by the Division of Resource Management of the Department
of Environmental Protection pursuant to this section shall, upon the request of the person
conducting the activities, be held condential for 10 years and shall be exempt from disclosure.
Section 377.2421(2), F.S. – Geologic data which is maintained by the Division of
Resource Management of the Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to this section
shall be subject to the same condentiality requirements that are required by the federal agency
and are exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the extent necessary to meet federal requirements.
Section 377.2424(3), F.S. – e Department of Environmental Protection shall share
geophysical permit information with a county or municipality upon request and may, on its
own initiative, share such information with a county or municipality. However, the county
or municipality shall maintain the condential status of such information, as required by s.
377.2408(3) and such information is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 377.606, F.S. – Proprietary information obtained by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services as the result of a required report, investigation, or verication
relating to energy resources shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) if disclosure
would be likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person providing the
information and the provider has requested condentiality.
Section 377.701(4), F.S. – No state employee may divulge or make known in any manner
any proprietary information under the Petroleum Allocation Act, if the disclosure of such
information would be likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person
providing such information and if the person requests that such information be held condential,
except in accordance with a court order, or in the publication of statistical information compiled
by methods which would not disclose the identity of individual suppliers or companies. Such
proprietary information is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 378.208(5), F.S. – e Department of Environmental Protection may adopt rules
to require mine operators to submit a copy of their most recent annual nancial statements.
e nancial statement, except for a nancial statement that is a public record in the custody
254
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
of another governmental agency, shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07, and the
department shall ensure the condentiality of such statements.
Section 378.406(1)(a), F.S. – Any information relating to prospecting, rock grades, or
secret processes or methods of operation which may be required, ascertained, or discovered
by inspection or investigation shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1) if the applicant requests the
Department of Environmental Protection to keep such information condential and informs
the department of the basis for such condentiality. Should the secretary determine that such
information shall not be condential, the secretary shall provide notice of his or her intent to
release the information.
Section 379.1026, F.S. – Site-specic location information held by an agency of animals
listed by a federal agency as threatened or endangered is exempt from disclosure. e exemption
does not apply to the site-specic location of animals held in captivity.
Section 379.223(3), F.S. – e identity and all information identifying a donor or
prospective donor to a citizen support organization established by the Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission who desires to remain anonymous is condential and exempt from
disclosure, and such anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report of the citizen support
organization.
Section 379.362(6), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, reports required of
wholesale dealers regarding saltwater products are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.0031(6), F.S. – Information submitted in reports of diseases of public health
signicance to the Department of Health as required by this section is condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), and shall be made public only when necessary to public health.
Section 381.00318, F.S. – An employee complaint alleging a private employer’s violation
of s. 381.00317 regarding employer COVID-19 vaccination policies or practices, and all
information relating to an investigation of such complaint, held by the Department of Legal
Aairs is condential and exempt until the investigation is completed or ceases to be active,
as dened in the exemption. Specied information as described in the exemption remains
condential after the investigation is completed or ceases to be active.
Section 381.004(2), (3), (4), and (5), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided, human
immunodeciency virus test results, and the identity of any person upon whom a test has been
performed, are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). No person to whom the results of a
test have been disclosed pursuant to this section may disclose the results to another person except
as authorized in the section. Such condential information is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.0041(9), F.S. – All blood banks shall be governed by the provisions of s.
381.004(2) relating to condentiality of HIV test results and the identity of test subjects.
Section 381.0055(1) and (2), F.S. – Information which is condential by operation of
law and which is obtained by the Department of Health and the health agencies specied in this
section relating to quality assurance activities shall retain its condential status and be exempt
from s. 119.07(1). Such information which is obtained by a hospital or health care provider from
the department or health agencies pursuant to this section shall retain its condential status and
be exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.0055(3), F.S. – Portions of meetings, proceedings, reports and records of
the Department of Health and the health agencies set forth in this section, which relate solely to
patient care quality assurance and where specic persons or incidents are discussed are condential
and exempt from s. 286.011, and are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
255
Section 381.0056(4)(a)16., F.S. – Provisions in the school health services plan developed
pursuant to this section for maintenance of health records of individual students must be in
accordance with s. 1002.22, relating to condentiality of student records.
Section 381.775, F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, all oral and written records,
information, letters, and reports received, made, or maintained by the Department of Health
relative to any applicant for or recipient of services under the brain and spinal cord injury
program are privileged, condential, and exempt from s. 119.07(1). e in camera proceeding
before designated ocials to determine whether records are relevant to an inquiry and should be
released and all records relating thereto are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 381.82(3)(d), F.S. – Research grant applications provided to the Alzheimer’s
Disease Research Grant Advisory Board and any records generated by the board relating to
review of such applications, except nal recommendations, are condential. ose portions of
a meeting during which applications are discussed are exempt, but the closed portions must be
recorded.
Section 381.8531, F.S. – e following information held by the Florida Center for Brain
Tumor Research is condential and exempt from disclosure requirements: Any information
received from an individual from another state or nation or the federal government that is
otherwise condential or exempt. Personal identifying information of a donor to the central
repository or the brain tumor registry is also condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 381.92201(1), (2), and (3), F.S. – Records relating to biomedical research grant
applications presented to the peer review panel are condential and exempt; that portion of a
peer review panel in which grant applications under cited statutes are discussed is exempt from
public meetings requirements; and records generated by the peer review panel relating to review
of such applications, except nal recommendations, are condential and exempt. Also published
at s. 215.56021, F.S.
Section 381.95(1), F.S. – Information identifying or describing the name, location,
pharmaceutical cache, contents, capacity, equipment, physical features, or capabilities of
individual medical facilities, storage facilities, or laboratories established, maintained, or regulated
by the Department of Health as part of the state’s plan of defense against terrorism is exempt from
public disclosure requirements.
Section 381.987(1)(2)(3), F.S. – e following information held by the Department of
Health is condential and exempt: A patient’s or caregiver’s personal identifying information in
the medical marijuana use registry established under s. 381.986, F.S., and all personal identifying
information pertaining to the physician certication for marijuana and the dispensing thereof.
Access is authorized under circumstances set forth in the exemption.
Section 382.008(6), F.S. – All information relating to cause of death in all death and fetal
death records and the parentage, marital status, and medical information included in all fetal
death records are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except for health research purposes
approved by the Department of Health, nor shall copies of same be provided except as provided
in s. 382.025.
Section 382.008(8), F.S. – All information relating to the cause of death and parentage of
a nonviable fetus, the marital status of such fetus’ parent, and any medical information included
in nonviable birth records held by a state agency is condential and exempt, except for research
purposes as approved by the Department of Health. Certied copies may be issued as provided
in the exemption.
Section 382.013(4), F.S. – In the event that a child of undetermined parentage is later
identied and a new certicate of birth is prepared, the original birth certicate shall be sealed
256
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
and led, shall be condential and exempt, and shall not be opened to inspection except by, nor
shall certied copies of the same be issued except by court order to, any person other than the
registrant if of legal age.
Section 382.013(5), F.S. – e original birth certicate shall contain all information
required by the Department of Health for legal, social, and health research purposes. However,
information concerning parentage, marital status, and medical details shall be condential and
exempt, except for health research purposes as approved by the department, nor shall copies be
issued except as provided by s. 382.025.
Section 382.017(1), F.S. – After registering a certicate of foreign birth in the new name
of an adoptee, the Department of Health shall place the adoption report or decree under seal, not
to be broken except pursuant to court order.
Section 382.025(1), F.S. – Except for birth records over 100 years old which are not
under seal pursuant to court order, all birth records of this state are condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1). Certied copies of the original birth certicate or a new or amended certicate,
or adavits thereof, are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall be issued only as
authorized by the Department of Health to those individuals and entities listed in the subsection.
Section 382.025(2), F.S. – A certication of the death or fetal death certicate which
includes the condential portions, shall be issued by the Department of Health only to the
individuals and entities specied in the subsection. All portions of a death certicate shall cease
to be exempt 50 years after the death.
Section 382.025(3), F.S. – Records or data issued by the Department of Health to
government and research entities as set forth in this subsection are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and
copies of records or data issued pursuant to this subsection remain the property of the department.
Section 382.025(4), F.S. – Except as provided in this section, preparing or issuing
certicates of live birth, death, or fetal death is exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), F.S.
Section 383.14(3)(d), F.S. – e condential registry of cases maintained by the
Department of Health pursuant to this section [relating to phenylketonuria and other metabolic,
hereditary and congenital disorders] shall be exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 383.32(3), F.S. – Birth center clinical records are condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1). A client’s clinical records shall be open to inspection only if the client has signed
a consent to release information or the review is made for a licensure survey or complaint
investigation.
Section 383.325, F.S. – Inspection reports of birth centers which have been led with or
issued by any governmental agency are to be maintained as public information. However, any
record which, by state or federal law or regulation, is deemed condential shall be exempt from
s. 119.07(1) and shall not be distributed or made available as public information unless or until
such condential status expires, except as provided in s. 383.32(2)(c) requiring records to be
made available for audit by licensure personnel.
Section 383.412, F.S. – Information held by the State Child Abuse Death Review
Committee or local committee which reveals the identity of the surviving siblings of a deceased
child whose death occurred as the result of a veried report of abuse or neglect is condential
and exempt. Any information held by the Committee or a local committee which reveals the
identity of a deceased child whose death is not the result of abuse or neglect, or the identity of the
surviving siblings, family members, or others living in the deceased child’s home, is condential
and exempt. Portions of committee meetings at which information made condential and
exempt pursuant to subsection (2) are discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
257
e closed portion of the meeting must be recorded; the recording is exempt from disclosure.
Section 383.51, F.S. – e identity of parents who leave a newborn infant at a hospital,
emergency medical services station, or re station in accordance with s. 383.50, is condential
and exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 384.26(2), F.S. – All information gathered by the Department of Health and its
authorized representatives in the course of contact investigation of sexually transmissible disease
infection shall be considered condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and subject to the
provisions of s. 384.29.
Section 384.282(3), F.S. – Except as provided in this section, the name of any person
subject to proceedings initiated by the Department of Health relating to a public health threat
resulting from a sexually transmissible disease, shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 384.287(6), F.S. – An authorized person who receives the results of a test for sexually
transmissible disease pursuant to this section, which results disclose human immunodeciency
virus infection and are otherwise condential pursuant to law, shall maintain the condentiality
of the information received and the identity of the person tested as required by s. 381.004.
Section 384.29, F.S. – All information and records held by the Department of Health
and its authorized representatives relating to known or suspected cases of sexually transmissible
diseases are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information may not be released or
made public by the department or its representatives, or by a court or parties to a lawsuit, except
as provided in the section. Except as provided in the section, information disclosed pursuant to
a subpoena is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 384.30(2), F.S. – e fact of consultation, examination, and treatment of a minor
for a sexually transmissible disease is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be
divulged directly or indirectly, such as sending a bill for services rendered to a parent or guardian,
except as provided in s. 384.29.
Section 385.202(3), F.S. – Information which discloses or could lead to the disclosure of
the identity of any person whose condition or treatment has been reported and studied pursuant
to this section relating to the statewide cancer registry shall be condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) except as provided in the subsection.
Section 390.01114(6)(f), F.S. – All hearings under this section, including appeals, shall
remain condential and closed to the public, as provided by court rule.
Section 390.01116, F.S. – Any information that can be used to identify a minor
petitioning a circuit court for a judicial waiver, as provided in s. 390.01114, of the notice
requirements under the Parental Notice of Abortion Act is condential and exempt if held by a
circuit court, an appellate court, the oce of criminal conict and civil regional counsel, or the
Justice Administrative Commission.
Section 390.01118, F.S. – Any information that can be used to identify a minor petitioning
a circuit court for a judicial waiver, as provided in s 390.01114, of the consent requirements
under the Parental Notice of and Consent for Abortion Act is condential and exempt if held by
a circuit court, an appellate court, the oce of conict and civil regional counsel, or the Justice
Administrative Commission.
Section 390.0112(3), F.S. – Reports concerning pregnancy termination which are
submitted to the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant to this section shall be
condential and exempt and shall not be revealed except upon court order in a civil or criminal
proceeding.
258
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 392.54(2), F.S. – All information gathered by the Department of Health and
its authorized representatives in the course of contact investigation of tuberculosis exposure or
infection shall be condential, subject to the provisions of s. 392.65. Such information is exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 392.545(3), F.S. – e name of any person subject to proceedings initiated by the
Department of Health relating to a public health threat from tuberculosis shall not be revealed by
the department, its authorized representatives, the courts, and other parties to the lawsuit except
as permitted in s. 392.65.
Section 392.65, F.S. – All information and records held by the Department of Health and
its authorized representatives relating to known or suspected cases of tuberculosis or exposure to
tuberculosis shall be strictly condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information may
not be released or made public by the department or its representatives, or by a court or parties to
a lawsuit, except as authorized in the subsection. Except as provided in the section, information
disclosed pursuant to a subpoena is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 393.0674, F.S. – It is a third degree felony for any person to willfully, knowingly,
or intentionally release information from the juvenile records, and a rst degree misdemeanor for
any person to willfully, knowingly, or intentionally release information from the criminal records
or central abuse registry, of a person obtained under s. 393.0655, s. 393.066, or s. 393.067 to any
other person for any purpose other than screening for employment as specied in those sections.
Section 393.13(4)(i)1., F.S. – Central client records of persons with developmental
disabilities are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and no part of such records shall be
released except as authorized in this paragraph.
Section 394.4615(1) and (8), F.S. – Clinical records of persons subject to “e Baker
Act” are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such records may be released only under
the circumstances specied in the statute. Any person, agency, or entity receiving information
pursuant to this section shall maintain such information as condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1).
Section 394.464(1) and (3), F.S. – All petitions for voluntary and involuntary admission
for mental health treatment, court orders, and related records that are led with or by a court
under “e Baker Act” are condential and exempt. Pleadings and other documents made
condential and exempt may be disclosed by the court upon request to certain persons and
entities. e clerk may not publish personal identifying information on a court docket or in a
publicly accessible le.
Section 394.467(6)(a)3., F.S. – e independent expert’s report which is submitted at a
hearing on involuntary inpatient placement is condential and not discoverable, unless the expert
is to be called as a witness for the patient at the hearing.
Section 394.907(7), F.S. – Records of quality assurance programs of community mental
health centers which relate solely to actions taken in carrying out the provisions of this section
and records obtained by the Department of Children and Family Services to determine licensee
compliance with this section are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Meetings or portions
of meetings of quality assurance program committees that relate solely to actions taken pursuant
to this section are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 394.921(2), F.S. – Psychological or psychiatric reports, drug and alcohol reports,
treatment records, medical records, or victim impact statements that have been submitted to the
court or admitted into evidence in Jimmy Ryce Act proceedings shall be part of the record but
shall be sealed and may be opened only pursuant to a court order.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
259
Section 395.0162(2), F.S. – Any records, reports or documents which are condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), shall not be distributed or made available for purposes of
compliance with this section (relating to inspection reports of licensed facilities) unless or until
such condential status expires.
Section 395.0193(4), F.S. – Reports of nal disciplinary actions taken by the governing
board of a licensed facility pursuant to s. 395.0193(3) which have been forwarded to the Division
of Health Quality Assurance of the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant to this
subsection are not subject to inspection under the provisions of s. 119.07(1), even if the division’s
investigation results in a nding of probable cause.
Section 395.0193(7), F.S. – e proceedings and records of peer review panels,
committees, or governing boards of licensed facilities (i.e., a hospital or surgical facility licensed
in accordance with Ch. 395) which relate solely to actions taken in carrying out this section
(i.e., disciplinary proceedings against sta) are not subject to inspection under s. 119.07(1) and
meetings held to achieve the objectives of such panels, committees or governing boards are not
open to the public under Ch. 286.
Section 395.0197(6)(c), F.S. – e annual report submitted by a facility licensed under Ch.
395 (hospitals and surgical facilities) to the Agency for Health Care Administration concerning
information on incidents as provided in this section is condential and is not available to the
public pursuant to s. 119.07(1) or any other law providing access to public records.
Section 395.0197(7), F.S. – An adverse incident report submitted by a facility licensed
under Ch. 395 to the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant to this subsection shall
not be available to the public pursuant to s. 119.07(1) or any other law providing access to public
records, except as authorized therein.
Section 395.0197(13), F.S. – Records of licensed facilities which are obtained by the
Agency for Health Care Administration under cited subsections in order to carry out the
provisions of this section relating to incidents and injuries are not available to the public under
s. 119.07(1), nor shall they be discoverable or admissible in any civil or administrative action,
except in disciplinary proceedings by the agencies set forth in the subsection.
Section 395.0197(14), F.S. – e meetings of the committees and governing board of a
facility licensed under this chapter (hospitals and surgical facilities) held solely for the purpose
of achieving the objectives of risk management as provided by this section shall not be open to
the public under Ch. 286. e records of such meetings are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1), except as provided in subsection (13).
Section 395.1025, F.S. – Notication to an emergency medical technician, paramedic
or other person that a patient they treated or transported has an infectious disease shall be done
in a manner to protect the condentiality of such patient information and shall not include the
patient’s name.
Section 395.1056, F.S. – ose portions of a comprehensive emergency management
plan that address the response of a public or private hospital to an act of terrorism held by
specied agencies are condential and exempt from disclosure requirements but may be disclosed
to another agency for anti-terrorism eorts as set forth in the exemption. at portion of a public
meeting which would reveal information contained in a comprehensive emergency management
plan that addresses the response of a hospital to an act of terrorism is exempt from open meetings
requirements.
Section 395.3025(4), F.S. – Patient records are condential and must not be disclosed
without the consent of the patient or his or her legal representative except that appropriate
disclosure may be made as provided in the subsection.
260
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 395.3025(7)(a), F.S. – If the content of any patient treatment record is provided
under this section, the recipient, if other than the patient or the patient’s representative, may use
such information only for the purpose provided and may not further disclose any information
unless expressly permitted by written consent of the patient. e content of such patient records
is condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 395.3025(8), F.S. – Patient records at hospitals and surgical facilities are exempt
from disclosure under s. 119.07(1), except as provided in subsections (1) through (5) of this
section.
Section 395.3025(9), F.S. – A facility licensed under Ch. 395 (hospitals and surgical
facilities) may prescribe the content and custody of limited-access records which the facility may
maintain on its employees. Such records are limited to information regarding evaluations of
employee performance and shall be accessible only as provided in the subsection. Such limited-
access employee records are exempt from s. 119.07(1) for a period of 5 years from the date such
records are designated limited-access records.
Section 395.3025(10) and (11), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, the home
addresses, telephone numbers, and photographs of employees of any licensed hospital or surgical
facility who provide direct patient care or security services, as well as specied information about
the spouses and children of such employees, are condential and exempt. e same information
must also be held condential by the facility upon written request by other employees who have
a reasonable belief, based upon specic circumstances that have been reported in accordance
with the procedure adopted by the facility, that release of the information may be used to
threaten, intimidate, harass, inict violence upon, or defraud the employee or any member of the
employee’s family.
Section 395.3035(2), F.S. – Certain public hospital records and information, including
contracts for managed care arrangements, strategic plans, trade secrets, as described in the
subsection, are condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 395.3035(3), F.S. – ose portions of a meeting of a public hospital’s governing
board, relating to contract negotiations as described in the subsection are exempt from the public
meeting requirements; however, all governing board meetings at which the board is scheduled
to vote on contracts, except managed care contracts, are open to the public. All portions of a
board meeting closed to the public shall be subject to procedural requirements as set forth in the
subsection.
Section 395.3035(4), F.S. – ose portions of a meeting of a public hospital’s governing
board at which written strategic plans that are condential pursuant to s. 395.3035(2), are
discussed, reported on, modied, or approved by the governing board are exempt from open
meetings requirements provided that certain procedural requirements as set forth in the
subsection are complied with.
Section 395.3035(5), F.S. – Any public records such as tapes, minutes, and notes,
generated at a public hospital governing board meeting which is closed to the public pursuant to
this section are condential and exempt from disclosure. All such records shall be retained and
shall cease to be exempt at the same time as the transcript of the meeting becomes available to
the public.
Section 395.3036, F.S. – e records of a private entity that leases a public hospital or
other public health care facility are condential and exempt from disclosure and the meetings of
the governing board of a private entity are exempt from open meetings requirements when the
public lessor complies with the public nance accountability provisions of s. 155.40(18) with
respect to the transfer of any public funds to the private lessee and when the private lessee meets
at least 3 of 5 criteria set forth in the exemption.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
261
Section 395.4025(13), F.S. – Patient care, transport, or treatment records or reports, or
patient care quality assurance proceedings, records, or reports obtained or made pursuant to this
section (relating to trauma centers) or pursuant to other statutes cited in the subsection, must be
held condential by the Department of Health and are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 395.51(1) and (2), F.S. – Information which is condential by operation of
law and which is obtained by a trauma agency or committee assembled pursuant to s. 395.50,
shall retain its condential status and be exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information which is
obtained by a hospital or emergency medical services provider from a trauma agency or committee
shall retain its condential status and be exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 395.51(3), F.S. – Portions of meetings, proceedings, reports and records of a
trauma agency or committee assembled pursuant to this chapter, which relate solely to patient
care quality assurance are condential and exempt from s. 286.011. Patient care quality assurance,
for the purpose of this section, shall include consideration of specic persons, cases, incidents
relevant to the performance of quality control and system evaluation.
Section 397.334(10), F.S. – Information relating to a participant or a person considered
for participation in a treatment-based drug court program which is contained in specied records
is condential and exempt. Disclosure is permitted under specied conditions.
Section 397.4075(3), F.S. – It is a third degree felony to willfully, knowingly, or
intentionally release any criminal or juvenile information obtained under Ch. 397, “Substance
Abuse Services,” for any purpose other than background checks of personnel for employment.
Section 397.4103(5), F.S. – Records of substance abuse service providers which relate
solely to actions taken in carrying out this section relating to quality improvement and records
obtained by the Department of Children and Families to determine a provider’s compliance
with this section are condential and exempt. Meetings or portions of meetings of quality
improvement program committees that relate solely to actions taken pursuant to this section are
exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 397.501(7), F.S. – Records of substance abuse service providers pertaining to the
identity, diagnosis, and prognosis of and service provision to any individual are condential in
accordance with Ch. 397 and federal condentiality regulations, and are exempt from disclosure.
Such records may not be disclosed without the individual’s written consent except under
circumstances specied in the subsection.
Section 397.6760(1), F.S. – Petitions for involuntary assessment and stabilization, court
orders, related records, and personal identifying information regarding substance abuse impaired
persons which are led with or by a court under Part V of ch. 397, are condential. Disclosure is
authorized upon request to persons and entities specied in the exemption.
Section 397.752, F.S. – An inmate’s substance abuse service records are condential in
accordance with s. 397.501(7).
Section 400.0077(1), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in the subsection, the following
records relating to long-term care ombudsman councils are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1): resident records held by an ombudsman or by the state or a local ombudsman council;
the names or identities of complainants or residents involved in a complaint; and any other
information about a complaint.
Section 400.0077(2), F.S. – at portion of a long-term care ombudsman council meeting
in which the council discusses information that is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) is
closed to the public and exempt from s. 286.011.
262
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 400.022(1)(m), F.S. – Personal and medical records of nursing home residents are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 400.0255(14), F.S. – Except as provided in this subsection, in any proceeding under
this section (relating to hearings of facility decisions to transfer or discharge nursing home residents)
the following information concerning the parties is condential and exempt from disclosure: names
and addresses, medical services provided, social and economic conditions, personal information
evaluations, medical data, and information verifying income eligibility and amount of medical
assistance payments.
Section 400.119, F.S. – Records of meetings of the risk management and quality assurance
committee of a long-term care facility, as well as incident reports led with the facility’s risk manager
and administrator, notications of the occurrence of an adverse incident, and adverse-incident
reports from the facility are condential and exempt. Meetings of an internal risk management
and quality assurance committee are exempt from open meetings requirements and are not open
to the public.
Section 400.494(1), F.S. – Information about patients received by persons employed by, or
providing services to, a home health agency or received by the licensing agency through reports or
inspection is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall be disclosed only as authorized
in the exemption.
Section 400.611, F.S. – e interdisciplinary record of hospice patient care and billing
records are condential and may not be released except as provided in the exemption. Information
obtained from patient records by a state agency pursuant to its statutory authority to compile
statistical data is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 400.945, F.S. – Medical and personal identifying information about patients of a
home medical equipment provider which is received by the licensing agency through reports or
inspection is condential and exempt.
Section 401.30(3), F.S. – Reports to the Department of Health from emergency medical
services licensed pursuant to Part III, Ch. 401, which cover statistical data are public records except
that the names of patients and other patient identifying information contained in such reports are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 401.30(4), F.S. – Records of emergency calls which contain patient examination or
treatment information are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and may not be disclosed
except as provided in the subsection.
Section 401.414(3), F.S. – A complaint concerning an alleged violation of Part III of Ch.
401, relating to emergency medical services, and all information obtained in the investigation
by the Department of Health shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until 10 days
after probable cause is found or the subject of the investigation waives condentiality, whichever
occurs rst. However, the department is not prohibited from providing such information to a law
enforcement or regulatory agency.
Section 401.425(5), F.S. – e records obtained or produced by an emergency medical
review committee providing quality assurance activities as described in subsections (1) through
(4) of the section are exempt from disclosure and committee proceedings and meetings regarding
quality assurance activities are exempt from open meetings requirements.
Sections 402.165(8) and 402.166(8), F.S. – All information obtained or produced by the
Florida Statewide Advocacy Council or by a local advocacy council that is made condential by
law, that relates to the identity of a client subject to the protections of this section, or that relates to
the identity of an individual providing information to the council about abuse or alleged violations
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
263
of rights, is condential and exempt from disclosure. Portions of meetings before such councils
relating to the identity of such individuals or where testimony is provided relating to records
otherwise made condential by law are not subject to open meetings requirements. All records
prepared by council members which reect a mental impression, investigative strategy, or theory
are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until completion of the investigation or the investigation ceases to be
active as dened in the section.
Section 402.22(3), F.S. – Statutory condentiality requirements apply to information
used by interdisciplinary teams involved in decisions regarding the design and delivery of specied
services to students residing in residential care facilities operated by the Department of Children
and Families and the Agency for Persons with Disabilities, and such information is exempt from ss.
119.07(1) and 286.011.
Section 402.308(3)(a), F.S. – Disclosure of the social security number submitted by an
applicant for a child care facility license issued by the Department of Children and Families shall be
limited to child support enforcement purposes.
Section 403.067(7)(c)6., F.S. – Agricultural records relating to production methods,
prots, or nancial information held by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services in
connection with its duties relating to water pollution reduction are condential and exempt from
disclosure requirements.
Section 403.074(3), F.S. – Proprietary information obtained by the Department of
Environmental Protection during a visit to provide onsite technical assistance pursuant to the
Pollution Prevention Act shall be treated in accordance with s. 403.111, unless such condentiality
is waived by the party who requested assistance.
Section 403.111, F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this section, upon a determination
of condentiality by the Department of Environmental Protection in accordance with the standard
and procedures established in subsection (1), specied manufacturing or nancial information
which is obtained through inspection or investigation by the department shall be exempt from s.
119.07(1), shall not be disclosed in public hearings, and shall be kept condential by the department.
Section 405.02, F.S. – Research groups, governmental health agencies, medical societies and
in-hospital medical sta committees may use or publish released information only for the purpose
of advancing medical research or education.
Section 405.03, F.S. – e identity of any person treated or studied as provided in this
chapter (relating to medical information available for research) shall be condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 406.075(3)(b), F.S. –
All proceedings and ndings of the probable cause panel
investigating a medical examiner are exempt from s. 286.011 until probable cause has been found
or the subject of the investigation waives condentiality. e complaint, investigative ndings, and
recommendations of the probable cause panel are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until 10 days after
probable cause has been found or until the subject has waived condentiality. e commission may
provide such information at any time to any law enforcement or regulatory agency.
Section 406.135, F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, autopsy photographs and
video and audio recordings of an autopsy held by the medical examiner are condential and exempt
from public disclosure.
Section 408.061(1)(d), F.S. – Specic provider contract reimbursement data which are
obtained by the Agency for Health Care Administration from health care facilities, health care
providers, or health insurers as a result of onsite inspections may not be used by the state for
purposes of direct provider contracting and are condential and exempt from disclosure.
264
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 408.061(9), F.S. – Portions of patient records obtained or generated by the Agency
for Health Care Administration which contain identifying information of any person or the spouse,
relative, or guardian of such person or any other identifying information which is patient-specic
or otherwise identies the patient, either directly or indirectly, are condential and exempt from
disclosure.
Section 408.061(10), F.S. – e identity of any health care provider, health care facility,
or health care insurer who submits proprietary business information, as dened in the section, to
the Agency for Health Care Administration is condential and exempt from disclosure except as
provided in the subsection.
Section 408.061(12), F.S. – Condential health care information may be released to other
governmental entities or to parties contracting with the Agency for Health Care Administration;
however, the receiving entity shall retain the condentiality of such information as provided in this
section.
Section 408.185, F.S. – Trade secrets and other condential proprietary business information
submitted by a member of the health care community to the Oce of the Attorney General
pursuant to a request for an antitrust no-action letter are condential and exempt from disclosure
for one year after the date of submission.
Section 408.910(14), F.S. – Personal identifying information of an enrollee or participant in
the Florida Health Choices Program is condential and exempt from public disclosure. In addition,
certain proprietary condential business information is condential.
Section 409.1678(6), F.S. – Information about the location of a safe house, safe foster
home, or other residential facility serving victims of sexual exploitation, as dened in cited statute,
which is held by an agency, is condential and exempt; however, the information may be disclosed
as provided in the exemption.
Section 409.175(12), F.S. – It is unlawful for any person, agency, family foster home,
summer day camp, or summer 24-hour camp providing care for children to release information
from the criminal or juvenile records obtained under this section to any other person for any
purpose other than screening for employment as specied in this section.
Section 409.175(16), F.S. – Specied personal information about foster parent applicants,
licensed foster parents, and the families of foster parent applicants and licensees, held by the
Department of Children and Families is exempt from disclosure unless otherwise provided by a
court or as provided in the exemption. e name, address, and telephone number of persons
providing character or neighbor references are exempt.
Section 409.176(12), F.S. – It is unlawful for any person or facility to release information
from the criminal or juvenile records obtained under Ch. 435, s. 409.175 or this section (relating
to registration of residential child-caring agencies) for any purpose other than screening for
employment as specied in those statutes.
Section 409.25661, F.S. – Information obtained by the Department of Revenue under an
insurance claims data exchange system is condential and exempt until such time as the department
determines whether a match exists. If a match exists, such information becomes available for public
disclosure. If a match does not exist, the nonmatch information shall be destroyed as provided in
s. 409.25659, F.S.
Section 409.2577, F.S. – Information gathered or used by the parent locator service is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and such information may be made available only to the
persons and agencies and for the purposes listed in the section.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
265
Section 409.2579, F.S. – Information concerning applicants for or recipients of Title IV-D
child support services is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). e use or disclosure of such
information by the IV-D program is limited to the purposes, and subject to the limitations, set
forth in the section.
Section 409.441(4), F.S. – All information about clients which is part of a runaway youth
center’s intake and client records system is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 409.821, F.S. – Information identifying a Florida Kidcare applicant or enrollee
held by specied agencies is condential and exempt, and may be disclosed only as authorized
in the exemption.
Section 409.910(17)(i), F.S. – All information obtained and documents prepared
pursuant to an investigation of a Medicaid recipient, the recipient’s legal representative, or any
other person relating to an allegation of recipient fraud or theft is condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1): until such time as the Agency for Health Care Administration takes nal agency
action; until the case is referred for criminal prosecution; until an indictment or information is
led in a criminal case; or at all times if otherwise protected by law.
Section 409.91196(1) and (2), F.S. – e rebate amount, percent of rebate, manufacturer’s
pricing, and supplemental rebate, and other trade secrets that the Agency for Health Care
Administration has identied for use in negotiations, held by the agency under cited statute are
condential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. at portion of a meeting of the
Medicaid Pharmaceutical and erapeutics Committee at which this information is discussed is
exempt from public meetings requirements. A record of an exempt portion of a meeting must
be made and maintained.
Section 409.913(12), F.S. – e complaint and all information obtained pursuant to an
investigation of a Medicaid provider, or the authorized representative of a provider, relating to an
allegation of fraud, abuse, or neglect are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until such
time as the Agency for Health Care Administration takes nal agency action; until the Attorney
General refers the case for criminal prosecution; until 10 days after the complaint is determined
to be without merit; or at all times if otherwise protected by law.
Section 409.920(9)(f), F.S. – Pursuant to the conduct of the statewide program of
Medicaid fraud control, the Attorney General shall safeguard the privacy rights of all individuals
and provide safeguards to prevent the use of patient medical records beyond the scope of a specic
investigation of fraud or abuse without the patient’s written consent.
Section 410.037, F.S. – Information about disabled adults receiving services under ss.
410.031-410.036 (relating to home care of disabled adults) which is received by the Department
of Children and Families or its authorized employees, or by persons who provide services to
disabled adults or elderly persons as volunteers or pursuant to contracts with the department is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Such information may not be disclosed publicly in
a manner that identies a disabled adult without the written consent of the person or his or her
legal guardian.
Section 410.605, F.S. – Information about disabled adults receiving services under the
Community Care for Disabled Adults Act which is received by the Department of Children
and Families or its authorized employees, or by persons who provide services to disabled adults
as volunteers or pursuant to contracts with the department is condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). Such information may not be disclosed publicly in a manner which would identify a
disabled adult without the written consent of such person or the disabled adult’s legal guardian.
Section 413.012(1), F.S. – All records furnished to the Division of Blind Services in
connection with state or local vocational rehabilitation programs and containing information as
266
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
to personal facts about applicants or clients given to the state or local vocational rehabilitation
agency, its representatives or its employees in the course of the administration of the program
including lists of names, addresses and records of client evaluations are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 413.341, F.S. – Oral and written records, information, letters and reports
received, made, or maintained by the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation of the Department of
Education relative to any applicant or eligible individual are privileged, condential, and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), and may not be released except as provided in the section. Records that
come into the possession of the division and that are condential by other provisions of law are
condential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), and may not be released by the
division, except as provided in this section.
Section 413.405(11), F.S. – Meetings, hearings, and forums of the Florida Rehabilitation
Council established to assist the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation in the planning and
development of statewide rehabilitation programs and services shall be open and accessible to the
public unless there is a valid reason for an executive session.
Section 413.615(7)(a) and (b), F.S. – e identity of, and all information identifying, a
donor or prospective donor to the Florida Endowment Foundation for Vocational Rehabilitation
who desires to remain anonymous is condential and exempt from disclosure. Portions of
the meetings of the foundation during which the identity of donors or prospective donors is
discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements. Records relating to clients or applicants
to the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation that come into the possession of the foundation and
that are condential by other provisions of law are condential and exempt from disclosure, and
may not be released by the foundation. Portions of meetings of the foundation during which the
identities of such clients or applicants are discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 413.615(11), F.S. – e identities of donors and prospective donors to the Florida
Endowment Foundation for Vocational Rehabilitation who desire to remain anonymous shall be
protected and the anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 414.106, F.S. – at portion of a meeting held by the Department of Children and
Families, CareerSource Florida, Inc., or a local workforce development board or local committee
created pursuant to s. 455.007 at which personal identifying information contained in records
relating to temporary cash assistance is discussed is exempt from open meetings requirements, if
the information identies a participant, a participant’s family or household member.
Section 414.295(1), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, personal identifying
information of a temporary cash assistance program participant, a participant’s family or a
participant’s family or household member, except for information identifying a noncustodial
parent, held by the agencies set forth in the exemption, is condential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements.
Section 415.1045(1)(a), F.S. – All photographs and videotapes taken during the course
of a protective investigation of alleged abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult are condential and
exempt from public disclosure as provided in s. 415.107.
Section 415.107(1), F.S. – All records concerning reports of abuse, neglect or exploitation
of a vulnerable adult, including reports made to the central abuse hotline and all records generated
as a result of such reports are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may not be disclosed
except as authorized in ss. 415.101-415.113.
Section 415.107(3)(l), F.S. – Access to records concerning reports of abuse, neglect or
exploitation of a vulnerable adult shall be granted to any person in the event of the death of
a vulnerable adult determined to be a result of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. Information
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
267
identifying the person reporting abuse, neglect or exploitation shall not be released. Any
information otherwise made condential or exempt by law shall not be released pursuant to this
paragraph.
Section 415.107(6), F.S. – e identity of any person reporting adult abuse, neglect or
exploitation may not be released without that person’s written consent to any person except as
authorized in the subsection. is subsection grants protection only for the person who reports
adult abuse, neglect or exploitation and protects only the fact that the person is the reporter.
Section 415.111(2), F.S. – A person who knowingly and willfully makes public
or discloses any condential information contained in the central abuse hotline, or in other
computer systems, or in the records of any case of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable
adult except as provided in ss. 415.101-415.113 commits a second degree misdemeanor.
Section 420.6231, F.S. – Individual identifying information of a person in specied
homeless management information system is condential and exempt. Release of aggregate
information that does not disclose identifying information is not precluded.
Section 427.705(6), F.S. – e names, addresses, and telephone numbers provided to the
Public Service Commission or administrator of the telecommunications access system established
for the hearing impaired and speech impaired populations, by applicants for specialized
telecommunications devices are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). e information
may be released to contractors only for the purposes set forth in the subsection.
Section 430.105, F.S. – Personal identifying information in a record held by the
Department of Elderly Aairs that relates to an individual’s health or eligibility for or receipt
of health-related, elder care, or long-term care services is condential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements. Such information may be disclosed to another governmental entity
for the purpose of administering the department’s programs for the elderly or if the aected
individual or his or her legal representative provides written consent.
Section 430.207, F.S. – Information about functionally impaired elderly persons receiving
services under the Community Care for the Elderly Act which is received by the Department of
Elderly Aairs or its authorized employees, or by persons who provide services to functionally
impaired elderly persons as volunteers or pursuant to contracts with the department is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 430.504, F.S. – Information about clients of programs created or funded under
s. 430.501 or s. 430.503 (relating to Alzheimer’s Disease) which is received by the Department
of Elderly Aairs or its authorized employees, or by persons who provide services to clients of
programs created or funded under these sections as volunteers or pursuant to contracts with the
department is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 430.608, F.S. – Identifying information about elderly persons receiving services
under ss. 430.601-430.606 which is collected and held by the Department of Elderly Aairs
or its employees, by volunteers, or by persons who provide services to elderly persons under
ss. 430.601-430.606 through contracts with the department, is condential and exempt from
disclosure.
Section 435.09, F.S. – No criminal or juvenile information obtained under this section
may be used for any other purpose than determining whether persons meet the minimum
standards for employment or for an owner or director of a covered service provider. e criminal
and juvenile records obtained by the department or employer are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 440.102(8), F.S. – Except as provided in this subsection, all information,
interviews, reports, statements, memoranda, and drug test results received or produced as a result
268
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
of a drug-testing program are condential and exempt from disclosure, and may not be used
or received in evidence, obtained in discovery, or disclosed in any public or private proceedings
except in accordance with this section or in determining compensability under the workers’
compensation law.
Section 440.108, F.S. – All investigatory records made or received pursuant to s.
440.107, [relating to enforcement of employer compliance with workers’ compensation
coverage requirements], and any records necessary to complete an investigation held by
the Department of Financial Services are condential and exempt until the investigation is
completed or ceases to be “active” as dened in the exemption. After the investigation is
completed or ceases to be active, information in the records remains condential and exempt if
it would jeopardize the integrity of another active investigation; reveal a trade secret, business
or personal nancial information or personal identifying information regarding the identity of
a condential informant; defame or cause unwarranted damage to the good name or reputation
of an individual or jeopardize the safety of an individual, or reveal investigative techniques or
procedures.
Section 440.125, F.S. – Medical records and reports of an injured employee and any
information identifying an injured employee in medical bills provided to the Department
of Financial Services pursuant to s. 440.13, are condential and exempt, except as otherwise
provided by this section and Ch. 440.
Section 440.132, F.S. – Investigatory records of the Agency for Health Care
Administration made or received pursuant to s. 440.134, and any examination records necessary
to complete an investigation are condential and exempt, until the investigation is completed
or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened in the subsection, except that medical records
which specically identify patients must remain condential and exempt.
Section 440.1851(1), F.S. – Personal identifying information of an injured or deceased
employee which is contained in records of the Department of Financial Services pursuant to the
Workers’ Compensation Law is condential, except as otherwise provided in the exemption.
Section 440.25(3), F.S. – Information from the les, reports, case summaries, mediator’s
notes, or other communications or materials, oral or written, relating to a mediation conference
under the Workers’ Compensation Law obtained by any person performing mediation duties is
privileged and condential and may not be disclosed without the written consent of all parties
to the conference.
Section 440.3851, F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, claims les of the Florida
Self-Insurers Guaranty Association, Incorporated, and medical records that are part of a claims
le and other information relating to the medical condition or medical status of a claimant, are
condential and exempt. Portions of meetings of the Association at which such condential
records are discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 440.39(7), F.S. – Documents and inspection results produced pursuant to this
subsection relating to investigation and prosecution of claims against third-party tortfeasors,
are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 440.515, F.S. – e Department of Financial Services shall maintain reports
from self-insurers led pursuant to former s. 440.51(6) as condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1). e reports shall be released only as authorized in this section.
Section 443.101(11)(c), F.S. – Disclosure of drug tests and other information pertaining
to drug testing of individuals who receive compensation under this chapter (Reemployment
Assistance) shall be governed by s. 443.1715.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
269
Section 443.1316(2)(b), F.S. – Provisions of cited statutes which relate to condentiality
of records apply to collection of reemployment assistance contributions and reimbursements by
the Department of Revenue unless prohibited by federal law.
Section 443.1715(1), F.S. – Except as provided in the subsection, information revealing
an employing unit’s or individual’s identity obtained from an employing unit or any individual
under the administration of Ch. 443 (Reemployment Assistance), is condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) and may be disclosed only as authorized in the subsection.
Section 443.1715(3)(b), F.S. – Unless otherwise authorized by law, information described
in the subsection and received by an employer through a drug-testing program, or obtained by a
public employee under this chapter (Reemployment Assistance) is condential and exempt until
introduced into the public record under a hearing conducted under s. 443.151(4).
Section 447.205(10), F.S. – Deliberations of the Public Employees Relations Commission
in any proceeding before it are exempt from s. 286.011 except any hearing held or oral argument
heard by the commission pursuant to Ch. 120 or Ch. 447 shall be open to the public. All draft
orders developed in preparation for or preliminary to the issuance of a nal written order are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 447.307(2), F.S. – e petitions and dated statements signed by employees
regarding whether employees desire to be represented in a proposed bargaining unit are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except that an employee, employer, or employee
organization shall be given an opportunity to verify and challenge signatures as provided in the
subsection.
Section 447.605(1), F.S. – All discussions between the chief executive ocer of a public
employer, or his or her representative, and the legislative body or the public employer relative to
collective bargaining shall be closed and exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 447.605(3), F.S. – All work products developed by the public employer in
preparation for and during collective bargaining negotiations shall be condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 455.213(10), F.S. – Disclosure of a license applicant’s social security number
obtained by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation pursuant to this section
shall be limited to the purpose of administration of the child support enforcement program and
use by the department, and as otherwise provided by law.
Section 455.217(5), F.S. – Meetings and records of meetings of any member of the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation or of any board within the department held
for the exclusive purpose of creating or reviewing licensure examination questions or proposed
examination questions are condential and exempt from ss. 119.07(1) and 286.011.
Section 455.2235(3), F.S. – Information relating to the mediation of a case pursuant to
this section shall be subject to the condentiality provisions of s. 455.225.
Section 455.225(2), F.S. – For cases dismissed prior to a nding of probable cause, the
report submitted by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation regarding dismissal
of a complaint which the department has previously determined to be legally sucient is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 455.225(4), F.S. – All proceedings of a probable cause panel of a board within the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation are exempt from s. 286.011 until 10 days
after the panel nds probable cause or until the subject of the investigation waives condentiality.
270
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 455.225(10), F.S. – e complaint and all information obtained pursuant to
an investigation by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation are condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), until 10 days after probable cause has been found or until the
regulated professional or subject of the investigation waives condentiality, whichever is rst.
However, this exemption does not apply to actions against unlicensed persons pursuant to s.
455.228 or the applicable practice act.
Section 455.229(1) and (2), F.S. – Information required by the Department of Business
and Professional Regulation of an applicant is open to public inspection pursuant to s. 119.07,
except nancial information, medical information, school transcripts, examination questions,
answers, papers, grades and grading keys, which are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and shall not be discussed with or made accessible to anyone except as provided in the subsection.
Information supplied to the department which is exempt or condential remains exempt or
condential while in the custody of the department. Examination questions and answers may be
considered only in camera in any Ch. 120 administrative proceeding. Examination questions and
answers provided at the hearing are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) unless invalidated
by the administrative law judge.
Section 455.232(1), F.S. – No ocer, employee or person under contract with the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation or any board therein, or any subject of an
investigation shall convey knowledge or information to any person not lawfully entitled to such
information or knowledge about any meeting or public record, which at the time such knowledge
or information is conveyed, is exempt from ss. 119.01, 119.07(1) or 286.011.
Section 455.32(15), F.S. – e exemptions set forth in cited provisions of Ch. 455, relating
to records of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, also apply to records
held by the corporation with which the department contracts pursuant to the Management
Privatization Act.
Section 456.014(1) and (2), F.S. – Information required by the Department of Health
of an applicant is open to public inspection pursuant to s. 119.07, except nancial information,
medical information, school transcripts, examination questions, answers, papers, grades and
grading keys, which are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall not be discussed
with or made accessible to anyone except as provided in the subsection. Examination questions
and answers may be considered only in camera in any Ch. 120 administrative proceeding.
Examination questions and answers provided at the hearing are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) unless invalidated by the administrative law judge.
Section 456.017(4), F.S. – Meetings of any member of the Department of Health or of
any board within the department held for the exclusive purpose of creating or reviewing licensure
examination questions or proposed examination questions are exempt from open meetings
requirements and any public records such as tape recordings, minutes, or notes, generated during
or as a result of such meetings are condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 456.046, F.S. – A patient name or other information that identies a patient
which is in a record obtained by the Department of Health for the purpose of compiling a
practitioner prole pursuant to s. 456.041 is condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 456.051(1), F.S. – e report of a claim or action for damages for personal
injury which is required to be led with the Department of Health under cited statutes is public
information except for the name of the claimant or injured person, which remains condential.
Section 456.057(7)(a), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in the exemption, patient
records generated by health care practitioners may not be furnished to any person other than the
patient, the patient’s legal representative, or other health care practitioners and providers involved
in the patient’s care and treatment.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
271
Section 456.057(9), F.S. – All patient records obtained by the Department of Health
and any other documents maintained by the department which identify the patient by name
are condential and exempt and shall be used solely for the purpose of the department and the
appropriate board in disciplinary proceedings.
Section 456.073(2), F.S. – For cases dismissed prior to a nding of probable cause, the
report submitted by the Department of Health regarding dismissal of a complaint which the
department has previously determined to be legally sucient is condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1).
Section 456.073(4), F.S. – All proceedings of a probable cause panel of a board within the
Department of Health are exempt from s. 286.011 until 10 days after the panel nds probable
cause or until the subject of the investigation waives condentiality.
Section 456.073(9)(c), F.S. – e identity of the expert whose report supported the
Department of Health’s recommendation for closure of a complaint, which report is provided to
the complainant in accordance with this paragraph, shall remain condential.
Section 456.073(10), F.S. – Except as provided in this subsection, a complaint and all
information obtained pursuant to an investigation by the Department of Health is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), until 10 days after probable cause has been found or until the
regulated professional or subject of the investigation waives condentiality, whichever is rst.
Section 456.076(13), F.S. – All information obtained by the consultant pursuant to
the impaired practitioner program provided by this section is condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1), F.S.
Section 456.078(4), F.S. – Information relating to the mediation of a case pursuant to this
section shall be subject to the condentiality provisions of s. 456.073.
Section 456.082, F.S. – No ocer, employee or person under contract with the
Department of Health, or any subject of an investigation shall convey knowledge or information
to any person not lawfully entitled to such information or knowledge about any meeting or
public record, which at the time such knowledge or information is conveyed, is exempt from ss.
119.01, 119.07(1) or 286.011.
Section 458.3193, F.S. – All personal identifying information contained in records
provided by physicians licensed under chapter 458 or 459 in response to physician workforce
surveys required as a condition of license renewal and held by the Department of Health is
condential and exempt, and shall be disclosed only as provided in the subsection. NOTE: Also
published in s. 459.0083, F.S.
Section 458.331(1)(s), F.S. – If the Department of Health les a petition for enforcement
against a physician pursuant to this paragraph, the licensee shall not be named or identied
by initials in any public court records or documents, and the proceedings shall be closed to
the public. See also ss. 457.109(1)(o) (acupuncturist); 459.015(1)(w) (osteopathic physician);
464.018(1)(j) (nurse); 466.028(1)(s) (dentist), and 486.125(1)(a)1., F.S. (physical therapist).
Section 458.337(3), F.S. – Records of a medical organization or hospital taking
disciplinary action against a physician which have been furnished to the Department of Health
for the purpose of disciplinary proceedings shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 458.339(3), F.S. – Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of physicians which are maintained by the Department of Health pursuant to this
section shall remain condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until probable cause is found and
an administrative complaint is issued.
272
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 458.341, F.S. – Patient medical records obtained during a search of a physician’s
oce by the Department of Health pursuant to this section are condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1).
Section 459.016(3), F.S. – Records of a medical organization taking disciplinary action
against an osteopathic physician which have been furnished to the Department of Health for
the purpose of disciplinary proceedings shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 459.017(3), F.S. – Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of osteopathic physicians which are maintained by the Department of Health
pursuant to this section shall remain condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until probable
cause is found and an administrative complaint issued.
Section 459.018, F.S. – Patient medical records obtained during a search of an
osteopathic physician’s oce by the Department of Health pursuant to this section are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 464.0096, F.S., – Specied records obtained from the coordinated licensure
health information system established in s. 464.0095 are exempt as are portions of meetings of
the Interstate Commission of Nurse Licensure Compact Administrators where exempt records
are discussed.
Section 464.208(2), F.S. – Criminal records or juvenile records relating to vulnerable
adults that are obtained by the Board of Nursing for purposes of determining whether a
person meets the requirements of Part II of Ch. 464, relating to certied nursing assistants are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 465.017(3), F.S. – Except as permitted in the enumerated chapters, records
maintained in a pharmacy relating to the lling of prescriptions and the dispensing of
medicinal drugs shall not be furnished to persons other than the patient or legal representative,
or to the department or to the patient’s spouse if the patient is incapacitated and has provided
written authorization. Rules adopted by the Board of Pharmacy relative to disposal of records
of prescription drugs shall be consistent with the duty to preserve the condentiality of such
records in accordance with applicable state and federal law.
Section 466.022(3), F.S. – Peer review information regarding dentists obtained by the
Department of Health as background information shall remain condential and exempt from
ss. 119.07(1) and 286.011 regardless of whether probable cause is found.
Section 466.0275(2), F.S. – Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of dentists which are maintained by the Department of Health pursuant to this
section shall remain condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until probable cause is found
and an administrative complaint is issued.
Section 466.041(3), F.S. – Any report of hepatitis B carrier status led by a licensee
or applicant in compliance with the requirements established by the Board of Dentistry shall
be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except for the purpose of investigation or
prosecution of an alleged violation of this chapter by the Department of Health.
Section 471.038(7), F.S. – e exemptions set forth in ss. 455.217, 455.225, and
455.229, for records of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation apply to
records created or maintained by the Florida Engineers Management Corporation, except as
provided in the subsection.
Section 472.0131(5), F.S. – Meetings and records of meetings of any member of the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or of the Board of Professional Surveyors
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
273
and Mappers held for the exclusive purpose of creating or reviewing licensure examination
questions or proposed examination questions are condential and exempt; however, the
exemption does not aect the right of a person to review an examination as provided in
subsection (3).
Section 472.0201(1) and (2), F.S. – All information required by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services of any applicant shall be a public record and open to public
inspection except nancial information, medical information, school transcripts, examination
questions, answers, papers, grades, and grading keys, which are condential and exempt and
shall not be discussed with or made accessible to anyone except as provided therein. Any
information supplied to the department by any other agency which is exempt from Ch. 119
or is condential shall remain exempt or condential pursuant to applicable law while in the
custody of the department. Examination questions and answers provided by the department
to an administrative law judge in an administrative hearing are condential and exempt unless
invalidated by the administrative law judge.
Section 472.02011, F.S. – An ocer, employee, or person under contract with the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or the Board of Professional Surveyors
and Mappers, or any subject of an investigation may not convey knowledge or information to
any person who is not lawfully entitled to such knowledge or information about any public
meeting or public record, which at the time such knowledge or information is conveyed is
exempt from disclosure.
Section 472.033(2), (4), and (10), F.S. – For cases involving a complaint to the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services that are dismissed before a nding of
probable cause, the report of the department is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
All proceedings of the probable cause panel are exempt from s. 286.011 until 10 days after
probable cause has been found to exist by the panel or until the subject of the investigation
waives his or her privilege of condentiality. e complaint and all information obtained
pursuant to the investigation by the department are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
until 10 days after probable cause has been found to exist by the probable cause panel or by the
department, or until the regulated professional or subject of the investigation waives his or her
privilege of condentiality, whichever occurs rst. However, the exemption does not apply to
actions against unlicensed persons pursuant to s. 472.036.
Section 474.214(1)(h), F.S. – If the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation les a petition for enforcement against a veterinarian pursuant to this paragraph,
the licensee shall not be named or identied by initials in any other public court records and
the enforcement proceedings shall be closed.
Section 474.2167, F.S. – Animal medical records held by a state college of veterinary
medicine are condential and exempt.
Section 474.2185, F.S. – Medical reports pertaining to the mental and physical
condition of veterinarians which are maintained by the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation pursuant to this section shall remain condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
until probable cause is found and an administrative complaint is issued.
Section 481.205(3)(a), F.S. – Complaints and any information obtained pursuant to
an investigation by the Board of Architecture and Interior Design are condential and exempt
from disclosure as provided in s. 455.225(2) and (10), F.S.
Section 487.031(5), F.S. – Information relative to formulas of products acquired by the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to the registration of pesticides is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
274
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 487.041(5), F.S. – Condential data received from the Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services by governmental agencies in providing review and comment to the
department regarding pesticide registration shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 491.017 – e Counseling Compact Commission or the executive committee
or other committees of the commission may convene in a closed, nonpublic meeting if specied
topics must be discussed. If a meeting is closed, the commission’s counsel must certify that the
meeting may be closed and must reference each relevant exempting provision. Minutes must
be kept as described in the exemption. e minutes and documents of a closed meeting must
remain under seal subject to release as provided in the exemption. See also 491.018.
Section 493.6121(5), F.S. – Criminal justice information submitted to the Department
of Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to the department’s prescribed duties relating to
licensure of private investigative, private security, and repossession services, is condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 493.6121(7), F.S. – An investigation conducted by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to this chapter relating to private investigative,
private security, and repossession services, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) until a probable cause
determination has been made, the case is closed prior to a determination of probable cause, or
the subject of the investigation waives condentiality.
Section 493.6122, F.S. – e residence telephone number and residence address of
certain licensees maintained by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except that this information may be provided to law
enforcement agencies. When the residence telephone number or address is or appears to be the
business telephone number or address, this information is public record.
Section 494.00125(1), F.S. – Except as provided therein, information relating to
an investigation by the Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to the Mortgage Brokerage
and Mortgage Lending Act, including any consumer complaint received by the oce or the
Department of Financial Services, is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the
investigation is completed or ceases to be “active” as dened in the subsection, unless disclosure
would result in certain enumerated consequences. If the investigation could endanger the safety
of employees or their families, specied information about such personnel and their families is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 494.00125(2), F.S. – All audited statements submitted pursuant to this act
(relating to mortgage brokerage and lending) are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1),
except that employees of the Oce of Financial Regulation shall have access to such information
in the administration and enforcement of the act and prosecution of violations.
Section 494.00125(3), F.S. – Credit history information and credit scores held by
the Oce of Financial Regulation and related to licensing under ss. 494.001-494.0077 are
condential and exempt except as provided therein.
Section 497.172(1), F.S. – Portions of meetings of the Board of Funeral, Cemetery,
and Consumer Services at which licensure examination questions or answers are discussed are
exempt from open meetings requirements; however, the closed meetings must be recorded.
Such recordings are exempt from disclosure.
Section 497.172(2), F.S. – Meetings of the probable cause panel of the Board of Funeral,
Cemetery, and Consumer Services, pursuant to s. 497.153 are exempt from open meeting
requirements although such meetings must be recorded. Records of exempt meetings of the
probable cause panel are exempt from disclosure requirements until 10 days after a determination
regarding probable cause is made.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
275
Section 497.172(3) and (4), F.S. – Except as provided therein, information held by the
Department of Financial Services pursuant to a nancial examination or inspection under Ch.
497 are condential and exempt until the examination or inspection is completed or ceases to
be active. Information held by the department relating to an investigation of a violation of Ch.
497 is condential and exempt until the investigation is completed or ceases to be active or until
10 days after a determination regarding probable cause is made. Trade secrets are condential
and exempt.
Section 499.051(7)(a)(b), F.S. – e complaint and all information obtained pursuant
to an investigation by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation under the Florida
Drug and Cosmetic Act are condential and exempt from disclosure until the investigation and
enforcement action are completed. Disclosure is authorized as provided in the exemption.
Section 500.148(1), F.S. – e complaint and all information deemed condential under
cited federal enactments and which is provided to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services during a joint food safety or food illness investigation, as a requirement for conducting a
federal-state contract or partnership activity, or for regulatory review, is condential and exempt
and may not be disclosed except as provided in the exemption.
Section 501.171(11), F.S. – Information received by the Department of Legal Aairs
pursuant to a notice of a data breach or pursuant to certain investigations is condential until
the investigation is completed or ceases to be active. Disclosure is authorized under specied
circumstances.
Section 501.2041(10)(a), F.S. – All information received by the Department of Legal
Aairs pursuant to an investigation by the department or a law enforcement agency into certain
prohibited social media platform activities is condential and exempt until such time as the
investigation is completed or ceases to be active. is exemption shall be construed in conformity
with s. 119.071(2)(c), F.S. Specied information as described in the exemption remains
condential after the investigation is completed or ceases to be active.
Section 501.2065, F.S. – Criminal or civil intelligence, investigative information, or any
other information held by any state or federal agency that is obtained by the Department of
Legal Aairs in the course of an investigation under Part II of Ch. 501 and that is condential or
exempt from s. 119.07(1) retains its status as condential or exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 517.12(14), F.S. – Currency transaction reports led with the Oce of Financial
Regulation by dealers and investment advisers pursuant to this subsection are condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) except as provided in the subsection.
Sections 517.2015 (securities) and 520.9965 (retail installment sales), F.S. – Except
as provided in the exemption, information relating to an investigation by the Oce of Financial
Regulation pursuant to the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act, or pursuant to the
retail installment sales laws, including a consumer complaint, is condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active” as dened in the subsection,
unless disclosure would result in any of the enumerated consequences. If the investigation could
endanger the safety of employees or their families, specied information about such personnel
and their families is condential and exempt.
Section 517.2016, F.S. – Information that would reveal examination techniques or
procedures used by the Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to the Florida Securities and
Investor Protection Act is condential and exempt.
Section 526.311(2), F.S. – Any records, documents, or other business material, regardless
of form or characteristics, obtained by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
in an investigation of an alleged violation of the Motor Fuel Marketing Practices Act are
276
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
condential and exempt from disclosure, while the investigation is pending. At the conclusion
of the investigation, any matter determined by the department or by a state or federal judicial or
administrative body to be a trade secret or proprietary condential business information held by
the department pursuant to such investigation shall be condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 527.0201(8), F.S. – Liqueed petroleum gas competency examinations of the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are condential and exempt.
Section 527.062(1), F.S. – Information compiled by the Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services pursuant to an investigation of an accident involving liqueed petroleum gas
or equipment is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed
or ceases to be “active” as dened in the subsection.
Section 539.003, F.S. – Except as provided in the subsection, records relating to
pawnbroker transactions delivered to appropriate law enforcement ocials are condential and
exempt.
Section 542.28(9), F.S. – Notwithstanding s. 119.07(1), it is the duty of the Attorney
General or a state attorney to maintain the secrecy of all evidence, testimony, documents, work
product, or other results of an investigative demand relevant to an antitrust investigation;
however, the Attorney General or state attorney may disclose such investigative evidence to the
agencies enumerated in the section.
Section 548.021(2), F.S. – Disclosure of a license applicant’s social security number
which is obtained by the State Athletic Commission pursuant to the statute is limited to child
support enforcement purposes.
Section 548.062(2), F.S. – Proprietary condential business information, as dened in
the exemption, provided by a promoter to the Florida State Boxing Commission or obtained by
the commission through an audit of a promoter’s books and records is condential and exempt.
Disclosure is authorized under specied circumstances.
Section 550.0251(9), F.S. – All information obtained by the Florida Gaming Control
Commission pursuant to an investigation for an alleged violation of the chapter or rules of the
division is exempt from disclosure until an administrative complaint is issued or the investigation
is closed or ceases to be active, as dened therein. e division may, however, provide
information to any law enforcement agency or other regulatory agency. With the exception
of active criminal intelligence or criminal investigative information and any other information
that, if disclosed, would jeopardize the safety of an individual, all other information, records and
transcriptions become public when the investigation is closed or ceases to be active.
Section 550.2415(1)(a), F.S. – Test results and the identities of racing animals being
tested and of their trainers and owners are condential and exempt for 10 days after testing
of all samples collected on a particular day has been completed and any positive test results
derived from such samples have been reported to the director of the Florida Gaming Control
Commission or administrative action has been commenced.
Section 556.113, F.S. – Proprietary condential business information held by Sunshine
State One-Call of Florida, Inc., for the purpose of describing the extent and root cause of
damage to an underground facility or using the member ticket management software system
is exempt.
Section 559.5558(2), F.S. – Information held by the Oce of Financial Regulation
pursuant to an investigation or examination of a violation of statutes relating to consumer
collection practices is condential and exempt until the investigation or examination is
complete or no longer active. Disclosure is authorized to a law enforcement agency or another
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
277
administrative agency in the performance of its ocial duties and responsibilities. However,
specied information, including certain consumer information, remains condential.
Section 559.952(5)(h), F.S. – Certain information provided to and held by the Oce
of Financial Regulation in a Financial Technology Sandbox application by specied providers of
innovative nancial products or services is condential and exempt. Condential information
may be released as provided in the exemption.
Section 560.129, F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in the exemption, information
concerning an investigation or examination by the Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to
this chapter (Money Services Businesses), including any consumer complaint received by the
oce or the Department of Financial Services, is condential and exempt from disclosure until
the investigation or examination ceases to be “active” as that term is dened in the exemption.
Condentiality is also provided for other records such as trade secrets and personal nancial
records. Other records may also remain condential if disclosure would result in any of the
consequences listed in the exemption. Quarterly reports submitted under s.560.118(2) are
condential.
Section 560.312(1)(2), F.S. – Payment instrument transaction information held by the
Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to s. 560.310, F.S. (check cashing and foreign currency
exchangers) which identies a licensee, payor, payee, or conductor is condential and exempt,
except as provided in the exemption.
Section 560.4041, F.S. – Information that identies a drawer or deferred presentment
provider contained in the database authorized under s. 560.404, is condential and exempt from
public disclosure requirements and may not be released except as provided in the subsection.
Section 561.19(2)(b), F.S. – Any portion of the drawing results of a particular county
to determine which applicants are to be considered for beverage licenses which reveals the rank
order of persons not receiving notice of selection is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1),
until such time as all of the licenses from that county’s drawing have been issued.
Section 569.215(1), F.S. – Proprietary condential business information received by
specied state ocials or outside counsel representing the state for the purpose of negotiation
or verication of annual tobacco settlement payments is condential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements.
Section 570.077, F.S. – Information held by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services as part of a joint or multi-agency examination or investigation with another state or
federal regulatory, administrative or criminal justice agency which is condential or exempt under
the laws or regulations of that state or federal agency is condential and exempt. Disclosure is
authorized under specied circumstances. e exemption does not apply to information held
by the department as part of an independent examination or investigation conducted by the
department.
Section 570.544(8), F.S. – Records of the Division of Consumer Services of the
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are public records; however, customer lists,
customer names, and trade secrets are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). Disclosure
necessary to enforcement procedures does not violate this prohibition.
Section 570.686, F.S. – e identity of a donor to the Florida Agriculture Center and
Horse Park Authority, if requested by the donor in writing, is condential and exempt from
disclosure.
Section 570.691(6), F.S. – e identity of a donor or prospective donor to a direct-
support organization established to assist programs of the Department of Agriculture and
278
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Consumer Services who desires to remain anonymous and all information identifying such donor
or prospective donor is condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 570.715(5), F.S. – Appraisal reports for conservation easement acquisition are
condential and exempt, for use by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
and the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, until an option contract is
executed or, if no option contract is executed, until 2 weeks before a contract or agreement for
purchase is considered for approval by the board of trustees. However, disclosure is authorized
under some circumstances, as described in the paragraph. e department may release a report
when the passage of time has rendered the conclusions of value invalid or when the department
has terminated negotiations.
Section 581.199, F.S. – It is unlawful for any authorized representative who in an ocial
capacity obtains under the provisions of this chapter (relating to plant industry) any information
entitled to protection as a trade secret, as dened in s. 812.081, to reveal that information to any
unauthorized person.
Section 585.611(1), F.S. – Personal identifying information of those persons employed
by, under contract with, or volunteering for a public research facility, including a state university,
that conducts animal research is exempt from disclosure when such information is contained in
specied records relating to animal research.
Section 595.409(1)(2), F.S. – Personal identifying information of an applicant for or
participant in a school food and nutrition service program held by the Departments of Agriculture
and Consumer Services, or Education is exempt. Such information shall be disclosed as provided
in the exemption.
Section 597.0042, F.S. – Certain aquaculture records held by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services are condential and exempt. Disclosure to another
governmental entity in the performance of its duties is authorized.
Section 601.10(8), F.S. – Any non published reports or data related to studies or research
conducted, caused to be conducted, or funded by the Department of Citrus under s.601.13, is
condential and exempt.
Section 607.0505(6), F.S. – Information provided to, and records and transcripts obtained
by, the Department of Legal Aairs pursuant to this section relating to corporations or alien
business organizations are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) while the investigation is
active. e department shall not disclose condential information, records, or transcripts except
as authorized by the Attorney General in the circumstances listed in the subsection. Similar
condentiality provisions exist relating to information received by the department regarding
nonprot corporations (s. 617.0503[6]).
Section 624.23, F.S. – Personal nancial and health information as dened therein held
by the Department of Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance Regulation relating to a
consumer’s complaint or inquiry regarding a matter or activity regulated under the Florida
Insurance Code or s. 440.191 is condential and exempt. e condential and exempt
information may be disclosed to the persons and entities described in the exemption.
Section 624.231, F.S. – If the Department of Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance
Regulation determines that any portion of a record requested by a person is exempt pursuant to
Ch. 119, the insurance code, or Ch. 641, the department or oce shall disclose to the person
in writing that the requested record will be provided in a redacted format and that there will
be additional fees charged for sta time associated with researching and redacting the exempt
portion of the record. Before the department or oce provides the record, the person must
arm his or her request to receive the record.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
279
Section 624.310(3)(f), F.S. – An emergency order entered by the Oce of Insurance
Regulation or the Department of Financial Services against a licensee or aliated party under
this subsection is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until made permanent, unless the
department or oce nds that the condentiality will result in substantial risk of nancial loss
to the public. Emergency cease and desist orders that are not made permanent are available for
public inspection 1 year from the date the emergency order expires; however, portions of such
order shall remain condential if disclosure would result in any of the consequences listed in the
paragraph.
Section 624.311(2), F.S. – Records of insurance claim negotiations of any state agency
or political subdivision are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until termination of all
litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident.
Section 624.319(3), F.S. – Examination reports of insurers prepared by the Oce of
Insurance Regulation or the Department of Financial Services or its examiner pursuant to this
section are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until led. Investigation reports are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be
“active,” as that term is dened in the paragraph. After an investigation is completed or ceases
to be active, portions of such records shall remain condential and exempt if disclosure would
result in any of the consequences listed in the paragraph. Work papers held by the Department
of Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance Regulation are condential and exempt from
disclosure until the examination report is led or until the investigation is complete or no longer
active; however, portions of work papers may remain condential under the conditions specied
therein. Information received from another governmental entity or the National Association
of Insurance Commissioners, which is condential or exempt when held by that entity, for the
department’s or oce’s use in the performance of its examination or investigation duties are
condential and exempt from disclosure requirements. Lists of insurers or regulated companies
are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), if the conditions set forth in the paragraph apply.
Section 624.40851(1) and (2), F.S. – Risk-based capital plans and reports as described in
the exemption that are held by the Oce of Insurance Regulation, as well as specied additional
related materials, are condential and exempt from disclosure. Hearings relating to the oce’s
actions regarding such risk-based capital records, are exempt from open meetings requirements,
subject to specied conditions.
Section 624.4212(2)(3)(4), F.S. – Certain proprietary condential business information
held by the Oce of Insurance Regulation, specied reports submitted, and condential
information received from other jurisdictions which is held by the Oce relating to insurer
valuation and solvency, are condential and exempt. Disclosure is authorized under specied
circumstances.
Section 624.82(1), F.S. – Orders, records, and other information in the possession of the
Oce of Insurance Regulation relating to the supervision of any insurer are condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1), except as otherwise provided in this section. Proceedings and hearings
relating to the oce’s supervision of any insurer are exempt from s. 286.011, except as otherwise
provided in this section.
Section 624.86, F.S. – During the period of administrative supervision, the Oce of
Insurance Regulation may meet with a supervisor appointed under this part or representatives of
the supervisor, and such meetings are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 625.121(3)(a)9., F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, a
memorandum or other material in support of the actuarial opinion required to be furnished
to the Oce of Insurance Regulation under this subsection, is condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) and is not subject to subpoena or discovery directly from the Oce.
280
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 625.1214(1), F.S. – Documents, reports, materials, and other information
created, produced, or obtained pursuant to ss. 625.121 and 625.0212 (valuation of policies and
contracts) are privileged, condential, and exempt as provided in s. 624.4212, and are not subject
to subpoena or discovery directly from the Oce of Insurance Regulation.
Section 626.511(3), F.S. – Any information or record regarding the termination of an
appointment which is furnished to the Oce of Insurance Regulation or the Department of
Financial Services under this section is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.601(6), F.S. – e complaint and any information obtained pursuant to the
investigation by the Oce of Insurance Regulation or the Department of Financial Services are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), unless the department or the Oce takes specied
action against the individual or entity.
Section 626.631(2), F.S. – Except as provided in the subsection, the records or evidence
of the Department of Financial Services relative to a hearing on the suspension or revocation of
a license or appointment are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until after the material
has been published at the hearing.
Section 626.84195(2), F.S. – Proprietary business information, as dened in the
exemption, provided to the Oce of Insurance Regulation by a title insurance agency or insurer
is condential and exempt until such information is otherwise publicly available or is no longer
treated by the title insurance agency or insurer as proprietary business information.
Section 626.842(3), F.S. – Information contained in credit or character reports furnished
to the Department of Financial Services under this section (relating to applications of title
insurance agents) is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.8433(3), F.S. – Any information or record furnished to the Department of
Financial Services under this section regarding the reasons for termination of the appointment of
a title insurance agent is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 626.884(2), F.S. – Except as provided in the subsection, information contained in
the books and records of an insurance administrator is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
if the disclosure would reveal a trade secret as dened in s. 688.002.
Section 626.921(8), F.S. – Information furnished to the Department of Financial Services
pursuant to pertinent statutes relating to policies and examinations of surplus lines agents is
condential and exempt if disclosure would reveal information specic to a particular policy
or policy holder. Information furnished to the Florida Surplus Lines Service Oce under the
Surplus Lines Law is condential and exempt if disclosure would reveal information specic to a
particular policy or policy holder.
Section 626.9651, F.S. – e Department of Financial Services and the Financial Services
Commission must adopt rules consistent with other provisions of the Florida Insurance Code to
govern the use of a consumer’s nonpublic personal nancial and health information.
Section 626.989(5), F.S. – Records of the Department of Financial Services and the
Oce of Insurance Regulation relating to an investigation of insurance fraud under this section
are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to
be “active,” as that term is dened in the subsection, unless disclosure would result in certain
enumerated consequences.
Section 626.9891(11)(a), F.S. – Information relating to investigation and tracking of
insurance fraud submitted by insurers to the Department of Financial Services is exempt from
public disclosure.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
281
Section 627.0628(3)(g), F.S. – A trade secret as dened in s. 668.002 that is used in
designing and constructing a hurricane or ood loss model and that is provided pursuant to
this section, by a private company, to the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection
Methodology, Oce of Insurance Regulation, or the appointed consumer advocate, is condential
and exempt. at portion of a meeting of the commission or of a rate proceeding on an insurer’s
rate ling at which a trade secret made condential by this exemption is discussed is exempt from
open meetings requirements. e closed meeting must be recorded; the recording is exempt
from disclosure.
Section 627.06292(1), F.S. – Reports of hurricane loss data and associated exposure data
that are specic to a particular insurance company, as reported by an insurer or a licensed rating
organization to the Oce of Insurance Regulation or to a state university center are exempt from
disclosure requirements.
Section 627.311(4)(a), F.S. – Certain records of the Florida Automobile Joint
Underwriting Association, as described in the exemption, are condential and exempt from
disclosure as set forth in the subsection.
Section 627.311(4)(b), F.S. – e Florida Automobile Joint Underwriting Association
must keep portions of meetings during which condential and exempt underwriting les or
condential and exempt claims les are discussed exempt from open meetings requirements,
subject to the conditions set forth in the exemption. A copy of the transcript, less any condential
and exempt information, of any closed meeting during which condential and exempt claims
les are discussed shall become public as to individual claims les after settlement of that claim.
Section 627.3121, F.S. – Certain records held by the Florida Workers’ Compensation
Joint Underwriting Association, Inc., as described in the exemption, are condential and exempt
and may only be released as prescribed therein. at portion of a meeting of the association’s
board of governors, or any subcommittee of the association’s board, at which records made
condential and exempt by the section are discussed is exempt from open meeting requirements;
the transcript and minutes of exempt portions of meetings are condential and exempt from
disclosure. ose portions of the transcript or the minutes pertaining to a condential and
exempt claims le are no longer condential and exempt upon termination of all litigation with
regard to that claim.
Section 627.351(4)(g), F.S. – All records, relating to the Medical Malpractice Joint
Underwriting Association or its operation are open for public inspection, except that a claim
le in the possession of the Association is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) during
processing of that claim. Information in these les that identies an injured person is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 627.351(6)(x)1., F.S. – Certain records of the Citizens Property Insurance
Corporation, as described in the exemption, are condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 627.351(6)(x)4., F.S. -- Portions of meetings of the Citizens Property Insurance
Corporation are exempt from open meetings requirements where condential underwriting
les or condential open claims les are discussed, subject to the conditions set forth in the
exemption. A copy of the transcript, less any exempt matters, of any closed meeting where claims
are discussed shall become public as to individual claims after settlement of the claim.
Section 627.3518(11), F.S. – Proprietary condential business information, as dened in
the exemption, that is provided to the Citizens Property Insurance Corporation clearinghouse is
condential and exempt.
Section 627.352, F.S. – Certain records of the Citizens Property Insurance Corporation
as described in the exemption which identify detection, investigation or response practices for
282
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
suspected or conrmed information technology security incidents as well as those portions of risk
assessments, evaluations, audits, and other reports of the corporation’s information technology
security program as specied in the exemption are condential and exempt. Portions of meetings
which would reveal such data and information are exempt from s. 286.011, F.S. All exempt
portions must be recorded and transcribed and the recordings and transcripts must be kept
condential except as provided in the exemption.
Section 627.6699(8)(c), F.S. – Information relating to rating and renewal practices of small
employer health insurance carriers which is submitted by the carriers to the Oce of Insurance
Regulation pursuant to this subsection constitutes proprietary and trade secret information and
may not be disclosed except as agreed to by the carrier or pursuant to court order.
Section 627.912(2)(e), F.S. – e name and address of the injured person that is
contained in reports to the Oce of Insurance Regulation regarding professional liability claims
is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and must not be disclosed without the person’s
consent, except for disclosure to the Department of Health.
Section 627.9122(2)(e), F.S. – e name of the injured person contained in a claim
report led by an insurer providing liability coverage for ocers and directors is condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1), and must not be disclosed by the Oce of Insurance Regulation
without the consent of the injured person.
Section 627.9126(3)(a)6., F.S. – e names of claimants identied in reports led by
liability insurers with the Oce of Insurance Regulation are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1).
Section 628.801(4), F.S. – Filings and related documents led by insurance holding
companies as provided in this section are condential and exempt as provided in s. 624.4212
and are not subject to subpoena or discovery directly from the Oce of Insurance Regulation.
Section 631.195, F.S. – Specied records of an insurer which are made or received by
the Department of Financial Services acting as a receiver are condential and exempt, including
personal and nancial information of a consumer, consumer claim les, personnel and payroll
records, underwriting les, specied risk information and corporate governance records submitted
pursuant to cited statutes and condential information received from other governmental entities.
Release is authorized under certain circumstances.
Section 631.398(1), F.S. – Reports and recommendations made by specied persons to
the Oce of Insurance Regulation or to the Department of Financial Services relative to the
solvency, liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of a member insurer or germane to the
solvency of a company seeking to do insurance business in this state, are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) until the termination of a delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.582, F.S. – Certain records of the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association
such as specied claims, medical records that are part of a claims le, information relating to the
medical condition or medical status of a claimant, and records pertaining to matters reasonably
encompassed in privileged attorney-client communications of the association, are condential
and exempt.
Section 631.62(2), F.S. – A request from the board of directors of the Florida Insurance
Guaranty Association that the Oce of Insurance Regulation order an examination of any
member insurer is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the examination report is
released to the public.
Section 631.62(3), F.S. – e reports and recommendations by the board of directors of
the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association on any matter germane to the solvency, liquidation,
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
283
rehabilitation, or conservation of any member insurer are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the termination of a delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.723(1), F.S. – e reports and recommendations by the board of directors
of the Florida Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association to the Department of Financial
Services or to the Oce of Insurance Regulation on any matter germane to the solvency,
liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of any member insurer or a company seeking to do
insurance business in Florida are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the termination
of a delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.723(3), F.S. – A request by the board of directors of the Florida Life and Health
Insurance Guaranty Association that the Oce of Insurance Regulation order the examination of
any member insurer is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the examination report is
released to the public.
Section 631.724, F.S. – Negotiations or meetings of the Florida Life and Health Insurance
Guaranty Association involving discussions of the association’s powers and duties under 631.717
are exempt from s. 286.011. Records of such negotiations or meetings are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1) until the termination of a delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.931, F.S. – e reports and recommendations by the board of directors of the
Florida Workers’ Compensation Insurance Guaranty Association under s. 631.917 on any matter
germane to the solvency, liquidation, rehabilitation, or conservation of any member insurer are
condential and exempt until the termination of a delinquency proceeding.
Section 631.932, F.S. – Negotiations between a self-insurance fund and the Florida Workers’
Compensation Insurance Guaranty Association are exempt from s. 286.011. Documents related
to such negotiations that reveal identiable payroll and loss and individual claim information are
condential and exempt.
Section 633.112(7), F.S. – Records obtained or prepared by the State Fire Marshal pursuant
to his or her investigation of res and explosions are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
until the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active” as that term is dened in the subsection.
Section 633.126(5), F.S. – Discussions involving ocials of the Department of Financial
Services and an insurance company in accordance with this section (relating to investigation of
fraudulent insurance claims and crimes) are condential and exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 633.324(1), F.S. – Test material relating to applicants for licensure, certication, or
permitting by the State Fire Marshal is made condential by s. 119.071(1)(a). An applicant may
waive condentiality in writing for purposes of discussion with the State Fire Marshal or his or her
sta.
Section 634.045(5), F.S. – e lings made by a guarantee organization pursuant to this
section relating to guarantee agreements provided by motor vehicle service agreement companies are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 634.201(3), F.S. – e Department of Financial Service’s records or evidence
relative to a hearing for the suspension or revocation of the license or appointment of a salesman
of automobile warranties are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until such investigation is
completed or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened in the subsection.
Section 634.348, F.S. – Active examination or investigatory records of the Department of
Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance Regulation made or received pursuant to Part II,
Ch. 634 (Home Warranty Associations) are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until such
investigation is completed or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened in the section.
284
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 634.4065(5), F.S. – e lings made by a guarantee organization pursuant to this
section relating to guarantee agreements provided by service warranty associations are condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 634.444, F.S. – Active examination or investigatory records of the Department
of Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance Regulation made or received pursuant to Part III,
Ch. 634 (Service Warranty Associations) are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
such investigation is completed or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened in the section.
Section 636.064(1) and (2), F.S. – Information pertaining to the diagnosis, treatment, or
health of an enrollee of a prepaid limited health service organization is condential and exempt
from disclosure and shall only be available pursuant to specic written consent of the enrollee
or as otherwise provided by law. Any proprietary nancial information contained in contracts
entered into with providers by prepaid limited health service organizations is condential and
exempt from disclosure.
Section 636.064(3), F.S. – Information obtained or produced by the Department
of Financial Services or the Oce of Insurance Regulation pursuant to an investigation or
examination of a prepaid limited health service organization is condential and exempt from
disclosure until the examination report has been led pursuant to s. 624.319 or until the
investigation is completed or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened in the subsection.
Except for information specied in the subsection, all information obtained by the oce
pursuant to an examination or investigation shall be available after the examination report has
been led or the investigation is completed or ceases to be active.
Section 641.515(2), F.S. – Patient-identifying information contained in reports
and records prepared or obtained under cited statutes (relating to investigation of health
maintenance organizations) by the Agency for Health Care Administration or by an outside
source, is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 641.55(5)(c), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, any
identifying information contained in the reports of a health maintenance organization led with
the Agency for Health Care Administration under this subsection is condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 641.55(6), F.S. – Incident reports led with the Agency for Health Care
Administration by a health maintenance organization pursuant to this subsection are condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 641.55(8), F.S. – Identifying information in records of a health maintenance
organization which are obtained by the Agency for Health Care Administration pursuant to
this section (internal risk management program) is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Identifying information contained in records obtained under s. 456.071 is exempt to the extent
that it is part of the record of disciplinary proceedings made available to the public by the agency
or appropriate board.
Section 648.26(3), F.S. – e Department of Financial Services’ investigatory records
pertaining to bail bond agents and runners are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until
the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened in the subsection.
Section 648.34(3), F.S. – Information in a character and credit report furnished to the
Department of Financial Services as part of an application for licensure as a bail bond agent is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 648.39(1), F.S. – Information furnished to the Department of Financial Services
pursuant to this subsection regarding the termination of appointment of a managing general
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
285
agent, bail bond agent, or temporary bail bond agent is condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1).
Section 648.41, F.S. – Information furnished to the Department of Financial Services
pursuant to this subsection regarding the termination of appointment of temporary bail bond
agents is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 648.46(3), F.S. – e complaint and all information obtained pursuant to the
investigation of a bail bond licensee by the Department of Financial Services are condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active,” as dened
in the subsection.
Section 651.105(3), F.S. – Reports of the results of such nancial examinations or
providers engaged in the execution of care contracts must be kept on le by the Oce of
Insurance Regulation. Any investigatory records, reports or documents held by the oce are
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be
“active,” as that term is dened in the subsection.
Section 651.111(2), F.S. – Unless the complainant who has led a complaint against a
continuing care provider specically requests otherwise, neither the substance of the complaint
which is provided to the provider nor any copy of the complaint or any record which is published,
released, or otherwise made available to the provider shall disclose the name of any person
mentioned in the complaint except the names of Oce of Insurance Regulation personnel
conducting the investigation or inspection pursuant to this chapter.
Section 651.121(5)(c), F.S. – Except for proceedings conducted under s. 651.018
(authorizing the Oce of Insurance Regulation to place a facility in administrative supervision),
the books and records of the Continuing Care Advisory Council to the Oce of Insurance
Regulation of the Financial Services Commission shall be open to inspection at all times.
Section 651.134, F.S. – Any active investigatory record of the Oce of Insurance
Regulation made or received under Ch. 651 (Continuing Care Contracts) and any active
examination record necessary to complete an active investigation is condential and exempt from
s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active,” as that term is dened
in the section.
Section 655.0321, F.S. – e Oce of Financial Regulation shall consider the public
purposes specied in s. 119.14(4)(b) in determining whether the hearings and proceedings
conducted pursuant to s. 655.033 (cease and desist orders) and s. 655.037 (suspension or removal
orders) shall be closed and exempt from s. 286.011, and whether related documents shall be
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.033(6), F.S. – An emergency order entered by the Oce of Financial
Regulation pursuant to this subsection (relating to the issuance of cease and desist orders to
nancial institutions in certain circumstances) is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
until the order is made permanent, unless the oce nds that such condentiality will result in
substantial risk of nancial loss to the public.
Section 655.057(1), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this section and except for
such portions thereof which are otherwise public record, all records and information relating
to an investigation by the Oce of Financial Regulation are condential and exempt from s.
119.07(1) until the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active” as that term is dened in
the section. After the investigation is completed or ceases to be active, portions of the records
shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) to the extent that disclosure would cause any
of the consequences listed in the subsection.
286
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 655.057(2), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this section and except for
such portions thereof which are public record, reports of examinations, operations, or condition,
prepared by, or for the use of, the Oce of Financial Regulation or other agency responsible for
regulation of banking institutions in this state are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Examination, operation, or condition reports of a nancial institution shall be released within 1
year after the appointment of a liquidator, receiver, or conservator to such nancial institution.
However, any portion of such reports which discloses the identities of depositors, bondholders,
members, borrowers, or stockholders, other than directors, ocers, or controlling stockholders
of the institution, shall remain condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(3), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this section and except for
those portions that are otherwise public record, after an investigation relating to an informal
enforcement action is completed or cases to be active, informal enforcement actions are
condential and exempt to the extent that disclosure would cause any of the consequences listed
in the subsection.
Section 655.057(4), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this section and except for
those portions that are otherwise public record, trade secrets as dened in s. 688.002 which
comply with s. 655.0591 and which are held by the Oce of Financial Regulation in accordance
with its statutory duties with respect to the nancial institutions codes are condential and
exempt.
Section 655.057(5), F.S. – Any condential information or records obtained from the
Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to this subsection (authorizing specied disclosures of
records or information) shall be maintained as condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(6)(b), F.S. – Condential records and information furnished pursuant
to a legislative subpoena shall be kept condential by the legislative body which received the
records or information except in a case involving an investigation of charges against a public
ocial subject to impeachment in which case the legislative body shall determine the extent of
disclosure.
Section 655.057(7), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the list of
members of a credit union or mutual association which is submitted to the Oce of Financial
Regulation is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(8), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, any portion
of the list of shareholders of a bank, trust company, and stock association which is submitted to
the Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to this subsection and which reveals the identities
of the shareholders is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 655.057(9), F.S. – Condential documents supplied to the Oce of Financial
Regulation or to employees of a nancial institution by other governmental agencies shall be
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may be made public only with the consent of
such agency or corporation.
Section 655.50(7), F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, all reports and records
led with the Oce of Financial Regulation pursuant to this section (Florida Control of Money
Laundering and Terrorist Financing in Financial Institutions Act) are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1).
Section 662.1465, F.S. – In specied statutory proceedings in which a family trust
company is a party, the clerk must, on written notice from a party, keep all court records of
that case separate from other court records and condential. However, disclosure is required to
specied individuals.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
287
Section 662.148(2), F.S. – Certain information, including personal identifying
information, held by the Oce of Financial Regulation, which relates to a family trust company,
is condential and exempt.
Section 663.416(2), F.S. – Certain information, including personal identifying
information of the customers or prospective customers of an aliated international trust entity,
held by the Oce of Financial Regulation is condential and exempt.
Section 663.540(2), F.S. – Certain information, including personal identifying
information of the customers or prospective customers of an aliated international trust entity
which appears in the records of a qualied limited services aliate, held by the Oce of Financial
Regulation is condential and exempt.
Section 681.1097(4), F.S. – A mediation conference conducted pursuant to the RV
Mediation and Arbitration Program shall be condential.
Section 687.144(6), F.S. – e material compiled by the Oce of Financial Regulation in
an investigation or examination under this act (relating to loan brokers) is condential until the
investigation or examination is complete.
Section 688.006, F.S. – In an action under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, a court shall
preserve the secrecy of an alleged trade secret by reasonable means as described in the section.
Section 717.117(8), F.S. – Social security numbers and property identiers contained in
reports to the Department of Financial Services concerning unclaimed property are condential
and exempt.
Section 717.1301(5), F.S. – Material compiled by the Department of Financial Services
in an investigation under the Disposition of Unclaimed Property Act is condential until the
investigation is complete; provided that such material remains condential if it is submitted to
another agency for investigation or prosecution and such investigation has not been completed
or become inactive.
Section 721.071, F.S. – If a developer or other person ling material with the Division of
Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes of the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation pursuant to chapter 721 relating to time-share plans expects the division to keep
the material condential on grounds that the material constitutes a trade secret as dened in s.
812.081, that person shall le the material together with an adavit of condentiality as provided
in the section. If the division is satised as to the facial validity of the claim of condentiality, it
shall keep the adavit and supporting documentation condential and shall not disclose such
information except upon administrative or court order.
Section 723.006(3), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in the subsection, mobile
home park nancial records, as dened in the subsection, which are acquired by the Division of
Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes of the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation pursuant to an investigation under this section are condential and exempt.
Section 733.604(1)(b), F.S. – Any inventory of an estate led with the clerk of court in
conjunction with the administration of an estate or of an elective estate led with the clerk of the
court in conjunction with an election made in accordance with Part II, Ch. 732, whether initial,
amended, or supplementary, is condential and exempt. Any accounting, whether interim, nal,
amended, or supplementary, led with the clerk of court in an estate proceeding is condential
and exempt. Disclosure is authorized under specied circumstances.
Section 741.29(2), F.S. – A law enforcement agency shall, without charge, send a copy
of the initial police report of domestic violence, as well as any subsequent, supplemental, or
288
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
related report, which excludes victim/witness statements or other materials that are part of an
active criminal investigation and are exempt from disclosure under Ch. 119 to the nearest locally
certied domestic violence center within 24 hours after the agency’s receipt of the report.
Section 741.30(3)(b), F.S. – A petitioner seeking an injunction for protection against
domestic violence may furnish his or her address to the court in a separate condential ling for
safety reasons if the petitioner requires the location of his or her current residence to be condential.
Section 741.313(7), F.S. – Personal identifying information contained in records
documenting an act of domestic or sexual violence that is submitted to an agency by an agency
employee seeking to take leave as provided therein as provided therein is condential and exempt.
A written request for leave submitted by an agency employee and any agency time sheet reecting
such request are condential and exempt until 1 year after the leave has been taken.
Section 741.3165, F.S. – Information that is condential or exempt and that is obtained
by a domestic violence fatality review team conducting activities as described in s. 741.316 shall
retain its condential or exempt status when held by the team. Information contained in a record
created by a team pursuant to s. 741.316 that reveals the identity of a victim of domestic violence
or the identity of the victim’s children is condential and exempt. Portions of meetings of the team
regarding domestic violence fatalities and their prevention, during which condential or exempt
information, the identity of the victim, or the identity of the victim’s children are discussed, are
exempt from s. 286.011, F.S.
Section 741.406, F.S. – e name, address, and telephone number of a participant in the
Address Condentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence may not be included in any
list of registered voters available to the public.
Section 741.465, F.S. – e addresses, corresponding telephone numbers, and social
security numbers of program participants in the Address Condentiality Program for Victims of
Domestic Violence held by the Oce of the Attorney General are exempt from disclosure, except
that the information may be disclosed under the following circumstances: to a law enforcement
agency for purposes of assisting in the execution of a valid arrest warrant; if directed by court order,
to a person identied in the order; or if the certication has been canceled. e names, addresses,
and telephone numbers of participants contained in voter registration and voting records are
exempt, except the information may be disclosed under the following circumstances: to a law
enforcement agency for purposes of assisting in the execution of an arrest warrant or, if directed by
court order, to a person identied in the order.
Section 741.4651, F.S. – e names, addresses, and telephone numbers of victims of
stalking or aggravated stalking are exempt in the same manner as participants in the Address
Condentiality Program for Victims of Domestic Violence under s. 741.465 are exempt from
disclosure, provided the victim les a sworn statement of stalking with the Oce of the Attorney
General and otherwise complies with ss. 741.401-741.409.
Section 742.091, F.S. – Records of any proceeding under the determination of paternity
statute which was subsequently dismissed when the mother of the illegitimate child and reputed
father marry thereby making the child legitimate are sealed against public inspection.
Section 742.16(9), F.S. – All papers and records pertaining to the armation of parental
status for gestational surrogacy, including the original birth certicate, are condential and exempt
and subject to inspection only upon court order.
Section 744.1076, F.S. – A court order appointing a court monitor is exempt from
public disclosure requirements. Reports of a court monitor relating to the medical condition,
nancial aairs, or mental health of the ward are condential and exempt. e reports may
be subject to inspection as determined by the court or upon a showing of good cause. Court
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
289
determinations relating to a nding of no probable cause and court orders nding no probable
cause are condential; however, such determinations and ndings may be subject to inspection as
determined by the court or upon a showing of good cause.
Section 744.2103(2), F.S. – No report or disclosure of the personal or medical records of a
ward of a public guardian shall be made, except as authorized by law.
Section 744.21031, F.S. – Home addresses, telephone numbers, and other specied personal
information of current or former public guardians and employees with duciary responsibility, as
dened in the exemption, as well as the names and specied information about the spouses and
children of these individuals are exempt from disclosure. An agency that is the custodian of the
information shall maintain the exempt status only if the specied individuals submit a written
request for exempt status to the custodial agency.
Section 744.2104(2) F.S. – All records held by the Oce of Public and Professional
Guardians relating to the medical, nancial, or mental health of vulnerable adults, persons with a
developmental disability, or persons with a mental illness, are condential and exempt from public
disclosure requirements.
Section 744.2105(6), F.S. – Personal identifying information of a donor or prospective
donor of funds or property to the direct-support organization of the Oce of Public and Professional
Guardians who wishes to remain anonymous is condential and exempt.
Section 744.2111(1)(2)(3), F.S. – A complaint and any information held by the
Department of Elderly Aairs as part of the investigative process are condential and exempt until
the investigation is completed or ceases to be “active, as that term is dened in the exemption.
However, once the investigation is completed or ceases to be active, specied personal information
relating to complainants or wards remains condential. e exemption does not prohibit the
department from providing such information to any law enforcement agency, any other regulatory
agency in the performance of its ocial duties and responsibilities, or the clerk of court under to s.
744.368, or pursuant to court order.
Section 744.3701, F.S.
–
Unless otherwise ordered by the court, upon a showing of good
cause, an initial, annual, or nal guardianship report or amendment thereto, or any record relating
to the settlement of a claim is subject to inspection only by the individuals specied in the section.
Court records relating to the settlement of a ward’s or minor’s claim are condential and exempt
and may not be disclosed except as specically authorized.
Section 760.11(12), F.S.
–
Complaints led with the Commission on Human Relations and
all records in the commission’s custody which relate to and identify a particular person, including,
but not limited to, the entities specied in the subsection are condential and may not be disclosed
except to the parties or in the course of a hearing or proceeding under this section. is restriction
does not apply to any record which is part of the record of a hearing or court proceeding.
Section 760.34(1), F.S.
–
Nothing said or done in the course of informal endeavors by the
Commission on Human Relations to resolve complaints about discriminatory housing practices
may be made public or used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding under ss. 760.20-760.37
without the written consent of the persons concerned.
Section 760.36, F.S.
–
A conciliation agreement arising out of a complaint led under the
Fair Housing Act shall be made public unless the complainant and the respondent otherwise agree
and the Commission on Human Relations determines that disclosure is not required to further the
purposes of the Act.
Section 760.40(2), F.S.
–
Except as provided in the subsection, DNA analysis results
information held by a public entity is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
290
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 760.50(5), F.S.
–
Employers shall maintain the condentiality of information
relating to the medical condition or status of any person covered by health or life insurance
benets provided or administered by the employer. Such information in the possession of a
public employer is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 765.51551, F.S.
–
Donor-identifying information maintained in the anatomical
gifts donor registry is condential and exempt as provided in the exemption.
Section 766.101(7)(c), F.S.
–
Proceedings of medical review committees are exempt from
s. 286.011 and any advisory reports provided to the Department of Health are condential and
exempt from s. 119.07(1), regardless of whether probable cause is found.
Section 766.105(3)(e)2., F.S.
–
A claim le in the possession of the Patient’s
Compensation Fund is condential and exempt until termination of litigation or settlement of
the claim, although medical records and other portions of the claim le may remain condential
and exempt as otherwise provided by law.
Section 766.106(6)(b)3., F.S.
–
An examination report on an injured claimant which
is made pursuant to this section relating to medical malpractice claims is available only to the
parties and their attorneys and may be used only for the purpose of presuit screening. Otherwise,
such report is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 766.1115(4)(c), F.S.
–
All patient medical records and any identifying
information contained in adverse incident reports and treatment outcomes which are obtained
by governmental entities contracting with health care providers under this paragraph, are
condential and exempt.
Section 766.305(3), F.S. – Information furnished by a person seeking compensation
under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan pursuant to this
subsection shall remain condential and exempt under the provisions of s. 766.315(5)(b).
Section 766.314(8), F.S. – Information obtained by the Florida Birth-Related
Neurological Injury Compensation Association to determine the actual cost of maintaining
the fund on an actuarially sound basis shall be utilized solely for the purpose of assisting the
association. Such information shall otherwise be condential and exempt.
Section 766.315(5)(b), F.S. – A claim le in the possession of the Florida Birth-Related
Neurological Injury Compensation Association or its representative is condential and exempt
until termination of litigation or settlement of the claim, although medical records and other
portions of the claim le may remain condential and exempt as otherwise provided by law.
Section 768.28(16)(b), F.S. – Claims les maintained by any risk management
program administered by the state, its agencies and subdivisions are condential and exempt
until termination of all litigation and settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident,
although portions of the claims les may remain exempt, as otherwise provided by law. Claims
les records may be released to other governmental agencies as provided in the paragraph; such
records held by the receiving agency remain condential as provided in the paragraph.
Section 768.28(16)(c), F.S. – Portions of meetings and proceedings conducted pursuant
to a risk management program administered by the state, its agencies or subdivisions relating
solely to the evaluation of claims or relating solely to oers of compromise of claims led with
the program are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 768.28(16)(d), F.S. – Minutes of the meetings and proceedings of a risk
management program administered by the state, its agencies or its subdivisions relating solely
to the evaluation of claims or relating solely to oers of compromise of claims led with such
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
291
risk management programs are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until termination of all litigation and
settlement of all claims arising out of the same incident.
Section 784.046(4)(b), F.S. – A petitioner seeking an injunction for protection against
repeat violence, sexual violence or dating violence and related court actions may furnish an
address to the court in a separate condential ling for safety reasons if the petitioner requires the
location of his or her current residence to be condential pursuant to s. 119.071(2)(j).
Section 784.0485(3)(b), F.S. – A petitioner seeking an injunction for protection against
stalking may furnish his or her address to the court in a separate condential ling if, for safety
reasons, the petitioner requires the location of the current residence to be condential.
Section 787.03(6)(c)1., F.S. – e current address and telephone number of the person
taking a child or incompetent person when eeing from domestic violence or to preserve the
minor or incompetent person from danger and the current address and telephone number of the
minor or incompetent person which are contained in the report made to a sheri or state attorney
under s. 787.03(6)(b) by the person who takes such child or incompetent person,
are condential
and exempt from public disclosure requirements.
Section 787.06(10), F.S. – Information about the location of a residential facility oering
services for adult victims of human tracking involving commercial sexual activity, which is held
by an agency is condential and exempt; however, the information may be disclosed as provided
in the exemption.
Section 790.0601, F.S. – Personal identifying information of an individual who has
applied for or received a license to carry a concealed weapon or rearm held by the Division
of Licensing of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or by a tax collector
appointed by the Department to receive applications and fees is condential and exempt from
disclosure requirements. Information made condential and exempt shall be disclosed with
express written consent of the applicant or licensee, by court order, or upon request by a law
enforcement agency in connection with the performance of lawful duties.
Section 790.0625(4), F.S. – All personal identifying information that is provided
pursuant to s. 790.06 and contained in the records of a tax collector appointed under this section
is condential and exempt except as provided in s. 790.0601.
Section 790.065(2)(a)4.d., F.S. – e hearing on the petition led by a person who has
been adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution for relief from the
rearm disabilities imposed by such adjudication or commitment may be open or closed as the
petitioner may choose.
Section 790.065(4)(a), F.S. – Any records containing information specied in this section
relating to a buyer or transferee of a rearm who is not prohibited under state or federal law from
receipt or transfer of a rearm shall be condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and may not be
disclosed by the Department of Law Enforcement to any other person or agency.
Section 790.335(2), F.S. – Subject to specied exceptions, no governmental agency or
any other person, public or private, shall knowingly and willfully keep or cause to be kept any
list, record or registry of privately owned rearms or any list, record, or registry of the owners of
those rearms.
Section 794.024, F.S. – A public employee or ocer having access to the photograph,
name or address of a person alleged to be a victim of an oense described in this chapter (sexual
battery), chapter 800 (lewdness, indecent exposure), s. 827.03 (aggravated child abuse), s. 827.04
(child abuse), or s. 827.071 (sexual performance by a child) may not willfully and knowingly
disclose it to a person not assisting in the investigation or prosecution of the alleged oense or to
292
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
any person other than the defendant, the defendant’s attorney, a person specied in a court order
entered by the court having jurisdiction over the alleged oense, to organizations authorized to
receive such information made exempt by s. 119.071(2)(h), or to a rape crisis center or sexual
assault counselor who will be oering services to the victim.
Section 794.03, F.S. – It is unlawful to print, publish, or broadcast or cause or allow to
be printed, published or broadcast in any instrument of mass communication the name, address
or other identifying fact or information of the victim of any sexual oense. Such identifying
information is condential and exempt.
Section 815.045, F.S. – It is a public necessity that trade secret information as dened in
s. 812.081, be expressly made condential and exempt from the public records law because it is
a felony to disclose such records.
Section 828.30(5), F.S. – An animal owner’s name, street address, phone number, and
animal tag number contained in a rabies vaccination certicate provided to the animal control
authority is condential and exempt from disclosure except as provided in the exemption.
Section 877.19(3), F.S. – Certain information on hate crimes which is reported to the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement pursuant to this statute is condential and exempt.
Data required pursuant to this section shall be used only for research or statistical purposes and
shall not include any information that may reveal the identity of a crime victim.
Section 893.0551(2), F.S. – Certain identication and location information of a patient
or patient’s agent, a health care practitioner, a dispenser, an employee of the practitioner who is
acting on behalf of and at the direction of the practitioner; a pharmacist, or a pharmacy, that is
contained in Department of Health records under the electronic prescription drug monitoring
program for monitoring the prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances is condential
and exempt from disclosure.
Section 895.06(2), F.S. – A subpoena issued pursuant to this chapter is condential for
120 days after the date of its issuance. e subpoenaed person or entity may not disclose the
existence of the subpoena to any person or entity other than his or her attorney during the 120-
day period.
Section 895.06(7), F.S. – Information held by an investigative agency pursuant to an
investigation of a violation of s. 895.03 is condential and exempt; however, the information may
be disclosed as provided in the subsection. Information made condential and exempt under this
exemption is no longer condential and exempt once all investigations to which the information
pertains are completed, as dened in the exemption, unless the information is otherwise protected
by law.
Section 896.102(2), F.S. – Information and documents led with the Department of
Revenue regarding certain currency transactions are condential and exempt; however, the
information may be released as provided in the subsection.
Section 905.17(1), F.S. – Stenographic records, notes and transcriptions made by a court
reporter during a grand jury session are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and shall be
led with the clerk who shall keep them in a sealed container not subject to public inspection.
Section 905.24, F.S. – Grand jury proceedings are secret and a grand juror or interpreter
appointed pursuant to s. 90.6063(2) shall not disclose the nature or substance of the deliberations
or vote of the grand jury.
Section 905.26, F.S. – Unless ordered by the court, a grand juror, reporter, stenographer,
interpreter, or ocer of the court may not disclose the nding of an indictment against a person
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
293
not in custody or under recognizance, except by issuing or executing process on the indictment,
until the person has been arrested.
Section 905.27(1) and (2), F.S. – A grand juror, state attorney, assistant state attorney,
reporter, stenographer, interpreter, or any other person appearing before the grand jury may not
disclose evidence received by it except when required by a court. It is unlawful for any person
knowingly to publish, disclose or cause to be published or disclosed any witness’s testimony
before a grand jury unless such testimony is or has been disclosed in a court proceeding.
Section 905.28(1), F.S. – A report or presentment of a grand jury relating to an individual
which is not accompanied by a true bill or indictment is condential and exempt and shall not be
made public until the individual concerned has been furnished a copy and given 15 days to le a
motion to repress or expunge the report.
Section 905.395, F.S. – Unless pursuant to court order, it is unlawful for any person
knowingly to publish, broadcast, disclose, divulge, or communicate or cause or permit such
publication or communication to any person outside the statewide grand jury room, any of the
proceedings or identity of persons referred to or being investigated by the statewide grand jury.
Section 914.27, F.S. – Information held by a law enforcement agency, prosecutorial
agency, or the Victim and Witness Protection Review Committee which discloses the identity
or location of a victim or witness who has been identied or certied for protective or relocation
services is condential and exempt from disclosure. Identity and location of immediate family
members of such victims or witnesses are also protected as are relocation sites, techniques or
procedures utilized or developed as a result of the victim and witness protective services.
Section 916.1065(1), F.S. – A forensic behavioral health evaluation led with the court
pursuant to Ch. 916, is condential and exempt.
Section 916.107(8), F.S. – Except as provided in the subsection, a forensic client’s clinical
record is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 918.16(1), F.S. – Except as provided in s. 918.16(2), in any civil or criminal trial,
if any person under 16 or any person with an intellectual disability as dened in cited statute is
testifying concerning any sex oense, the court shall clear the courtroom of all persons except
parties to the cause and their immediate families or guardians, attorneys and their secretaries,
ocers of the court, jurors, newspaper reporters or broadcasters and court reporters, and at the
request of the victim, victim or witness advocates designated by the state attorney’s oce.
Section 918.16(2), F.S. – If the victim of a sex oense is testifying concerning that oense
in any civil or criminal trial, the court shall clear the courtroom of all persons upon the request
of the victim, regardless of the victim’s age or mental capacity, except that parties to the cause and
their immediate families or guardians, attorneys and their secretaries, ocers of the court, jurors,
newspaper reporters or broadcasters and court reporters, and at the request of the victim, victim
or witness advocates designated by the state attorney may remain in the courtroom.
Section 925.055(2), F.S. – e names of condential informants that may be revealed to
auditors of law enforcement investigative funds are condential and exempt.
Section 934.08(1)(b), F.S. – A state or federal law enforcement ocial who receives
intelligence information as described in the paragraph is subject to any limitations on the
unauthorized disclosure of such information.
Section 934.09(8)(c), F.S. – Applications made and orders granted authorizing
interception of wire, oral or electronic communications pursuant to cited statutes shall be sealed
by the judge and shall be disclosed only upon a showing of good cause before a judge.
294
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 934.33(7), F.S. – e record maintained by an investigative or law enforcement
agency which contains specied identifying information regarding the installation and use of a
pen register or trap and trace device must be provided under seal to the court.
Section 937.028(1), F.S. – When ngerprints are taken for the purpose of identifying
a child, should that child become missing, the state agency, public or private organization, or
other person taking such ngerprints shall not release the ngerprints to any law enforcement
agency or other person for any purpose other than the identication of a missing child. Such
records and data are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 943.03(2), F.S. – Records related to a Florida Department of Law Enforcement
investigation requested by the Governor concerning ocial misconduct of public ocials and
employees, are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the investigation is completed
or is no longer “active” as dened in the subsection.
Section 943.031(9)(c) and (d), F.S. – e Florida Violent Crime and Drug Control
Council may close portions of meetings during which the council will hear or discuss active
criminal investigative information or active criminal intelligence information and such portions
of meetings are exempt from open meetings requirements, provided that the conditions set forth
in the subsection are met. A tape recording of, and any minutes and notes generated during,
the closed portion of a meeting are condential and exempt until the criminal investigative or
intelligence information ceases to be active.
Section 943.0314, F.S. – at portion of a meeting of the Domestic Security Oversight
Council at which the council will hear or discuss active criminal investigative information or
active criminal intelligence information is exempt from open meetings requirements provided
that the conditions set forth in the exemption are complied with. An audio or video recording
of, and any minutes and notes generated during, a closed meeting are exempt from public
disclosure requirements until such time as the criminal investigative information or criminal
intelligence information heard or discussed therein ceases to be active.
Section 943.0321(4), F.S. – Information that is exempt from public disclosure under
Ch. 119 when in the possession of the Florida Domestic Security and Counter-Terrorism
Intelligence Center retains its exemption from public disclosure after such information is
revealed to a law enforcement agency or prosecutor, except as otherwise provided by law.
Exempt information obtained by the center from a law enforcement agency or prosecutor
retains its exemption from public disclosure, except as otherwise provided by law.
Section 943.053(3), F.S. – Criminal history information relating to a juvenile and
compiled by the Criminal Justice Information Program from intrastate sources is condential
and exempt except as provided in the exemption.
Section 943.053(5), (8), (9), and (10), F.S. – Sealed records received by a court for the
purpose of assisting judges in their case-related responsibilities, or by a private entity under
contract to operate a juvenile oender facility, county detention facility or state correctional
facility pursuant to cited laws remain condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 943.057, F.S. – is section (providing for access to criminal justice information
in the Department of Law Enforcement for research or statistical purposes) does not require
release of condential information or require the department to accommodate requests that
would disrupt ongoing operations beyond the extent required by s. 119.07.
Section 943.0582(5), F.S. – Nonjudicial records held by the Florida Department of
Law Enforcement pertaining to the arrest of juveniles for certain crimes who have had the
records sealed or expunged pursuant to s. 943.0582, are condential. Disclosure is authorized
as provided in the exemption.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
295
Section 943.0583(10)(a), F.S. – A criminal history record of a human tracking victim
that is ordered expunged under this section that is retained by the Florida Department of
Law Enforcement is condential and exempt except that the record shall be made available
to criminal justice agencies for their respective criminal justice purposes; to any governmental
agency that is authorized by law to determine eligibility to purchase or possess a rearm or to
carry a concealed rearm for use in the course of such agency’s ocial duties; or by court order.
Section 943.0583(11), F.S. – Criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative
information that reveals or may reveal the identity of a person who is a victim of human
tracking whose criminal history record has been ordered expunged or has been expunged
under s. 943.0583 is condential and exempt. Disclosure is authorized under specied
circumstances.
Section 943.0585(6), F.S. – A criminal history record ordered expunged that is retained
by the Department of Law Enforcement pursuant to this section is condential and exempt
and is not available to any person or entity except upon court order.
Section 943.0585(6)(d), F.S. – Information relating to the existence of an expunged
criminal history record which is provided in accordance with paragraph (a), is condential and
exempt, except that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement shall disclose the existence
of an expunged record to the agencies set forth in the paragraph for their respective licensing
and employment purposes and to criminal justice agencies for their respective criminal justice
purposes. It is unlawful for any employee of an entity identied in the paragraph to disclose
such information except to the person to whom the record relates or to persons having direct
responsibility for employment or licensure decisions.
Section 943.059(6)(a), F.S. – A criminal history record of a minor or an adult which is
ordered sealed by a court pursuant to this section is condential and exempt and available only
to the persons and entities identied in the subsection.
Section 943.059(6)(d), F.S. – Information relating to the existence of such record that
is provided in accordance with paragraph (a) is condential and exempt, except that the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement shall disclose a sealed record to the agencies set forth in
the paragraph for their respective licensing and employment purposes. It is unlawful for any
employee of an entity identied in the paragraph to disclose such information except to the
person to whom the record relates or to persons having direct responsibility for employment
or licensure decisions.
Section 943.082(6), F.S. – e identity of the reporting party received through the
mobile suspicious activity reporting tool and held by the Department of Law Enforcement, law
enforcement agencies, or school ocials is condential and exempt. Any other information
received through the tool and held by such agencies is exempt.
Section 943.1395(6)(b), F.S. – e report of misconduct and all records or information
provided to or developed by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission during
the course of an investigation conducted by the commission are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and,
except as otherwise provided by law, such information shall be subject to public disclosure only
after a determination as to probable cause has been made or until the investigation becomes
inactive. However, the ocer being investigated or the ocer’s attorney may review records as
authorized in the exemption.
Section 943.173(3), F.S. – Examinations, assessments, and instruments and examination
results, other than test scores on ocer certication examinations, including developmental
materials and workpapers, administered pursuant to s. 943.13(9) or (10) and s. 943.17 are
exempt from s. 119.07(1).
296
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 943.325(14), F.S. – e results of a DNA analysis and the comparison of analytic
results submitted to the Department of Law Enforcement under this section shall be released only
to criminal justice agencies as dened in s. 943.045(10), at the request of the agency. Otherwise,
such information is condential and exempt.
Section 943.687(8), F.S. – Any portion of a meeting of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas
High School Public Safety Commission at which exempt or condential information is discussed
is exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 944.606(3)(d), F.S. – Sexual oender information received from the Department
of Corrections by the Department of Law Enforcement, the sheri, or the chief of police shall be
provided to a person who requests it and such information may be released to the public in any
manner deemed appropriate, unless the information so received is condential or exempt from
disclosure.
Section 945.10, F.S. – Records of the Department of Corrections relating to inmates and
other specied persons and entities, as set forth in the exemption, are condential and exempt
and may not be released except as provided in the exemption.
Section 945.602(7)(b), F.S. – Neither the provisions of this section nor those of Ch. 119
or s. 154.207(7) shall apply to any health care provider under contract with the Department of
Corrections except to the extent such provisions would apply to any similar entity not under
contract with the department.
Section 945.6032(3), F.S. – e ndings and recommendations of a medical review
committee created by the Correctional Medical Authority or the Department of Corrections
pursuant to s. 766.101 are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and any proceedings of the
committee are exempt from s. 286.011.
Section 946.517, F.S. – Proprietary condential business information, as dened in the
statute, of the corporation created to operate correctional work programs is condential and
exempt.
Section 951.27(2), F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, serologic blood
test results for infectious disease which are obtained pursuant to s. 951.27(1) on inmates in
county and municipal detention facilities are condential and exempt.
Section 960.001(1)(g)2., F.S. – Any person who views a presentence investigation report
pursuant to this paragraph must maintain the condentiality of the report and may not disclose
its contents to any person except statements made to the state attorney or the court.
Section 960.001(8), F.S. – Information gained by a crime victim pursuant to this chapter
(providing guidelines for fair treatment of victims in the criminal and juvenile justice systems),
regarding any case handled in juvenile court, must not be revealed to any outside party, except as
is reasonably necessary in pursuit of legal remedies.
Section 960.003(3), F.S. – Results of human immunodeciency virus and hepatitis tests
performed pursuant to this section on persons charged with or alleged by delinquency petition
with certain oenses are condential and exempt and may not be disclosed to any person other
than the individuals and entities identied in the subsection.
Section 960.15, F.S. – Any record or report obtained by the Department of Legal Aairs
or a hearing ocer, pursuant to a claim for crime victim compensation, that is condential or
exempt from s. 119.07(1) shall retain that status and shall not be subject to public disclosure.
Section 960.28(4), F.S. – Information received or maintained by the Department of Legal
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
297
Aairs identifying an alleged victim who seeks payment of medical expenses under this section is
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 984.06(3) and (4), F.S. – All information obtained pursuant to Ch. 984 (families
in need of services and children in need of services) in the discharge of ocial duty by the ocials
specied in the subsection shall not be disclosed to anyone other than persons and agencies
entitled under the chapter to receive this information or upon court order. Court records
required by Ch. 984 are not open to public inspection.
Section 985.036, F.S. – Nothing in this chapter prohibits the victim of the oense or a
minor victim’s parent or guardian from the right to be informed of, and to be present during,
all crucial stages of the proceedings involving the juvenile oender. However, such person may
not reveal to any outside party any condential information obtained under this subsection
regarding the case, except as is reasonably necessary to pursue legal remedies. A law enforcement
agency may release a copy of the juvenile oense report to the victim of the oense; however,
information gained by the victim under this chapter, including the next of kin of a homicide
victim, regarding any case handled in juvenile court must not be revealed to any outside party,
except as is reasonably necessary in pursuit of legal remedies.
Section 985.04(1) F.S. – Except as otherwise provided in this section, all information
obtained under this chapter (relating to juvenile justice) in the discharge of ocial duty by any
of the entities set forth in the subsection is condential and exempt and may be disclosed only to
the entities specied in the subsection or upon court order. Agencies entering into an agreement
to share information about juvenile oenders as authorized by this subsection must comply with
s. 943.0525 and must maintain the condentiality of information otherwise exempt from s.
119.07(1), as provided by law.
Section 985.04(6), F.S. – Records maintained by the Department of Juvenile Justice
pertaining to a child found to have committed a delinquent act which, if committed by an adult,
would be a crime specied in cited statute may not be destroyed for a period of 25 years after
the youth’s nal referral to the department, except in cases of the child’s death. However, such
record shall be sealed by the court and may be released only to meet screening requirements for
personnel in s. 402.3055 and the other mentioned statutes or department rules although sexual
oender and predator registration information is a public record.
Section 985.04(7)(a), F.S. – Records in the custody of the Department of Juvenile Justice
regarding children are not open to public inspection and may be inspected only upon order of the
Secretary of the department or the secretary’s authorized agent as provided therein.
Section 985.045(2), F.S. – e clerk of court shall keep all ocial records required by
this section (delinquency) separate from other records of the circuit court, except those records
pertaining to motor vehicle violations, which shall be forwarded to the Department of Highway
Safety and Motor Vehicles. Except as provided in ss. 943.053 and 985.04(6)(b) and (7), ocial
records required by this chapter are not open to inspection by the public, but may be inspected
only by persons and entities specied in the subsection or deemed by the court to have a proper
interest therein. e court may permit authorized representatives of recognized organizations
compiling statistics for proper purposes to inspect, and make abstracts from, ocial records
under whatever conditions upon the use and disposition of such records the court may deem
proper and may punish by contempt proceedings any violation of those conditions.
Section 985.047(2)(a), F.S. – Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary,
condentiality of records information does not apply to juveniles who have been arrested for an
oense that would be a crime if committed by an adult, regarding the sharing of information
on such juveniles with the law enforcement agency or county as well as other specied agencies
and individuals. Neither these records provided to the law enforcement agency or county nor
the records developed from these records for serious habitual juvenile oenders nor the records
298
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
provided or developed from records provided to the law enforcement agency or county on
juveniles at risk of becoming serious habitual juveniles oenders shall be available for public
disclosure under s. 119.07.
Section 985.11, F.S. – Except as provided in cited statutes, ngerprints and photographs
of juveniles are not available for public disclosure and inspection under s. 119.07(1),except as
provided in ss. 943.053 and 985.04(2), but are available to specied entities or to any other
person authorized by the court to have access to such records. e records may, in the discretion
of the court, be open to inspection by anyone upon a showing of cause.
Section 985.534(4) and (5), F.S. – e original order of the appellate court in a case
aecting a party to a case involving a child under this chapter (juvenile justice) and all papers
led in the case on appeal shall remain in the oce of the clerk of the court, sealed and not
open to inspection except by order of the appellate court. e case on appeal shall be docketed,
and any papers led in the appellate court shall be entitled with the initials but not the name
of the child.
Section 1001.24(4), F.S. – e identity of donors to a Department of Education
direct-support organization, and all information identifying donors and prospective donors,
is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and that anonymity shall be maintained in the
auditor’s report. All records of the organization other than the auditor’s report, management
letter, and any supplemental data requested by the Auditor General and the Oce of Program
Policy Analysis and Government Accountability shall be condential and exempt.
Section 1001.453(4), F.S. – e identity of donors and all information identifying donors
and prospective donors are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and that anonymity shall
be maintained in the auditor’s report of a district school board direct-support organization.
Section 1002.221, F.S. – Education records, as dened in the Family Educational Rights
and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, and the federal regulations, are condential
and exempt. An agency or institution, as dened in s. 1002.22, may not release a student’s
education records without the written consent of the student or parent except as provided in the
exemption and as permitted by FERPA.
Section 1002.225, F.S. – All public postsecondary educational institutions shall comply
with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g, with respect to the
education records of students.
Section 1002.36(7)(d), F.S. – e criminal records, private investigator ndings, and
information from reference checks obtained by the Florida School for the Deaf and the Blind
for determining the moral character of employees of the school are condential and exempt
from disclosure.
Section 1002.395(6)(q), F.S. – Information and documentation provided to the
Department of Education and the Auditor General relating to the identity of a taxpayer that
provides an eligible contribution under this section (Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program)
shall remain condential at all times in accordance with s. 213.053.
Section 1002.72, F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, the records of children
enrolled in the Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Program are condential.
Section 1002.97, F.S. – Except as provided in the exemption, individual records of
children enrolled in school readiness programs, held by a VPEP provider, an early learning
coalition or the Department of Education are condential and exempt.
Section 1003.25(1), F.S. – e cumulative record of a public school pupil that is required
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
299
by this section is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and is open to inspection only as
provided in Ch. 1002.
Section 1003.53(6), F.S. – School districts and other agencies receiving information
contained in student records and juvenile justice records shall use such information only for
ocial purposes connected with the certication of students for admission to and for the
administration of the dropout prevention and academic intervention program, and such agencies
shall maintain the condentiality of such information unless otherwise provided by law or rule.
Such information is condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 1003.57(1)(c), F.S. – Hearings on exceptional student identication, evaluation,
and eligibility determination, or lack thereof, are exempt from s. 286.011, except to the extent
that the State Board of Education adopts rules establishing other procedures, and any records
created as a result of such hearings are condential and exempt.
Section 1004.055, F.S. – Certain records held by a state university or Florida College
System institution which identify detection, investigation, or response practices for suspected or
conrmed security incidents are condential and exempt. ose portions of a public meeting
which would reveal such data and information are exempt from s. 286.011, F.S.
Section 1004.0962(2) and (5), F.S. – A campus emergency response, as dened
in the exemption, held by a public postsecondary institution or specied agencies is exempt
from disclosure requirements. at portion of a public meeting which would reveal a campus
emergency response is exempt from s. 286.011, F.S.
Section 1004.098(1), F.S. – Personal identifying information of an applicant for president
of a state university or a Florida College System institution held by a state university or college
is condential and exempt, except that the age, race, and gender of all applicants who met the
minimum qualications established for the position who were considered and the personal
identifying information of an applicant included in the nal group of applicants, are no longer
condential and exempt beginning at the earlier of the date the nal group of applicants to
be considered is established or 21 days before the date of a meeting at which an interview of
an applicant will be conducted or at which nal action or a vote is to be taken on the oer of
employment of an applicant as president.
Section 1004.098(2), F.S. – Any portion of a meeting held for the purpose of identifying
or vetting applicants for president of a state university or Florida College System institution,
including any portion of a meeting which would disclose personal identifying information of
such applicants which is otherwise condential and exempt under s. 1004.098(1) is exempt from
open meetings requirements. A complete recording must be made of any portion of a meeting
which is closed and the closed portion may not be held o the record. e recording of the
closed portion is exempt. e exemption does not apply to portions of meetings held to establish
qualications for the position or for establishing any compensation framework to be oered to an
applicant, or to any meeting held after a nal group of applicants has been established.
Section 1004.22(2), F.S. – Materials relating to methods of manufacture or production,
potential or actual trade secrets, potentially patentable material, business transactions, or
proprietary information received, generated, ascertained or discovered during the course of
research conducted within state universities are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1), except
that a division of sponsored research shall make available, upon request, title and description of
a research project, name of the researcher, and amount and source of funding for the project.
Section 1004.24(4), F.S. – e claims les of a self-insurance program adopted by the
Board of Governors, or the board’s designee, pursuant to this section are condential and exempt
from s. 119.07(1), and are only for the use of the program in fullling its duties.
300
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 1004.28(5), F.S. – Other than the auditor’s report, management letter, any records
related to the expenditure of state funds, and any nancial records related to the expenditure of
private funds for travel, all records of a university direct-support organization and any supplemental
data requested by the Board of Governors, the university board of trustees, the Auditor General,
and the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability shall be condential
and exempt from s. 119.07(1). e identity of donors who desire to remain anonymous shall
be protected, and that anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report. Any portion of a
meeting of the board of directors of the organization, or of the executive committee or other
committees of such board, at which any proposal seeking research funding from the organization
or a plan or program for either initiating or supporting research is discussed is exempt from s.
286.011, F.S.
Section 1004.30, F.S. – Certain records of university health services support organizations
are made condential; however, some records become public records at a specied time in the
future. Any portion of a governing board or peer review panel or committee meeting during which
a condential and exempt contract, document, record, marketing plan, or trade secret is discussed is
exempt from s. 286.011, as well as any records generated during the closed portion of a governing
board or peer review panel or committee meeting which contain information relating to contracts,
documents, records, marketing plans, or trade secrets which are made condential and exempt
by this section. A person may petition a court for release of certain documents upon a nding
of compelling public interest for release. e organization may petition a court for continued
condentiality upon a showing of good cause.
Section 1004.43(8), F.S. – Proprietary condential business information, as dened in the
subsection, of the not-for-prot corporation organized pursuant to this section for the purpose
of operating the H. Lee Mott Cancer Center and Research Institute, and the corporation’s
subsidiaries, is condential and exempt from disclosure, except that the Auditor General, Oce
of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, and the Board of Governors must be
given access and must maintain the condentiality of the information so received.
Section 1004.43(9), F.S. – Meetings of the governing body of the not-for-prot corporation
operating the H. Lee Mott Cancer Center and Research Institute, or its subsidiaries are exempt
from open meeting requirements except that meetings at which expenditures of dollars appropriated
to the corporation by the state are discussed must remain open to the public.
Section 1004.4472, F.S. – Specied materials held by the Florida Institute for Human
and Machine Cognition, Inc., or its subsidiary, including certain donor information, as well as
trade secrets, patentable material, proprietary information received or generated from research,
and exempt information received from other states or the federal government, are condential
and exempt from disclosure requirements. Portions of meetings where condential information is
discussed are exempt from open meetings requirements.
Section 1004.45(2)(h), F.S. – Information that, if released, would identify donors who
desire to remain anonymous, is condential and exempt. Information which, if released, would
identify prospective donors to the museum is condential and exempt unless the direct-support
organization has obtained the name from another source. Identities of such donors and prospective
donors shall not be revealed in the auditor’s report.
Section 1004.55(6), F.S. – Records that relate to the client of a regional autism center are
condential and exempt from public disclosure. Personal identifying information of a donor or
prospective donor who desires to remain anonymous is also condential.
Section 1004.70(6), F.S. – Records of a Florida College System institution direct-support
organization other than the auditor’s report, any information necessary for the auditor’s report,
any information related to the expenditure of funds, and any supplemental data requested by the
board of trustees, the Auditor General, and the Oce of Program Policy Analysis and Government
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
301
Accountability are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1). e identity of donors who desire
to remain anonymous shall be protected, and that anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s
report.
Section 1004.71(6), F.S. – e identity of a donor or prospective donor to a statewide Florida
College System direct-support organization who desires to remain anonymous, and all information
identifying such donor or prospective donor are condential and exempt from disclosure. Such
anonymity shall be maintained in the auditor’s report.
Section 1004.78(2), F.S. – Materials relating to methods of manufacture or production,
potential or actual trade secrets, potentially patentable material, business transactions, or proprietary
information received, generated, ascertained or discovered during the course of activities conducted
within a Florida College System institution are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) provided
that an institution shall make available, upon request, the title and description of a project, the
name of the investigator and the amount and source of the funding provided for the project.
Section 1005.36(3), F.S. – Condentiality of student records of closed nonpublic
postsecondary institutions which are furnished to the Commission for Independent Education in
accordance with this section shall be maintained, to the extent required by law.
Section 1005.38(6), F.S. – Investigatory records held by the Commission for Independent
Education are exempt from public disclosure requirements for a period not to exceed 10 days
after the panel makes a determination regarding probable cause. ose portions of meetings of
the probable cause panel at which exempt records are discussed are exempt from open meetings
requirements but must be recorded. e recording of a closed portion of a meeting and the minutes
and ndings of such meeting are exempt from disclosure for a period not to exceed 10 days after the
panel makes a determination regarding probable cause.
Section 1006.07(1)(a), F.S. – Student expulsion hearings are exempt from s. 286.011.
However, the student’s parent must be given notice of the Sunshine Law and may elect to have the
hearing held in compliance with that section.
Section 1006.12(8), F.S. – Any information held by listed agencies that would identify
whether an individual has been appointed as a safe-school ocer is exempt.
Section 1006.52(1), F.S. – Each public postsecondary educational institution may prescribe
the content and custody of records which the university may maintain on its students. A student’s
education records, as dened in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. s. 1232g,
and the federal regulations, and applicant records as dened by this section are condential and
exempt.
Section 1008.23(1), F.S. – All examination and assessment instruments, including
developmental materials and workpapers directly related thereto, which are prepared, prescribed or
administered pursuant to cited statutes, shall be condential and exempt.
Section 1008.23(2), F.S. – All examination and assessment instruments, including
developmental materials and workpapers directly related thereto, which are prepared, prescribed,
or administered by a Florida College System institution, a state university, or the Department of
Education shall be condential and exempt.
Section 1008.24(4)(b), F.S. – e identity of a school or postsecondary educational
institution, personal identifying information of any personnel of any school district or postsecondary
educational institution, or any specic allegations of misconduct obtained or reported pursuant to
an investigation conducted by the Department of Education of a testing impropriety are condential
and exempt until the conclusion of the investigation or until such time as the investigation ceases
to be active.
302
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Section 1008.39(3), F.S. – e Florida Education and Training Placement Information
Program must not make public any information that could identify an individual or the
individual’s employer.
Section 1008.41(1)(b), F.S. – Uniform management information systems for workforce
education coordinated by the Commissioner of Education pursuant to this section must provide
for compliance with state and federal condentiality requirements except that the department
shall have access to certain reemployment assistance wage reports to collect and report placement
data about former students. Such placement reports must not disclose the individual identities
of former students.
Section 1009.98(6), F.S. – Information that identies the purchasers or beneciaries of a
prepaid college plan and their advance payment account activities is exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Information which is authorized to be released to postsecondary institutions shall be maintained
as exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 1009.981(6), F.S. – Information that identies the benefactors or the designated
beneciary of any account initiated pursuant to the Florida College Savings Program is
condential and exempt from public disclosure requirements. However, the board is authorized
to release such information to a community college, college, or university in which a designated
beneciary may enroll or is enrolled. e receiving institution shall maintain the condentiality
of such information.
Section 1009.983(4), F.S. – e identity of donors who desire to remain anonymous
shall be condential and exempt from disclosure, and such anonymity shall be maintained in
the auditor’s report of the direct-support organization of the Florida Prepaid College Program.
Information received by the direct-support organization that is otherwise condential or exempt
shall retain such status and any sensitive, personal information regarding contract beneciaries,
including their identities, is exempt from disclosure.
Section 1009.987, F.S. – e personal nancial and health information of a consumer
(dened as a party to a participation agreement) held by the Florida Prepaid College Board,
Florida ABLE Inc., or the Florida ABLE program relating to an ABLE account or participation
agreement or any information that would identify a consumer is condential and exempt.
Disclosure is authorized in specied circumstances.
Section 1012.31(3), F.S. – Public school system employee personnel les are subject to the
provisions of s. 119.07(1) except that any complaint and material relating to the investigation of a
complaint against an employee is condential and exempt until the conclusion of the preliminary
investigation or until the preliminary investigation ceases to be active; employee evaluations are
condential until the end of the school year immediately following the school year during which
the evaluation was made, but no evaluations made prior to July 1, 1983, shall be made public;
payroll deduction records of the employee and medical records are condential and exempt.
However, an employee’s personnel le shall be open at all times to the ocials designated in the
subsection.
Section 1012.56(9)(e), F.S. – For any examination developed by this state, the Department
of Education and the State Board of Education shall maintain condentiality of the examination,
developmental materials, and workpapers, which are exempt from s. 119.07(1).
Section 1012.56(9)(g), F.S. – Examination instruments, including developmental
materials and workpapers directly related thereto, which are prepared, prescribed, or administered
pursuant to this section (educator certication) are condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1)
and from s. 1001.52. Provisions governing access to, maintenance of, and destruction of such
instruments and related materials shall be prescribed by rules of the State Board of Education.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
303
Section 1012.796(4), F.S. – e complaint against a teacher or administrator and all
information obtained pursuant to the investigation by the Department of Education shall be
condential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) until the conclusion of the preliminary investigation,
until such time as the preliminary investigation ceases to be active, or until such time as otherwise
provided by s. 1012.798(6). However, the complaint and all material assembled during the
investigation may be inspected and copied by the certicate holder or the certicate holder’s
designee, after the investigation is concluded, but prior to the determination of probable cause.
Section 1012.798(9), F.S. – Information obtained by the recovery network program
(established within the Department of Education to assist impaired educators) from a treatment
provider which relates to a person’s impairment and participation in the program is condential
and exempt from disclosure.
Section 1012.798(11), F.S. – Medical records released pursuant to paragraph (8)(e) of this
section relating to the impaired educators recovery network program may be disclosed only to the
entities specied only as required for purposes of this section, or as otherwise authorized by law.
e medical records are condential and exempt from disclosure.
Section 1012.81, F.S. – Rules of the State Board of Education shall prescribe the content
and custody of limited-access records maintained by a Florida College System institution on its
employees. Such limited-access records may include only the records described in the section.
Limited access records are condential and exempt and may not be released except as authorized
in the section.
Section 1012.91, F.S. – Each university board of trustees shall adopt rules prescribing the
content and custody of limited-access records maintained on its employees. Such limited-access
records are limited to the records described in the section. Limited access records are condential
and exempt and may not be released except as authorized in the section.
Section 1013.14(1)(a), F.S. – In any case where a board, pursuant to the provisions of
Ch. 1013, seeks to purchase real property for educational purposes, all appraisals, oers, or
counteroers are exempt from s. 119.07(1) until an option contract is executed or, if no option
contract is executed, until 30 days before a contract or agreement for purchase is considered for
approval by the board. If a contract or agreement for purchase is not submitted to the board for
approval, then the exemption from s. 119.07(1) expires 30 days after the negotiations end.
E. SECTION 11.0431, FLORIDA STATUTES - LEGISLATIVE RECORDS;
EXEMPTIONS FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE.
11.0431 Legislative records; intent of legislation; exemption from public disclosure.–
(1) It is the policy of the Legislature that every person has the right to inspect and copy records
of the Senate and the House of Representatives received in connection with the ocial
business of the Legislature as provided for by the constitution of this state. To that end,
public records shall be open to personal inspection and copying at reasonable times except
when specic public necessity justies that public records be exempt from such inspection
and copying.
(2) e following public records are exempt from inspection and copying:
(a) Records, or information contained therein, held by the legislative branch of government
which, if held by an agency as dened in s. 119.011, or any other unit of government,
would be condential or exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1), or otherwise exempt
from public disclosure, and records or information of the same type held by the Legislature.
(b) A formal complaint about a member or ocer of the Legislature or about a lobbyist and
the records relating to the complaint, until the complaint is dismissed, a determination
as to probable cause has been made, a determination that there are sucient grounds for
304
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
review has been made and no probable cause panel is to be appointed, or the respondent
has requested in writing that the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of
Representatives make public the complaint or other records relating to the complaint,
whichever occurs rst.
(c) A legislatively produced draft, and a legislative request for a draft, of a bill, resolution,
memorial, or legislative rule, and an amendment thereto, which is not provided to any
person other than the member or members who requested the draft, an employee of the
Legislature, a member of the Legislature who is a supervisor of the legislative employee, a
contract employee or consultant retained by the Legislature, or an ocer of the Legislature.
(d) A draft of a bill analysis or scal note until the bill analysis or scal note is provided to
a person other than an employee of the Legislature, a contract employee or consultant
retained by the Legislature, or an ocer of the Legislature.
(e) A draft, and a request for a draft, of a reapportionment plan or redistricting plan and an
amendment thereto. Any supporting documents associated with such plan or amendment
until a bill implementing the plan, or the amendment, is led.
(f) Records prepared for or used in executive sessions of the Senate until 10 years after the date
on which the executive session was held.
(g) Portions of records of former legislative investigating committees whose records are sealed
or condential as of June 30, 1993, which may reveal the identity of any witness, any
person who was a subject of the inquiry, or any person referred to in testimony, documents,
or evidence retained in the committee’s records; however, this exemption does not apply
to a member of the committee, its sta, or any public ocial who was not a subject of the
inquiry.
(h) Requests by members for an advisory opinion concerning the application of the rules of
either house pertaining to ethics, unless the member requesting the opinion authorizes in
writing the release of such information. All advisory opinions shall be open to inspection
except that the identity of the member shall not be disclosed in the opinion unless the
member requesting the opinion authorizes in writing the release of such information.
(i) Portions of correspondence held by the legislative branch which, if disclosed, would reveal:
information otherwise exempt from disclosure by law; an individual’s medical treatment,
history, or condition; the identity or location of an individual if there is a substantial
likelihood that releasing such information would jeopardize the health or safety of that
individual; or information regarding physical abuse, child abuse, spouse abuse, or abuse of
the elderly.
(3) Any record created prior to July 1, 1993, which was not available to the public from the
house, commission, committee, or oce of the legislative branch that created the record,
is exempt from inspection and copying until July 1, 1993. Prior to July 1, 1993, the
presiding ocer of each house shall determine which records held by that house should
remain exempt from inspection and copying. e presiding ocers of both houses shall
jointly determine which records held by joint committees should remain exempt from
inspection and copying. No later than July 1, 1993, the presiding ocers shall publish a
list of records that remain exempt from inspection and copying.
(4) For purposes of this section, “public record” means all documents, papers, letters, maps,
books, tapes, photographs, lms, sound recordings, or other material, regardless of physical
form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection
with the transaction of ocial business by the legislative branch.
(5) Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the authority of each house of the Legislature to
adopt rules pursuant to s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
305
F. TABLE OF APPELLATE CASES (GOVERNMENT- IN-THE-SUNSHINE LAW
AND THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT) NOTE: is listing includes federal cases and
Florida appellate (i.e., District Court of Appeal or Supreme Court) cases cited in the
Sunshine Manual; the complete text of cited Florida county court and circuit court cases
is available online at the Oce of the Attorney General website: myoridalegal.com.
(s) Denotes case cited in Part I, Sunshine Law
(pr) denotes case cited in Part II, Public Records Act
Agrosource, Inc. v. Florida Department of Citrus, 148 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (pr)
Alice P. v. Miami Daily News, Inc., 440 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA1983), review denied, 467 So.
2d 697 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Allen v. United Faculty of Miami-Dade College, 197 So. 3d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (s)
Allstate Floridian Ins. Co. v. Oce of Ins. Regulation, 981 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review
denied, 987 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2008) (pr)
Alterra Healthcare Corporation v. Estate of Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
Althouse v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 89 So. 3d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (pr)
Althouse v. Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce, 92 So. 3d 899 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (pr)
Alvarez v. Reno, 587 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (pr)
Anderson v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (s)
Arbelaez v. State, 775 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Areizaga v. Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough County, 935 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA
2006), review denied, 958 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 2007) (pr)
Askew v. City of Ocala, 348 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1977) (s)
Atkins v. State, 663 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1995) (pr)
Atwell v. Sacred Heart Hospital of Pensacola, 520 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 1988) (pr)
B & L Service, Inc. v. Broward County, 300 So. 3d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (pr)
B & S Utilities, Inc. v. Baskerville-Donovan, Inc. 988 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), review
denied, 4 So. 3d 1220 (Fla. 2009) (pr)
B.B. v. Department of Children and Family Services, 731 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (pr)
Baker v. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 937 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 4th DCA
2006), review denied, 954 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2007) (s)
Baker County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, Inc., 870 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA
2004) (s), (pr)
B.M.Z. Corporation v. City of Oakland Park, 415 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (s)
306
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Bareld v. City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department, 639 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA), review
denied, 649 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 1994) (pr)
Bareld v. City of Tallahassee, 171 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (pr)
Bareld v. Doe, 47 F.L.W. D1924 (Fla. 4th DCA September 21, 2022) (pr)
Bareld v. School Board of Manatee County, 135 So. 3d 560 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (pr)
Bareld v. Town of Eatonville, 675 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (pr)
Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, 531 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 1988) (s), (pr)
Bay County School Board v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 382 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA
1980) (pr)
Bennett v. Clerk of Circuit Court Citrus County, 150 So. 3d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (pr)
Bennett v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (s)
Bent v. State, 46 So. 3d 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (pr)
Bevan v. Wanicka, 505 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
Bigelow v. Howze, 291 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (s)
Blackford v. School Board of Orange County, 375 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 1979) (s)
Blackshear v. State, 115 So. 3d 1093 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (pr)
Bland v. Jackson County, 514 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (s)
Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 476 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied,
488 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1986) (pr)
Board of County Commissioners of Highlands County v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)
(pr)
Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County v. D.B., 784 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA
2001) (pr)
Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County v. Webber, 658 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 2d DCA
1995) (s)
Board of Public Instruction of Broward County v. Doran, 224 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1969) (s)
Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund v. Lee, 189 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2016) (pr)
Booksmart Enterprises, Inc. v. Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc., 718 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1998), review denied, 729 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Borreca v. Fasi, 369 F. Supp. 906 (D. Hawaii 1974) (s)
Boyles v. Mid-Florida Television Corp., 431 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), approved, 467 So.
2d 282 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Braddy v. State, 219 So. 3d 803 (Fla. 2017) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
307
Brayshaw v. City of Tallahassee, Fla., 709 F. Supp. 2d 1244 (N.D. Fla. 2010) (pr)
Broward County v. Conner, 660 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), review denied, 669 So. 2d 250
(Fla. 1996) (s)
Brown v. City of Lauderhill, 654 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (s)
Brown v. Denton, 152 So. 3d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (s)
Brown v. State, 152 So. 3d 739 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (pr)
Browning v. Walton, 351 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (pr)
Bruckner v. City of Dania Beach, 823 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (s)
Bryan v. State, 753 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Buchanan v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 206 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), modied,
230 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1969) (pr)
Bundy v. State, 455 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1984), cert. denied, 106 S. Ct. 1958 (1986) (s)
Butler v. City of Hallandale Beach, 68 So. 3d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (pr)
Butterworth v. Smith, 110 S.Ct. 1376 (1990) (s), (pr)
Buxton v. City of Plant City, Florida, 871 F.2d 1037 (11th Cir. 1989) (pr)
Campus Communications, Inc. v. Earnhardt, 821 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), review denied,
848 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
Canney v. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 278 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1973) (s), (pr)
Cannon v. City of West Palm Beach, 250 F. 3d 1299 (11th Cir. 2001) (pr)
Cantanese v. Ceros-Livingston, 599 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), review denied, 613 So. 2d
2 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Cape Coral Medical Center, Inc. v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 390 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1980) (s)
Cape Publications, Inc. v. City of Palm Bay, 473 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (s)
Cape Publications, Inc. v. Hitchner, 549 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 1989), appeal dismissed, 110 S.Ct. 296
(1989) (pr)
Carden v. Chief of Police, 696 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (pr)
Carlson v. Florida Department of Revenue, 227 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (s)
Caswell v. Manhattan Fire & Marine Insurance Company, 399 F.2d 417 (5th Cir. 1968) (pr)
Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Lynx v. Post-Newsweek Stations, Orlando,
Inc., 157 So. 3d 401 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (pr)
Chandler v. City of Greenacres, 140 So. 3d 1080 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (pr)
308
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Chandler v. City of Sanford, 121 So. 3d 657 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (pr)
C.H.-C., v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 262 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (pr)
Chmielewski v. City of St. Pete Beach, 161 So. 3d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (s)
Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheri ‘s Oce, 698 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (pr)
Citizens Awareness Foundation, Inc. v. Wantman Group, Inc., 195 So. 3d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
(pr)
Citizens for Sunshine, Inc. v. School Board of Martin County, 125 So. 3d 184 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
(s)
City of Avon Park v. State, 117 So. 3d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (pr)
City of Delray Beach v. Bareld, 579 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (pr)
City of Dunnellon v. Aran, 662 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (s)
City of Fort Myers v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 514 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (s)
City of Gainesville v. State ex rel. International Association of Fire Fighters Local No. 2157, 298 So.
2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (pr)
City of Hallandale v. Rayel Corporation, 313 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cause dismissed sua
sponte, 322 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1975) (s)
City of Homestead v. McDonough, 232 So. 3d 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (pr)
City of Miami v. Airbnb, Inc., 260 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (s)
City of Miami v. Blanco, 336 So. 3d 1268 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (pr)
City of Miami v. Post-Newsweek Stations Florida, Inc., 837 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002),
review dismissed, 863 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
City of Miami v. Metropolitan Dade County, 745 F. Supp. 683 (S.D. Fla. 1990) (pr)
City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971) (s)
City of Miami Beach v. DeLapp, 472 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (pr)
City of Miami Beach v. Miami New Times, 314 So. 3d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (pr)
City of Miami Beach v. Public Employees Relations Commission, 937 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA
2006) (pr)
City of North Miami v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 468 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 493 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 1986) (pr)
City of Riviera Beach v. Bareld, 642 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), review denied, 651 So.
2d 1192 (Fla. 1995) (pr)
City of St. Petersburg v. Romine ex rel. Dillinger, 719 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
309
City of St. Petersburg v. Dorchester Holdings, LLC, 331 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (pr)
City of St. Petersburg v. Wright, 241 So. 3d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018) (s)
City of Sunny Isles Beach v. Gatto, 338 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (pr)
City of Sunrise v. News and Sun-Sentinel Company, 542 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (s)
City of Tallahassee v. Federated Publications, Inc., No. 4:11cv395-RH/CAS (N.D. Fla. August 9,
2012) (pr)
City of Tarpon Springs v. Garrigan, 510 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
Clay County Education Association v. Clay County School Board, 144 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA
2014) (pr)
Clein v. State, 52 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 1950) (s)
Coconut Grove Playhouse, Inc. v. Knight-Ridder, Inc., 935 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (pr)
Coleman v. Austin, 521 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (pr)
Collier County Public Schools v. Mason Classical Academy, Inc., 342 So. 3d 753 (Fla. 2d DCA
2022) (s)
Consumer Rights, LLC v. Bradford County, 153 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (pr)
Consumer Rights, LLC v. Union County, 159 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), review denied, 177
So. 3d 1264 (Fla. 2015) (pr)
Cook v. Florida Department of Corrections, 315 So. 3d 790 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (pr)
Cooper v. Dillon, 403 F. 3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2005) (pr)
Correll v. State, 184 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 2015) (pr)
County of Volusia v. Emergency Communications Network, Inc., 39 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. 5th DCA
2010) (pr)
Coventry First, LLC v. Oce of Insurance Regulation, 30 So. 3d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (pr)
Cox Broadcasting Corporation v. Cohn, 95 S.Ct. 1029 (1975) (pr)
Critical Intervention Services, Inc. v. City of Clearwater, 908 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Cruz v. State, 279 So. 3d 154 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019) (pr)
Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. v. Miami-Dade County, 899 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
(pr)
Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (pr)
Dade Aviation Consultants v. Knight Ridder, Inc., 800 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (pr)
Daniels v. Bryson, 548 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (pr)
Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 877 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (s)
310
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Dascott v. Palm Beach County, 988 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), review denied, 6 So. 3d 51
(Fla. 2009) (s)
Davis v. Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 480 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review
denied, 488 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1986), appeal after remand, 519 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (pr)
Deereld Beach Publishing, Inc. v. Robb, 530 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (s)
Deeson Media, LLC v. City of Tampa, 291 So. 3d 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (pr)
Delaurentos v. Peguero, 47 So. 3d 879 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (pr)
DeMartini v. Town of Gulf Stream, 942 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 2019) (pr)
Department of Children and Families v. Panno, 312 So.3d 1275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (pr)
Department of Health v. Poss, 45 So. 3d 510 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (pr)
Department of Health v. Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills, 259 So. 3d 979 (Fla. 1st DCA
2018) (pr)
Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Company, 582 So. 2d
725 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (pr)
Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Martin, 574 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
(pr)
Department of Professional Regulation v. Spiva, 478 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (pr)
Dettelbach v. Department of Business and Professional Regulation, 261 So. 3d 676 (Fla. 1st DCA
2018) (pr)
Dickerson v. Hayes, 543 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (pr)
Doe v. State, 901 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (pr)
Donner v. Edelstein, 415 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (pr)
Douglas v. Michel, 410 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), questions answered and approved, 464
So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Downs v. Austin, 522 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (pr)
Downs v. Austin, 559 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 574 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1990) (pr)
Economic Development Commission v. Ellis, 178 So. 3d 118 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (pr)
Edelstein v. Donner, 450 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), approved, 471 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Environmental Turf, Inc. v. University of Florida Board of Trustees, 83 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. 1st DCA
2012) (pr)
Everglades Law Center, Inc. v. South Florida Water Management District, 290 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2019) (s) (pr)
Evergreen the Tree Treasurers of Charlotte County, Inc. v. Charlotte County Board of County
Commissioners, 810 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (s)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
311
Executive Oce of the Governor v. AHF MCO of Florida, Inc., 257 So. 3d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA
2018) (pr)
Fadjo v. Coon, 633 F.2d 1172 (5th Cir. 1981) (pr)
Ferrier v. Public Defender’s Oce, Second Judicial Circuit, 171 So. 3d 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
(pr)
Finch v. Seminole County School Board, 995 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (s)
Florida Agency for Health Care Administration v. Zuckerman Spaeder, LLP, 221 So. 3d 1260 (Fla.
1st DCA 2017) (pr)
Florida Citizens Alliance, Inc., v. School Board of Collier County, 328 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA
2021) (ss)
Florida Bar v. Committee, 916 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 2005) (s) (pr)
Florida Board of Bar Examiners Re: Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida
Relating to Admissions to the Bar, 676 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1996) (pr)
Florida Department of Children and Families v. Sun-Sentinel, Inc., 865 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2004)
(pr)
Florida Department of Corrections v. Abril, 969 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 2007) (pr)
Florida Department of Corrections v. Miami Herald Media Company, 278 So. 3d 786 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2019) (pr)
Florida Department of Education v. NYT Management Services, Inc., 895 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2005) (pr)
Florida Department of Revenue v. WHI Limited Partnership, 754 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
(pr)
Florida Environmental Regulation Specialists, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, 342 So. 3d 710 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (s)
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (pr)
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, 520 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1988) (pr)
Florida Institutional Legal Services v. Florida Department of Corrections, 579 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1991), review denied, 592 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 1991) (pr)
Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. Baranko, 407 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (s)
Florida Parole and Probation Commission v. omas, 364 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (s)
Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. v. City of Tallahassee, 314 So. 3d 796 (Fla. 1st DCA
2021), review granted, No. 21-651 (Fla. December 21, 2021) (pr)
Florida Power & Light Company v. Public Service Commission, 31 So. 3d 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
(pr)
Forehand v. School Board of Gulf County, Florida, 600 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (s)
312
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Forsberg v. Housing Authority of City of Miami Beach, 455 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1984) (pr)
Fox v. News-Press Publishing Co., Inc., 545 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (s) (pr)
Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance Company v. Magaha, 769 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 2000) (s)
Fraternal Order of Police v. Rutherford, 51 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (pr)
Freeman v. Times Publishing Company, 696 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (s)
Friedberg v. Town of Longboat Key, 504 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
Fuller v. State ex rel. O’Donnell, 17 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 1944) (pr)
Gadd v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 412 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 419
So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1982) (pr)
Gannett Co., Inc. v. Goldtrap, 302 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) (pr)
Garcia v. Walder Electronics, Inc., 563 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So. 2d 287
(Fla. 1990) (pr)
Garner v. Florida Commission on Ethics, 415 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), review denied, 424
So. 2d 761 (Fla. 1983) (pr)
Garrison v. Bailey, 4 So. 3d 683 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (pr)
Gay v. State, 697 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (pr)
G.G. v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, 97 So. 3d 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (pr)
Gilliam v. State, 996 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (pr)
Godheim v. City of Tampa, 426 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (s)
Gonzalez v. State, 240 So. 3d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018) (pr)
Grace v. Jenne, 855 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (pr)
Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So. 3d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review denied, 47 So. 3d 1288
(Fla. 2010) (s) (pr)
Grapski v. City of Alachua, 134 So. 3d 987 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), review denied, 118 So. 3d 220
(Fla. 2012) (pr)
Greenbarg v. Metropolitan Dade County Board of County Commissioners, 618 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1993) (s)
Halifax Hospital Medical Center v. News-Journal Corporation, 724 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1999) (s) (pr)
Harold v. Orange County, 668 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (pr)
Harvard v. Village of Palm Springs, 98 So. 3d 645 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (pr)
Henderson v. Perez, 835 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (pr)
Henderson v. State, 745 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
313
Herbits v. City of Miami, 207 So. 3d 274 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (pr)
Herrin v. City of Deltona, 121 So. 3d 1094 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (s)
Hewlings v. Orange County, 87 So. 3d 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (pr)
Hill v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 701 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), review
denied, 717 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Hillier v. City of Plantation, 935 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (pr)
Hillsborough County v. Morris, 730 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (pr)
Hillsborough County Aviation Authority v. Azzarelli Construction Company, 436 So. 2d 153 (Fla.
2d DCA 1983) (pr)
Holield v. Big Bend Cares, Inc., 326 So. 3d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (pr)
Holley v. Bradford County Sheri’s Department, 171 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (pr)
Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (s)
Housing Authority of the City of Daytona Beach v. Gomillion, 639 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
(pr)
Human Rights Defense Center v. Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc., 336 So. 3d 769 (Fla.
3d DCA 2021) (pr)
IDS Properties, Inc. v. Town of Palm Beach, 279 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), certied question
answered sub nom., Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974) (s)
Indian River County Hospital District v. Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., 766 So. 2d 233 (Fla.
4th DCA 2000) (s) (pr)
In re Adoption of H.Y.T., 458 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 1984) (s)
In re Advisory Opinion of the Governor, 334 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1976) (s)
In re Amendments to Fla. R. Jud. Admin., Public Access to Judicial Records, 608 So. 2d 472 (Fla.
1992) (pr)
In re Final Report of the 20th Statewide Grand Jury, 343 So. 3d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (pr)
In re Grand Jury, Fall Term 1986, 528 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (s) (pr)
In re Grand Jury Investigation Spring Term 1988, 543 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied,
547 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 1989) (pr)
In re Getty, 427 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (s)
In re Motion to Compel Compliance to Minnesota Department of Health v. All Temporaries Midwest,
Inc., 423 F. Supp. 3d 670 (D. Minn. 2019) (pr)
In re Records of the Department of Children and Family Services, 873 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 2d DCA
2004) (pr)
In re Report of the Supreme Court Workgroup on Public Records, 825 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
314
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
In re Report & Recommendations of Judicial Mgmt. Council of Fla. on Privacy & Elec. Access to Court
Records, 832 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
In re Subpoena to Testify Before Grand Jury Directed to Custodian of Records, 864 F.2d 1559 (11th
Cir. 1989) (s) (pr)
Jackson v. City of Tallahassee, 265 So. 3d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (s)
Jacobs Keeley, PLLC v. Chief Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 169 So. 3d 192 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2015) (pr)
James, Hoyer, Newcomer, Smiljanich, & Yanchunis, P.A., v. Rodale, Inc., 41 So.3d 386 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2010) (pr)
James v. Loxahatchee Groves Water Control District, 820 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (pr)
Jennings v. Dade County, 589 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), review denied, 598 So. 2d 75
(Fla. 1992) (s)
Jennings v. State, 626 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
J.I. v. Department of Children and Families, 922 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (s)
Johnson v. Butterworth, 713 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Johnson v. Deluz, 875 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Johnson v. Jarvis, 107 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (pr)
Johnson v. State, 769 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 2000) (pr)
Jones v. Heyman, 888 F.2d 1328 (11th Cir. 1989) (s)
Jones v. Miami Herald Media Company, 198 So. 3d 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (pr)
Jordan v. Jenne, 938 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (s)
Jordan v. School Board of Broward County, 531 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (pr)
Justice Coalition v. e First District Court of Appeal Judicial Nominating Commission, 823 So. 2d
185 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (pr)
Kanner v. Frumkes, 353 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (s) (pr)
Keesler v. Community Maritime Park Associates, Inc., 32 So. 3d 659 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review
denied, 47 So. 3d 1289 (Fla. 2010) (s)
Kever v. Gilliam, 886 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (pr)
Kight v. Dugger, 574 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1990) (pr)
Killearn Properties, Inc. v. City of Tallahassee, 366 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied,
378 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1979) (s)
King v. State, 840 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
Kline v. University of Florida, 200 So. 3d 271 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
315
Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump, No. 18-1691 (2d Cir. July 9, 2019) (pr)
Knight News, Inc. v. University of Central Florida, 200 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (pr)
Knox v. District School Board of Brevard, 821 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (s)
Kovaleski v. State, 854 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), case dismissed, 860 So. 2d 978 (Fla.
2003) (pr)
Krause v. Reno, 366 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (s)
Krischer v. D’Amato, 674 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
L.R. v. Department of State, Division of Archives, History and Records Management, 488 So. 2d
122 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (pr)
Lake v. State, 193 So. 3d 932 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (s)
Lake Shore Hospital Authority v. Lilker, 168 So. 3d 332 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (pr)
Langlois v. City of Deereld Beach, Florida, 370 F. Supp. 2d 1233 (S.D. Fla. 2005) (pr)
Law and Information Services, Inc. v. City of Riviera Beach, 670 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
(s)
Layton v. Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 676 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1996) (pr)
Leach-Wells v. City of Bradenton, 734 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (s)
League of Women Voters v. Florida House of Representatives, 132 So. 3d 135 (Fla. 2013) (pr)
Lee v. Board of Trustees, Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund, 113 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 1st DCA
2013) (pr)
Lee County v. Pierpont, 693 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), armed, 710 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 1998)
(s)
Lee County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 634 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA
1994) (pr)
Lewis v. State, 958 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Lightbourne v. McCollum, 969 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 2007), cert. denied, 553 U.S. 1059 (2008) (pr)
Lilker v. Suwannee Valley Transit Authority, 133 So. 3d 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (pr)
Locke v. Hawkes, 595 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Lopez v. Singletary, 634 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Lopez v. State, 696 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Lorei v. Smith, 464 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), review denied, 475 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1985)
(pr)
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 995 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (pr)
316
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, Fla., 138 S. Ct. 1945 ( 2018) (s)
Lyon v. Lake County, 765 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (s)
Maraia v. State, 685 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (pr)
Major v. Hallandale Beach Police Department, 219 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (pr)
Managed Care of North America, Inc. v. Florida Healthy Kids, 268 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
(pr)
Marino v. University of Florida, 107 So. 3d 1231 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (pr)
Martinez v. State, 969 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Matos v. Oce of the State Attorney, 17
th
Jud. Cir., 80 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (pr)
Maxwell v. Pine Gas Corporation, 195 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967) (pr)
Mayer v. State, 523 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 529 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1988) (s)
Mazer v. Orange County, 811 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (pr)
McCoy Restaurants, Inc. v. City of Orlando, 392 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1980) (s)
McDonough v. City of Homestead, 305 So. 3d 316 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (pr)
McDougall v. Culver, 3 So. 3d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (s)
McLendon v. Palm Beach County Oce of the Inspector General, 286 So. 3d 375 (Fla. 4th DCA
2019) (pr)
Media General Convergence, Inc. v. Chief Judge of the irteenth Judicial Circuit, 840 So. 2d 1008
(Fla. 2003) (pr)
Media General Operation, Inc. v. Feeney, 849 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Media General Operations, Inc. v. State, 933 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (pr)
Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999) (s)
(pr)
Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 784 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2001) (pr)
Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc. v. News-Journal Corporation, 927 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA
2006) (s) (pr)
Metropolitan Dade County v. San Pedro, 632 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (pr)
Miami Dade College v. Nader + Museu I, LLLP, 47 F.L.W. D1814 (Fla. 3d DCA August 31,
2022) (pr)
Miami-Dade County v. Professional Law Enforcement Association, 997 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA
2009) (pr)
Miami Herald Media Company v. Florida Department of Transportation, 345 F. Supp. 3d 1349
(N.D. Fla. 2018) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
317
Miami Herald Media Company v. State, 218 So. 3d 460 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (s)
Miami Herald Media Co. v. Sarno, 971 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (pr)
Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Gridley, 510 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108
S.Ct.1224 (1988) (s) (pr)
Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982) (s) (pr)
Michel v. Douglas, 464 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1985) (pr)
Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review denied, 902 So. 2d 791
(Fla. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 746 (2005) (pr)
Mills v. Doyle, 407 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (pr)
Milner v. State, 196 So. 3d 569 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
Mintus v. City of West Palm Beach, 711 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (pr)
Mitchell v. School Board of Leon County, 335 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976) (s)
Molina v. City of Miami, 837 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (s)
Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (s)
Morency v. State, 223 So. 3d 439 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (pr)
Morgan v. Wagner, 73 So. 3d 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (pr)
Morris Communications Company, LLC v. State, 844 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. Department of Education, 133 So. 3d 957 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013),
review denied, 157 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 2015) (pr)
Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 13 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
(pr)
Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 136 So. 3d 770 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (s)
Morris Publishing Group, LLC v. State, 154 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), review denied, 163
So. 3d 512 (Fla. 2015) (pr)
Morris v. Whitehead, 588 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (pr)
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Associated Press, 18 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009),
review denied, 37 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2010) (pr)
National Council of Compensation Insurance v. Fee, 219 So. 3d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (s)
Natural Parents of J.B. v. Florida Department of Children and Family Services, 780 So. 2d 6 (Fla.
2001) (s)
Neu v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, 462 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1985) (s)
Neumann v. Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association, 763 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA
2000) (pr)
318
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
New York Times Company v. PHH Mental Health Services, Inc., 616 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1993) (s), (pr)
News-Journal Corporation v. Memorial Hospital-West Volusia, Inc., 695 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA
1997), approved, 729 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1999) (s) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (s)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Gadd, 388 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Kaune, 511 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Lee County, Florida, 570 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
(s)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Sapp, 464 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (pr)
News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. Wisher, 345 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 1977) (pr),
(s)
News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Cox, 702 F. Supp. 891 (S.D. Fla. 1988) (s)
News and Sun-Sentinel Company v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d
1029 (Fla. 1992) (s) (pr)
Nicolai v. Baldwin, 715 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (pr)
O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 257 So. 3d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (pr)
O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 341 So. 3d 335 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (pr)
O’Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream, 341 So. 3d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (pr)
Ocala Star Banner Corp. v. McGhee, 643 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (pr)
Ocala Star-Banner v. State, 697 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (pr)
Occidental Chemical Company v. Mayo, 351 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1977) (s)
Oce of Insurance Regulation v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company, 213 So. 3d 1104 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2017) (pr)
Oce of the State Attorney for the irteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida v. Gonzalez, 953 So. 2d 759
(Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (pr)
Orange County v. Florida Land Company, 450 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review denied,
458 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 1984) (pr)
Orange County v. Hewlings, 152 So. 3d 812 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (pr)
Osario v. State, 34 So. 3d 98 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (pr)
Palm Beach Community College Foundation, Inc. v. WFTV, 611 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (pr)
Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher’s Association v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 411 So.
2d 1375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (s)
Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association v. Neumann, 796 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 4th DCA
2001) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
319
Palm Beach County Sheri’s Oce v. Sun-Sentinel Company, LLC, 226 So. 3d 969 (Fla. 4th DCA
2017) (pr)
Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Burk, 504 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S.Ct. 346
(1987) (s),
(pr)
Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., v. Doe, 460 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (s)
Parole Commission v. Lockett, 620 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 429 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (pr)
Paylan v. Oce of the State Attorney for the irteenth Circuit, 310 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)
(pr)
Pinellas County School Board v. Suncam, Inc., 829 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (s)
Potts v. State, 869 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (pr)
Port Everglades Authority v. International Longshoremen’s Association, Local 1922-1, 652 So. 2d
1169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (s)
Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Prison Health Services, Inc. v. Lakeland Ledger Publishing Company, 718 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2d DCA
1998), review denied, 727 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Pritchett v. State, 566 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 570 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1990) (s)
Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v. Sundy, 145 So. 3d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (pr)
Puls v. City of Port St. Lucie, 678 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
Putnam County Humane Society v. Woodward, 740 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (pr)
Quad-City Community News Service, Inc. v. Jebens, 334 F. Supp 8 (S.D. Iowa 1971) (s)
Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Ragsdale v. State, 720 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
Rameses, Inc. v. Demings, 29 So. 3d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (pr)
Ramese’s, Inc. v. Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation, 954 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Rasier-DC, LLC v. B & L Service, Inc., 237 So. 3d 374 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (pr)
Rea v. Sansbury, 504 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1987) (pr)
Rhea v. District Board of Trustees of Santa Fe College, 109 So. 3d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (pr)
Rhea v. City of Gainesville, 574 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (s)
Rhea v. School Board of Alachua County, 636 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (s)
Ribaya v. Board of Trustees of the City Pension Fund for Fireghters and Police Ocers in the City of
Tampa, 162 So. 3d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (s)
320
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Roberts v. Butterworth, 668 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1996) (pr))
Roberts v. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc., 409 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied,
418 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 1982) (pr)
Roesch v. State, 633 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Rogers v. Hood, 906 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), review denied, 919 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 2005)
(pr)
Rogers v. State, 271 So. 3d 79 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (pr)
Rose v. D’Alessandro, 380 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1980) (pr)
Rowe v. Pinellas Sports Authority, 461 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1984) (s)
Ru v. School Board of Collier County, 426 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (s)
Rush v. High Springs, 82 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (pr)
Salameh v. Florida Department of Health, 325 So. 3d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (pr)
Salcines v. Tampa Television, 454 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (pr)
Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Sarasota, 48 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2010) (s)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune Company v. Community Health Corporation, Inc., 582 So. 2d 730 (Fla.
2d DCA 1991) (pr)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune v. State, 916 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune v. State, 924 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), review denied, 918 So. 2d 293
(Fla. 2005), pet. for cert. dismissed, 126 S. Ct. 1139 (2006) (pr)
Satz v. Blankenship, 407 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), review denied, 413 So. 2d 877 (Fla.
1982) (pr)
Satz v. Gore Newspapers Company, 395 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (pr)
School Board of Alachua County v. Rhea, 661 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), review denied, 670
So. 2d 939 (Fla. 1996) (s)
School Board of Duval County v. Florida Publishing Company, 670 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
(s)
Schwartzman v. Merritt Island Volunteer Fire Department, 352 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977),
cert. denied, 358 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1978) (pr)
Schweickert v. Citrus County Florida Board, 193 So. 3d 1075 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (pr)
SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (s)
Scott v. Lee County School Board, 310 So. 3d 163 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (pr)
Scott v. ompson, 4326 So. 3d 123 (Fla.1st DCA 2021) (pr)
Seigle v. Barry, 422 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), review denied, 431 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1983) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
321
Seminole County, Florida v. Wood, 512 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So.
2d 586 (Fla. 1988) (pr)
Sepro Corporation v. Department of Environmental Protection, 839 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA
2003), review denied sub nom., Crist v. Department of Environmental Protection, 911 So. 2d 792
(Fla. 2005) (pr)
Seta Corporation of Boca, Inc. v. Oce of the Attorney General, 756 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA
2000) (pr)
Shevin v. Byron, Harless, Schaer, Reid and Associates, Inc., 379 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1980) (pr)
Siegmeister v. Johnson, 240 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (pr)
Silver Express Company v. District Board of Lower Tribunal Trustees, 691 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA
1997) (s)
Sireci v. State, 587 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1500 (1992) (s)
Skeen v. D’Alessandro, 681 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (pr)
Smith v. State, 696 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (pr)
Smith v. State, 335 So. 3d 795 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (pr)
Smith & Williams, P.A. v. West Coast Regional Water Authority, 640 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 2d DCA
1994) (pr)
Smithwick v. Television 12 of Jacksonville, Inc., 730 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (pr)
Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company v. Beard, 597 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (pr)
Southern Coatings, Inc. v. City of Tamarac, 916 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (pr)
Southwestern Newspapers Corporation v. Curtis, 584 S.W.2d 362 (Texas App. 1979) (s)
Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc. v. Centrust Savings Bank, 535 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (s)
Staneld v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 698 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (s)
Staneld v. Salvation Army, 695 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (s),
(pr)
State v. Buenoano, 707 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 1998) (pr)
State v. City of Clearwater, 863 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 2003) (pr)
State v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Miami, Inc., 582 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (pr)
State v. Globe Communications Corporation, 648 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1994) (pr)
State v. Ingram, 170 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 2015) (pr)
State v. Johnson, 814 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2002) (pr)
State v. Knight, 661 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (pr)
State v. Kokal, 562 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 1990) (pr)
322
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
State v. Natson, 661 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (pr)
State v. Schenecker, No. 11-CF-001376A (Fla. 13th
Cir. Ct. August 3, 2011), certiorari denied sub.
nom., Media General Operations v. State, 71 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 2d DCA September 16, 2011) (pr)
State v. Webb, 786 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (pr)
State v. Wright, 803 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2002)
(pr)
State v. Wooten, 260 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (pr)
State Attorney’s Oce, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit v. Cable News Network, Inc., 251 So. 3d 205
(Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (pr)
State Attorney’s Oce, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit v. Cable News Network, Inc., 254 So. 3d 461(Fla.
4th DCA 2018) (pr)
State, Department of Economic Opportunity v. Consumer Rights, LLC, 181 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2015) (pr)
State, Department of Financial Services v. Danahy & Murray, 246 So. 3d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
(pr)
State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Southpointe Pharmacy, 636 So. 2d 1377
(Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (pr)
State, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Krejci Company, Inc., 570 So. 2d 1322
(Fla. 2d DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1991) (pr)
State, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Krop, 445 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA
1984) (pr)
State, Department of Management Services v. Lewis, 653 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (s)
State ex rel. Christian v. Rudd, 302 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (s)
State ex rel. Clayton v. Board of Regents, 635 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 1994) (pr)
State ex rel. Cummer v. Pace, 159 So. 679 (Fla. 1935) (pr)
State ex rel. Davidson v. Couch, 156 So. 297 (Fla. 1934) (pr)
State ex rel. Davidson v. Couch, 158 So. 103 (Fla. 1934) (pr)
State ex rel. Davis v. McMillan, 38 So. 666 (Fla. 1905) (pr)
State ex rel. Miami Herald Publishing Company v. McIntosh, 340 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 1977) (s) (pr)
State ex rel. Veale v. City of Boca Raton, 353 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 360
So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1978) (pr)
Staton v. McMillan, 597 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Staton
v.Austin, 605 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1992) (pr)
Stone v. Ward, 752 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
323
U.S. v. Story County, Iowa, 28 F. Supp. 3d 861, 872 (S.D. Iowa 2014) (pr)
Sun-Sentinel, Inc. v. Florida Department of Children and Families, 815 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 3d DCA
2002) (pr)
Surterra Florida, LLC v. Florida Department of Health, 223 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (pr)
Tal-Mason v. Satz, 614 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 624 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1993)
(pr)
Tampa Television, Inc. v. Dugger, 559 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (pr)
e Florida Bar, In re Advisory Opinion Concerning the Applicability of Ch. 119, F.S., 398 So. 2d
446 (Fla. 1981) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Ake, 660 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1995) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. A.J., 626 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. City of St. Petersburg, 558 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Patterson, 451 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. State, 827 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. State, 903 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (pr)
Times Publishing Co. v. Williams, 222 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969) (s)
Timoney v. City of Miami Civilian Investigative Panel, 917 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (pr)
Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied sub nom., Metropolitan
Dade County Transit Agency v. Sanchez, 426 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1983) (pr)
Tolar v. School Board of Liberty County, 398 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1981) (s)
Town of Gulf Stream v. O’Boyle, 654 Fed. Appx. 439 (11th Cir. 2016) (pr)
Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974) (s) (pr)
Tracy v. State, 219 So. 3d 958 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (pr)
Transparency for Florida, Inc. v. City of Port St. Lucie, 240 So. 3d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (s)
Trepal v. State, 704 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Tribune Company v. Cannella, 438 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), reversed on other grounds,
458 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), appeal dismissed sub nom., DePerte v. Tribune Company, 105 S.Ct.
2315 (1985) (pr)
Trout v. Bucher, 205 So. 3d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (pr)
TSI Southeast, Inc. v. Royals, 588 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (s)
Turner v. Wainwright, 379 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), armed and remanded, 389 So. 2d
1181 (Fla. 1980) (s) (pr)
324
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Valle v. State, 705 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 1997) (pr)
Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 94 S.Ct. 1564 (1974) (pr)
Villarreal v. State, 687 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), review denied, 694 So. 2d 741 (Fla.
1997), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 316 (1997) (pr)
Wagner v. Orange County, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (pr)
Wait v. Florida Power & Light Company, 372 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1979) (pr)
Wallace v. Guzman, 687 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (pr)
Walton v. Dugger, 634 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1993) (pr)
Weekly Planet v. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, 829 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (pr)
Warden v. Bennett, 340 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (pr)
Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (pr)
Weeks v. Golden, 846 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (pr)
Wells v. Aramark Food Service Corporation, 888 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Wells v. Sarasota Herald Tribune Company, Inc., 546 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. Robbins, 625 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. School Board of Seminole County, Florida, 874 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004),
review denied, 892 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2004) (pr)
WFTV, Inc. v. Wilken, 675 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (pr)
Wilkinson v. State Attorney’s Oce, 345 So. 3d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (pr)
Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), review denied, 589 So. 2d 289
(Fla. 1991), appeal after remand, 619 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (pr)
Williams v. State, 741 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 1999) (pr)
Williams v. State, 163 So. 3d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (pr)
Winter v. Playa del Sol Inc., 353 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (pr)
Wisner v. City of Tampa, 601 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (pr)
Wolfson v. State, 344 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977) (s)
Woliner v. Florida Department of Health, 320 So. 3d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (pr)
Wood v. Marston, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1983) (s)
Woodard v. State, 885 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (pr)
Woodfaulk v. State, 935 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (pr)
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
325
Woolling v. Lamar, 764 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), review denied, 786 So. 2d 1186 (Fla.
2001) (pr)
Wootton v. Cook, 590 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (pr)
WPTV-TV v. State, 61 So. 3d 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (pr)
Wright v. State, 324 So 3d 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (pr)
Yanke v. State, 588 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), review denied, 595 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1992), cert.
denied, 112 S.Ct. 1592 (1992) (pr)
Yarbrough v. Young, 462 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (s)
Yasir v. Forman, 149 So. 3d 107 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (pr)
Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 735 So. 2d 1284
(Fla. 1999) (s)
326
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
INDEX TO MANUAL AND EXEMPTIONS Page
ABLE program, nancial and health information
Exemption: 1009.987 ......................................................................................302
Abortion requests by minors, parental notication waiver petitions .....................................16
Exemptions: 390.01114(6)(f); 390.01116; 390.01118 ....................................257
Abstention from voting ......................................................................................... 49-50, 209
Adoption records and proceedings .......................................................................................73
Exemptions: 63.022(4)(i); 63.0541; 63.162; 63.165(1) ........................... 228-229
Advisory committees, application of open government laws
Criminal justice advisory committees............................................................................20
Exemptions: 286.01141; 943.031(9)(c) and (d); 943.0314 ......................209, 294
Generally ............................................................................................... 1-3, 57-58
Personnel advisory committees .....................................................................................34
Purchasing advisory committees ....................................................................... 35-36, 48
Exemption: 286.0113(2) .......................................................................... 206-207
Real estate advisory committees ....................................................................................57
School advisory committees ...................................................................... 2-5, 19, 20, 58
Advocacy councils, investigatory proceedings and records....................................................52
Exemptions: 402.165(8); 402.166(8) ....................................................... 262-263
Aging, agencies on, application of open government laws ........................................ 17-18, 61
Accessibility of public meetings to physically handicapped ..................................................41
Agendas for public meetings ................................................................................................40
Aggravated battery and aggravated stalking victims, addresses ................................... 121-122
Exemption: 119.071(2)(j) ................................................................................235
Agricultural processing or production records relating to pollution reduction
Exemption: 403.067(7)(c)5. .............................................................................263
Agriculture Center and Horse Park Authority, donor identities
Exemption: 570.686 ........................................................................................277
Airport security plans and operating facility documents
Exemption: 331.22 ..........................................................................................250
Alcoholic beverage licenses, random selection drawing results
Exemption: 561.19(2)(b) .................................................................................277
Alien business organization proceedings
Exemptions: 607.0505(6); 617.0503(6) ...........................................................278
Alternate board members, application of Sunshine Law ................................................. 21-22
Alzheimer’s disease
Research and care programs, identity of clients
Exemption: 430.504 .........................................................................................267
Research grant applications, advisory board
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
327
Exemptions: 381.82(3)(d) ................................................................................255
Anatomical gift donor registry, donor identifying information
Exemption: 765.51551 ....................................................................................290
Animal medical records held by state college of veterinary medicine
Exemption: 474.2167 ......................................................................................273
Animal researchers, personal identifying information
Exemption: 585.611(1) ....................................................................................278
Annuities for public employees ..........................................................................................134
Exemption: 112.21(1) ......................................................................................231
Anonymous requests for records ........................................................................................167
Antitrust investigation demand products
Exemption: 542.28(9) ......................................................................................276
Applications for employment, generally .............................................................................134
Applications for presidency of postsecondary institution, records, and meetings .........34, 134
Exemption: 1004.098(1) ..................................................................................299
Aquaculture records
Exemption: 597.0042. .....................................................................................278
Arbitration, application of attorney-client exemption .........................................................29
Archaeological site location
Exemption: 267.135 ........................................................................................245
Architecture and Interior Design, Board of; complaints and investigation
Exemption: 481.205(3)(a) ................................................................................273
Archival materials under special restrictions
Exemption: 257.38(4) ......................................................................................245
Arrest reports, see also criminal investigative and intelligence information ..........................101
Attorney records and litigation meetings
Attorney notes .................................................................................................... 131-132
Attorney work product ....................................................................... 127-131, 174, 194
Exemptions: 119.071(1)(d); 119.0714(1)(a), 627.3121(1)(j) ...........218, 233, 281
Insurance claim negotiation records ............................................................................131
Exemption: 624.311(2) ....................................................................................279
Litigation settlement negotiation or strategy session meetings ................................. 26-31
Exemption: 286.011(8) ............................................................................ 205-206
Risk management records and meetings ......................................................................131
Exemptions: 284.40(2); 768.28(16)(b)(c); 1004.24(4) .....................246, 290, 299
Attorney’s fees in open government cases ........................................................ 54-55, 196-200
Auditor General, audit workpapers ......................................................................................88
Exemption: 11.45(4)(c) ....................................................................................225
Audits or investigations for local governments ................................................. 88-89, 99, 178
328
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemption: 119.0713(2)(b) .............................................................................238
Autism clients
Exemption: 1004.55(6) ....................................................................................300
Autopsy reports ............................................................................................. 73-74, 103, 108
Autopsy photographs...........................................................................................................74
Exemption: 406.135 ........................................................................................263
Bail bond agents
Exemptions: 648.26(3); 648.34(3); 648.39(1); 648.41; 648.46(3) ........... 284-285
Baker Act ............................................................................................................ 95, 110-111
Exemptions: 394.4615(1), (8) ..........................................................................258
Ballots
Ballots cast at public meetings ................................................................................ 49-51
Ballots cast by voters in elections ...................................................................... 79, 82-83
Exemptions: 101.62(3); 119.07(5) ...........................................................230, 216
Bank account numbers in possession of governmental entity ......................................... 91-92
Exemptions: 119.071(5)(b); 119.0714(1)(j), (2), (3) ........................237, 218, 219
Banks, stockholder lists
Exemptions: 655.057(2), (8) ............................................................................286
Bids, records and meetings, see competitive solicitations
Biomedical research grants and peer review meetings
Exemptions: 215.56021; 381.92201 ................................................................255
Birth center records
Exemptions: 383.32(3); 383.325 ......................................................................256
Birth records ...............................................................................................................73, 180
Exemptions: 382.013(4)(5); 382.017(1); 382.025(1)-(4) .................................256
Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association records
Exemptions: 766.305(3); 766.314(8); 766.315(5)(b) .......................................290
Blind Services, Division of; records identifying blind persons
Exemption: 413.012(1) ....................................................................................266
Body camera recordings .....................................................................................................111
Exemption: 119.071(2)(l) ................................................................................235
Bond ownership records ......................................................................................................91
Exemption: 279.11(1) ......................................................................................246
Booking business records, public facilities............................................................................91
Exemption: 255.047(2) ....................................................................................244
Boxing Commission, proprietary information
Exemption: 548.062(2) ....................................................................................276
Brain research and spinal cord injury records
Exemptions: 381.775; 381.8531 ......................................................................255
Budgets ......................................................................................................................... 89-90
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
329
Building plans, blueprints, and diagrams ...........................................................................155
Exemptions: 119.071(3)(b)(c)(d) .....................................................................236
Business and Professional Regulation, Department of; investigators and inspectors,
personal information ................................................................................................. 146-147
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.m .........................................................................236
Cameras and tape recorders at public meetings ....................................................................48
Campaign nance reports and investigatory proceedings
Exemptions: 106.0706(1)(2); 106.25(7)...........................................................230
Campus emergency response .............................................................................................157
Exemption: 1004.0962(2) ................................................................................299
Candidates, application of Sunshine Law ..............................................................................6
Candidate forums, application of Sunshine Law ................................................................22
Capital development board, donor identities
Exemption: 11.45(3)(j) ....................................................................................225
Canvassing boards ............................................................................................................82
Ballots ............................................................................................................82
Minutes ....................................................................................................80, 193
Charter schools ............................................................................................................. 80-81
Child abuse records and reports ................................................................66, 75-76, 122-124
Exemptions: 39.101(3)(b); 39.202(1), (2)(o), (5), (6);
39.301(18); 92.56; 119.071(2)(h)(j) ........................................227, 229, 234, 235
Child care facilities and programs
Exemptions: 119.071(5)(c); 409.175(12) .................................................237, 264
Child death information, website publication ......................................................................76
Child death review committee .............................................................................................43
Exemption: 383.412 ........................................................................................256
Child advocacy center employees, personal information ....................................................144
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.t. ..........................................................................236
Child protection team members, personal information .....................................................144
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.t. ..........................................................................236
Child support hearing ocers, personal information .........................................................147
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.e. ..........................................................................236
Child support recipients
Exemption: 61.1827 ........................................................................................228
Child trac violation records ............................................................................................115
Child welfare proceedings
Exemptions: 39.0132(3), (4)(a)1.; 39.507; 39.809(4). .............................226, 227
Children participating in government-sponsored recreation programs .................................82
Exemption: 119.071(5)(c) ..............................................................................237
Children and Families, Department of; information exchanged with
Department of Health .........................................................................................................94
330
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Children and Families, Department of; investigators personal information ........................143
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.a. ..........................................................................236
Children at risk of becoming serious habitual juvenile oenders, information
Exemption: 985.047(2)(a) ........................................................................ 297-298
Children’s services, councils on; child or parent identifying information
Exemption: 125.901(11) ..................................................................................240
Cities, authority to hold joint meetings with county or city governing bodies .....................42
Citizen Dispute Settlement Centers, dispute information
Exemption: 44.201(5) ......................................................................................228
Citizen support organizations (see also direct support organizations)
Division of Historical Resources
Exemption: 267.17(3) ......................................................................................245
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Exemption: 379.223(3) ....................................................................................254
Publication of information on agency website ...............................................................77
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation
Exemptions: 627.351(6)(x); 627.3518(11) .......................................................281
Citrus records
Exemption: 601.10(8) ......................................................................................278
Clemency records and meetings .............................................................................6-7, 72-73
Exemption: 14.28 ............................................................................................225
Codes, use at public meetings ..............................................................................................49
Code enforcement ocers, personal information ..............................................................144
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.g. ..........................................................................236
Collective bargaining .......................................................................... 31-32, 55,90, 135, 187
Exemptions: 110.201(4); 447.605(1), (3) ................................................231, 269
College Savings Program, account information
Exemption: 1009.981(6) ..................................................................................302
Commercial entity, authority to make public records requests ...........................................162
Commercialization of Florida Technology, Institute for
Exemption: 288.9627(2)(3) .............................................................................248
Communicable disease reports ............................................................................................94
Exemptions: 381.0031(6); 395.1025 ........................................................254, 259
Community care for disabled adults, identity of clients
Exemption: 410.605 ................................................................................ 265-266
Community care for elderly persons, identity of clients
Exemption: 430.207 ........................................................................................267
Community colleges, See Florida College System institutions
Community forums, application of Sunshine Law ...............................................................22
Community mental health centers, quality assurance
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
331
Exemption: 394.907(7) ....................................................................................258
Competitive solicitation, bids, proposals, or replies ......................................... 35-36, 89, 129
Exemptions: 119.071(1)(b); 119.0713(3);
286.0113(2); 337.168 ...................................................... 233, 239, 206-207, 251
Competitive solicitation, construction bids .........................................................................89
Competitive solicitation, nancial statements ......................................................................89
Exemption: 119.071(1)(c) ................................................................................233
Computer records and meetings, see electronic records and meetings
Concealed weapon licensees or license applicants, identifying information .................... 93-94
Exemptions: 790.0601; 790.0625(4) ................................................................291
Confessions of arrested persons .........................................................................................111
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(e); 119.0714 (1)(e) ............................................218, 234
Condential informant or source, identication ................................................ 111-112, 173
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(f); 119.0714(1)(f ); 925.055(2) .................218, 234, 292
Condential information, release by clerk of court ........................................................ 67-68
Condentiality agreements, authority to enter into ................................................... 171-172
Conservation easement acquisitions, appraisal reports
Exemption: 570.715(5) ....................................................................................278
Constitutional commissions, application of open government laws ........................... 6, 72-73
Consumer collection practices, examination and investigations
Exemption: 559.5558(2) ........................................................................... 276-277
Consumer Services, division of; customer and trade secret information
Exemption: 570.544(8) ....................................................................................277
Continuing care contracts; reports, examinations, and investigations
Exemptions: 651.105(3); 651.111(2); 651.134 ................................................285
Conviction integrity unit reinvestigation information
Exemption: 119.071(2)(q) ...............................................................................112
Copyrighted records, public records status ................................................................. 182-183
Corporations, information provided to Department of Legal Aairs
Exemption: 607.0505(6) ..................................................................................278
Correctional ocers, examinations of
Exemption: 943.173(3) ....................................................................................295
Correctional ocers, investigations concerning ......................................................... 136-138
Exemptions: 112.532(4)(b); 112.533(2)(a); 943.1395(6)(b) ....................233, 295
Correctional ocers, personal information ........................................................................148
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.a. ..........................................................................236
Corrections, Department of; prison records and information ............................................119
Exemption: 945.10 ..........................................................................................296
Cosmetics; complaints, investigative information
Exemption: 499.051(7)(a)(b) ...........................................................................275
332
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Costs and fees to obtain public records ................................183-190, 196-200, 215-216, 212
County addiction treatment facility employees, personal information ...............................144
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.s. ..........................................................................236
County commissions, meeting with counties and cities .......................................................42
County health departments
Exemption: 381.0055 ......................................................................................254
County tax collectors, personal information ......................................................................145
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.n ..........................................................................236
Court monitors, court orders and reports ...................................................................... 76-77
Exemption: 744.1076 .............................................................................. 288-289
Credit card numbers in possession of governmental agency ........................................... 91-92
Exemptions: 119.071(5)(b); 119.0714(1)(j), (2), (3) ........................218, 220, 237
Credit history information
Exemptions: 288.075(7), 494.00125(3) ...................................................247, 274
Credit union member lists
Exemption: 655.057(7) ....................................................................................286
Crime victim compensation records
Exemption: 960.15 ..........................................................................................296
Crime victim identities or personal information ........................................................ 121-126
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(h)(i)(j)(m)(o); 877.19(3);
945.10; 960.28(4) .....................................................................234, 235, 292, 296
Crime victim relocation information .................................................................................126
Exemption: 914.27 ..........................................................................................293
Crime victim testimony .......................................................................................................16
Exemption: 918.16 ..........................................................................................293
Crime victim solicitation ...................................................................................................121
Exemption: 119.105 ........................................................................................222
Criminal conict and civil regional counsels, personal information ...................................149
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.j. ..........................................................................236
Criminal history information, generally .................................................................... 113-115
Criminal history records, expunction or sealing ......................................................... 113-114
Exemptions: 943.053; 943.0582(5); 943.0585; 943.059 ..........................294, 295
Criminal history records used in employment screening ....................................................140
Exemptions: 110.1127(2)(d)(e); 393.0674; 409.175(12); 409.176(12);
435.09;464.208(2); 943.0585(6); 943.059(6);
1002.36(7)(d) ...................................................230, 258, 264, 267, 294, 295, 298
Criminal intelligence and investigative information
Generally ............................................................................................................ 101-112
Exemption: 119.071(2)(c) ................................................................................234
Identity of human tracking victim whose criminal history record
has been expunged .............................................................................................. 125-126
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
333
Exemption: 943.0583(11)(a) ............................................................................295
Information received by criminal justice agency before 25 January, 1979 ....................110
Exemption: 119.071(2)(a) ................................................................................234
Investigations by non law enforcement agencies .................................................... 97-101
Non-Florida criminal justice agency information ................................................104, 110
Exemption: 119.071(2)(b) ...............................................................................234
Research and statistical use
Exemption: 943.057 ........................................................................................294
Unlawful disclosure by public servant .........................................................................102
Criminal justice advisory commissions ................................................................................20
Exemption: 286.01141 .....................................................................................209
Criminal penalties
Sunshine Law ...............................................................................................................53
Public Records Act ......................................................................................................200
Cultural endowment program, identity of donors
Exemption: 265.605(2) ....................................................................................245
Currency transaction reports
Exemptions: 517.12(14); 896.102(2) .......................................................275, 292
Custodian of public records ............ 68, 161-165, 167-169, 171-176, 200-201, 212, 213-218
Cybersecurity, see electronic records
Damages, authority to obtain for violation of open government laws ..................58, 192, 223
Data breach notication, information received by Department of Legal Aairs
Exemption: 501.171(11) ..................................................................................275
Deaf and the Blind, School for; employee screening information ......................................140
Exemption: 1002.36(7)(d) ...............................................................................292
Death and fetal death records ........................................................................................ 74-75
Exemptions: 382.008(6); 382.025(2)(3)(4) ..............................................255, 256
Death sentence execution identication information .........................................................119
Exemption: 945.10 ..........................................................................................296
Deceptive and unfair trade practice intelligence or investigative information
Exemption: 501.2065 ......................................................................................275
Declaratory relief
Sunshine Law ..............................................................................................................56
Public Records Act ......................................................................................................192
Defense Support Task Force
Exemption: 288.985 ........................................................................................248
Deferred compensation plans for public employees, account records .................................140
Exemption: 112.215(7) ............................................................................ 231-232
Deferred presentment providers and drawers, identifying information
334
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemption: 560.4041 ......................................................................................277
Dental practitioners, records and reports involving
Exemptions: 466.022(3); 466.0275(2); 466.041(3)..........................................272
Depositions, access to .................................................................................................... 68-69
Development Finance Corporation bonds, applicant information
Exemption: 288.9607(5) .......................................................................... 247-248
Developmentally disabled persons, service providers, employee screening information
Exemption: 393.0674 ......................................................................................258
Direct deposit records
Exemption: 17.076(5) ......................................................................................140
Direct-support organizations (see also citizen-support organizations)
Agriculture and Consumer Services, Department of .....................................................77
Exemption: 570.691(6) ............................................................................ 277-278
District school boards .............................................................................................19, 77
Exemption: 1001.453(4) ..................................................................................298
Education, Department of
Exemption: 1001.24(4) ....................................................................................298
Endowment Foundation for Vocational Rehabilitation
Exemption: 413.615(7)(a)(b) ...........................................................................266
Florida College System institutions ...............................................................................77
Exemptions: 1004.70(6); 1004.71(6) .......................................................300, 301
Florida, University of, historic preservation
Exemption: 267.1736(9) .......................................................................... 245-246
Generally ................................................................................................................19, 77
Performing arts center
Exemption: 265.7015 ........................................................................................77
Prepaid College Board
Exemption: 1009.983(4) .................................................................................302
Publication of information on agency website ...............................................................77
Public and Professional Guardians, Oce of
Exemption 744.2105(6) ....................................................................................289
Ringling Museum of Art .........................................................................................19, 77
Exemption: 1004.45(2)(h) ...............................................................................300
State universities .....................................................................................................19, 77
Exemption: 1004.28(5) ....................................................................................299
Tourism Marketing Corporation
Exemptions: 288.1226(7) ..................................................................................247
Veterans’ Aairs, Department of ...................................................................................19
Exemption: 292.055(9) ....................................................................................248
West Florida, University of, historic preservation
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
335
Exemption: 267.1732(8) ..................................................................................246
Disabled adults receiving home care services, identifying information
Exemption: 410.037 ........................................................................................265
Disadvantaged business enterprises, certication information
Exemption: 339.0805(1)(c) ..............................................................................251
Discovery of exempt or condential records ......................................................................180
Discrimination complaints and records ...............................................................................98
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(g) (n); 119.0713(1) ...................................234, 235, 238
Disposal of public records ..........................................................................201-202, 212-213
Dissolution of marriage, mediation proceedings
Exemption: 61.183(3) ......................................................................................228
DNA analysis information
Exemptions: 760.40(2); 943.325(14) ............................................... 289, 295-296
Domestic Security and Counter-Terrorism Intelligence Center information
Exemption: 943.0321(4) ..................................................................................294
Domestic Security Oversight Council
Exemption: 943.0314 ......................................................................................294
Domestic violence centers ...................................................................................................78
Exemption: 39.908 ..........................................................................................293
Domestic violence, petitions for injunction for protection ...................................................78
Exemption: 119.0714(1)(k) ..................................................................... 218-219
Domestic violence fatality review teams ...............................................................................78
Exemption: 741.3165 ......................................................................................288
Domestic violence police reports, victim/witness statements .............................................122
Exemption: 741.29(2) ......................................................................................288
Domestic violence victims .............................................................................78, 83, 115, 122
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(j); 741.30(3), (8); 741.313(7);
741.465; 787.03(6)(c)1. ....................................................................235, 288, 291
Domestic violence victim advocates ...................................................................................145
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.u. .........................................................................236
Drafts and notes, generally ...........................................................................................78--80
Driver license number ......................................................................................... 82, 117-118
Exemptions: 97.0585, 119.0712(2)(b) .....................................................230, 238
Driver physical or mental disability reports
Exemptions: 322.125(3)(4); 322.126(3)...........................................................250
DROP participants ..........................................................................................................154
Drug dependent newborns, guardian advocate appointment proceedings ............................16
Exemption: 39.827(4) ......................................................................................228
Drugged racing animals; test results and identities of animal, owner, and trainer
Exemption: 550.2415(1)(a) ..............................................................................276
336
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Drugs
Compassionate use registry
Exemptions: 381.987(1)(2) ..............................................................................255
Complaints, investigative information
Exemption: 499.051(7) ....................................................................................275
Employee drug testing information..................................................................... 140-141
Exemptions: 112.0455(8)(t), (11)(a);
440.102(8); 443.1715(1),(3)(b) ........................................................231, 268, 269
Medicaid supplemental rebates
Exemption: 409.91196(1) ................................................................................265
Petitions for involuntary assessment and stabilization ...................................................95
Exemption: 397.6760(1) ..................................................................................261
Prescription drug monitoring program information
Exemption: 893.0551(2) ..................................................................................292
Substance abuse treatment and services programs ......................................... 95, 140-141
Exemptions: 110.1091(2); 125.585(2); 166.0444; 397.334(10); 397.4103(5);
397.501(7); 397.752 .........................................................................230, 240, 261
Dues, public funds used for .................................................................................................66
Economic development records and meetings ............................................................... 90-91
Exemption: 288.075 ........................................................................................247
Education Practices Commission, records and meetings ......................................................46
Elderly Aairs, Department of, investigations
Exemption: 744.2111(1) ..................................................................................289
Elderly persons receiving services, identifying information
Exemptions: 430.105; 430.608 ........................................................................267
Election of ocers, application of Sunshine Law ...........................................................26, 50
Elections Commission, complaints and investigations
Exemption: 106.25(7) ......................................................................................230
Electric projects, due diligence review information
Exemption: 119.0713(4) .................................................................................239
Electronic records and meetings
Blogs, application of Sunshine Law ...............................................................................24
Cybersecurity, records and meetings ....................................................................... 36-37
Exemptions: 119.0712(2)(f); 119.0713(5)(a); 119.0725(2); 282.318; 286.0113;
627.352; 1004.055; 1004.0962.................................238, 239, 246, 206, 281, 299
Data processing software ......................................................................................... 83-84
Exemptions: 119.071(1)(f); 119.0714(1)(b) ............................................233, 218
E-mail addresses ....................................................................................... 84-85, 93, 118
Exemptions: 119.071(5)(j); 119.0712(2)(c);197.3225 .....................273, 238, 242
E-mail communications
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
337
Sunshine Law ............................................................................................... 23-24, 57
Public records ..............................................................................85-86, 133-134, 200
Facebook
Sunshine Law ...........................................................................................................24
Public records ...........................................................................................85, 133, 200
Judicial electronic records .............................................................................................67
Public records status, generally .......................................................................... 59, 83-86
Retention ........................................................................................................ 83-86, 200
Risk analysis and security issues, see cybersecurity
Secure login credentials held by Commission on Ethics for electronic ling of nancial
disclosure
Exemption: 112.31446(6)(a) .............................................................................232
Text messages ...........................................................................85-86, 133-134, 195, 202
Twitter ..........................................................................................................................85
Virtual meetings, quorum requirements.................................................................. 37-40
Emergency records and meetings
Disaster recovery assistance ...........................................................................................88
Exemption: 119.071(5)(f)1.b ............................................................................237
Discussions with sta ....................................................................................................26
Emergency 911, caller information ...............................................................................86
Exemption: 365.171(12) ..................................................................................252
Emergency evacuation registration, persons with special needs......................................87
Exemption: 252.355(4) ....................................................................................244
Emergency evacuation plans .........................................................................................87
Exemption: 119.071(3)(a)
Emergency medical services, call records .......................................................................96
Exemption: 401.30(4) ......................................................................................262
Emergency medical services quality assurance activities
Exemption: 401.425(5) ....................................................................................262
Emergency medical technicians, disciplinary investigative information
Exemption: 401.414(3) ....................................................................................262
Emergency medical technicians, personal information ................................................145
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.g ...........................................................................236
Emergency meetings of public boards, notice requirements .................................... 44-45
Emergency notication records .....................................................................................87
Exemption: 119.071(5)(j); 119.0712(2)(d) ..............................................237, 238
Emergency plans furnished to Division of Emergency Management .............................87
Exemption: 252.905 .........................................................................................244
Emergency response plans ............................................................................. 87, 119-120
Exemption: 119.071(2)(d) ...............................................................................234
338
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Emergency shelter information .....................................................................................87
Exemption: 252.385(5) ....................................................................................244
Eminent domain proceedings, business information
Exemption: 73.0155 ........................................................................................229
Eminent domain, use of by executive agencies
Exemption: 119.0711 ......................................................................................237
Employee assistance program identifying information .......................................................141
Exemptions: 110.1091(2); 125.585(2); 166.0444 ............................230, 240, 241
Employment search or consultant records .........................................................................141
Endowment Foundation for Vocational Rehabilitation
Exemptions: 413.615(7)(a)(b), (11) .................................................................266
Energy resources reports, proprietary information
Exemption: 377.606 ........................................................................................253
Engineers Management Corporation
Exemption: 471.038(7) ....................................................................................272
Enterprise Florida, Inc.
Exemptions: 11.45(3)(i); 288.9520 ................................................... 224-225, 247
Environmental Protection, Department of ....................................................................4, 173
Exemptions: 377.075(4)(f); 403.111 .......................................................253, 263
Estate inventories and accountings
Exemption: 733.604(1)(b) ...............................................................................287
Ethics complaints and investigations ....................................................................... 26, 98-99
Exemption: 112.324(2) ............................................................................ 232-233
Examinations for licensure, certication, or employment .......................................... 144-143
Exemption: 119.071(1)(a) ................................................................................233
Executive Clemency, Board of; investigations ................................................................ 72-73
Exemption: 14.28 ............................................................................................225
Execution records ..........................................................................................................119
Exemption: 945.10(1)(g)(j) ..............................................................................296
Exemptions from disclosure
Creation of ......................................................................................................... 176-177
Denition ...........................................................................................................176, 212
Dierence between exempt and condential records ........................................... 178-180
Discovery, eect on .....................................................................................................180
Retroactive application ....................................................................................... 177-178
Strict construction of ..................................................................................................177
Ex ocio board members, application of Sunshine Law ..................................................... 6-7
Export Finance Corporation loans, applicant nancial information
Exemption: 288.776(3)(d) ...............................................................................247
Facebook, application of open government laws ............................................................24, 85
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
339
Fact nding or inspection trips ...................................................................................... 24-25
Fair association........... .....................................................................................................1, 64
False Claims Act investigations
Exemption: 68.083(8) ......................................................................................229
Family trust company
Exemption: 662.1465; 662.148(2) ....................................................................286
Federal agencies and statutes
Application of Sunshine Law to federal government .......................................................7
Application of federal statutes to agency records ................................................. 180-181
Federal employer identication numbers .....................................................................91, 221
Exemption: 288.075 ........................................................................................247
Fees to inspect or copy public records .........................................................183-190, 214-216
Financial disclosure, electronic ling
Exemption: 112.31446 .....................................................................................232
Financial information submitted to agencies, generally ........................................................92
Financial institution records
Cease and desist order proceedings
Exemption: 655.0321 ......................................................................................285
Depositories of public funds
Exemptions: 280.16(3); 655.057 ..............................................................246, 286
Direct deposit records .................................................................................................140
Exemption: 17.076 (5) .....................................................................................225
Investigative information
Exemption: 655.057(1) ....................................................................................285
Informal enforcement action investigations
Exemption: 655.057(3) ....................................................................................286
Money laundering control records and reports
Exemption: 655.50(7) ......................................................................................286
Reports of examinations, operations, or condition
Exemption: 655.057(2) ....................................................................................286
Financial Regulation, Oce of, information held by ...........................................................92
Exemptions: 119.0712(3); 494.00125(1)(2)(3); 517.2015;
517.2016; 520.9965; 559.952(5); 560.312;
655.057; 655.50(7) ................................................... 238, 274, 275, 277, 285-286
Financial Services, Department of; investigative information
Exemption: 17.0401; 624.319(3) .............................................................225, 279
Financial Services, Department of; investigative personnel information .............................147
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.b. .........................................................................236
Financial statements, submitted in commercial solicitation .................................................89
Exemption: 119.071(1)(c) ................................................................................230
340
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Financial statements, mine operators
Exemption: 378.208(5) ....................................................................................253
Fingerprints .......................................................................................................................114
Exemptions: 119.071(5)(g); 937.028(1); 985.11 ..............................237, 294, 298
Fire Marshall investigation records and meetings
Exemptions: 633.112(7) ...................................................................................283
Fire prevention personnel, examination information
Exemption: 633.324 ........................................................................................283
Firearms sales or transfers, license records information .................................................. 93-94
Exemption: 790.065(4) ....................................................................................291
Fireghters, personal information ......................................................................................145
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.d. .........................................................................236
Firesafety system plans ............................................................................................... 155-157
Exemption: 119.071(3)(a). ...............................................................................236
Florida Bar, application of open government laws to ...........................................................69
Florida College System institution records and meetings ....................................... 80-82, 142
Exemptions: 1004.055(1); 1004.098; 1004.78(2); 1006.52(1);
1008.24(3)(b); 1012.81 ....................................................................299, 301, 303
Florida Retirement System, retiree information .................................................................154
Exemptions: 121.031(5); 121.4501(19) ...........................................................239
Food safety or food illness investigative information
Exemption: 500.148(3) ....................................................................................275
Forensic behavioral health evaluations
Exemption: 916.1065(1) ..................................................................................293
Foster care ...........................................................................................................................76
Exemptions: 39.702(5), 409.175(16) .......................................................227, 264
Funeral, Cemetery, and Consumer Services, Board of
Exemption: 497.172 ........................................................................................275
Gaming Control Commission
Exemption: 16.716; 550.0251(9) .............................................................225, 276
Geolocation information, law enforcement .......................................................................114
Exemption: 119.071(4)(e) ................................................................................236
Geophysical operations, proprietary information ...............................................................173
Exemptions: 377.22(2)(h); 377.2408(3); 377.2409;
377.2421(2); 377.2424(3) ................................................................................253
Gestational surrogacy, armation of parental status hearing records
Exemption: 742.16(9) ......................................................................................225
Government eciency toll-free hotline calls
Exemption: 17.325(3) ......................................................................................225
Governor and Cabinet, application of open government laws to..........................................72
Governor’s executive order assigning state attorney
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
341
Exemption: 27.151 ..........................................................................................226
Grand juries ............................................................................................................ 14, 70-71
Exemptions: 905.17(1); 905.26; 905.27(1)(2); 905.28(1) ........................ 292-293
Grievance committees ................................................................................................... 32-33
Guardian ad litem
Applicants, security background investigative information
Exemption: 39.821(1) ......................................................................................228
Child welfare information
Exemption: 39.0132(4)(a)2. .............................................................................226
Personal information .......................................................................................... 145-146
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.j. ..........................................................................236
Guardianship court settlement records
Exemption: 744.3701 ......................................................................................289
H. Lee Mott Cancer Center and Research Institute nonprot corporation
Exemption: 1004.43(8)(9) ...............................................................................300
Hate crime victims, identities
Exemption: 877.19(3) ......................................................................................292
Hazardous materials facilities, site plans and location of hazardous chemicals
Exemption: 252.88 ..........................................................................................244
Hazardous or toxic substances, proprietary information
Exemptions: 252.88(2)(3); 403.111 .........................................................244, 263
Health Care Administration, Agency for
Exemptions: 395.0193(4); 395.0197;
408.061(1)(d), (7), (8), (10) .............................................................. 259, 263-264
Health care community antitrust no-action letter requests, supporting information
Exemption: 408.185 ........................................................................................259
Health care facilities, adverse incident reports
Exemptions: 395.0197(6)(c), (7), (13) .............................................................259
Health care facilities, building plans ..................................................................................155
Exemptions: 119.071(3)(c) ...............................................................................236
Health care facilities, risk management records and meetings
Exemptions: 395.0197(14) ...............................................................................259
Health care practitioner proles, condential data
Exemption: 456.046 ........................................................................................270
Health care provider identity, proprietary information
Exemption: 408.061(10) .......................................................................... 266-264
Health, Department of
Investigative personnel, personal information ............................................. 143-144, 148
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(d)2.a, o .....................................................................236
Personal identifying information in health records ........................................................95
342
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemption: 119.0712(1) ..................................................................................238
Practitioner prole patient information
Exemption: 456.046 ........................................................................................270
Quality assurance records and meetings
Exemption: 381.0055(1)-(3) ............................................................................254
Health maintenance organizations
Exemption: 408.185 ........................................................................................264
Healthy start coalitions
Exemption: 381.0055 ......................................................................................254
Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Department of,
motor vehicle records ........................................................................................ 117-118, 190
Exemption: 119.0712(2) ..................................................................................238
Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, investigations
Exemptions: 319.1414, 319.25, 320.861)5), 322.71(5) ...........................249, 250
Home care for disabled adults, identity of clients
Exemption: 410.037 ........................................................................................265
Home care for elderly persons, identity of clients
Exemption: 430.608 ........................................................................................267
Home health agency information
Exemption: 400.494(1) ....................................................................................262
Home improvement sellers, investigative information
Exemption: 520.9965 ......................................................................................275
Home medical equipment providers, patient information
Exemption: 400.945 ........................................................................................262
Home warranty associations, examination or investigation records
Exemption: 634.348 ................................................................................ 283-284
Homelessness counts and data, individual information
Exemption: 420.6231 ......................................................................................267
Homeowners associations, application of open government laws ............................. 19-20, 63
Homicide victims and witnesses ..........................................................................10, 105, 125
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(m), (o)(p); 406.135; ..........................................235, 262
Hospice patient records
Exemption: 400.611(3) ....................................................................................262
Hospitals
Adverse incident reports,
Exemption: 395.0197(7) ..................................................................................259
Budgets................................................................................................................... 89-90
Employee limited access records .............................................................................. 96-97
Exemption: 395.3025(9)-(11) ..........................................................................259
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
343
Generally ................................................................................................................ 94-97
Inspection reports
Exemption: 395.0162(2) ..................................................................................260
Medical sta disciplinary proceedings
Exemption: 395.0193(4)(7) .............................................................................260
Patient care quality assurance, trauma care
Exemptions: 395.3025; 395.4025(13); 395.51; 401.30 ....................259, 261, 262
Patient records ........................................................................................................ 95-96
Exemptions: 395.3025(4)(7)(a), (8); 395.4025(13) ..................................260, 261
Private hospitals ............................................................................................................95
Exemption: 395.3036 ......................................................................................260
Public hospitals ....................................................................................................... 94-95
Exemptions: 395.1056; 395.3035 ............................................................259, 260
Terrorism response plans ...............................................................................................87
Exemption: 395.1056 ......................................................................................259
House museums, donor information
Exemption: 267.076 ........................................................................................245
Housing assistance program participant information ...................................................88, 181
Exemption: 119.071(5)(f) ................................................................................237
Housing discrimination complaints and records ..................................................................98
Exemptions: 119.0713(1); 760.34(1); 760.36 ..........................................238, 289
Human and Machine Cognition, Inc., Institute for
Exemption: 1004.4472 ....................................................................................300
Human Immunodeciency Infection Virus (HIV) test results .......................................16, 94
Exemptions: 381.004; 951.27(2) ..............................................................254, 296
Human Relations, Commission on; discrimination complaints and records
Exemptions: 760.11(12); 760.34(1) .........................................................289, 290
Human tracking victims ......................................................................... 105, 123, 125-126
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(h); 787.06(10); 943.0583(11)(a) ...............234, 291, 295
Impaired practitioner consultants, personal information....................................................146
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.p ..........................................................................236
Impaired professionals, treatment information
Exemptions: 310.102(3)(5); 456.076(13);
1012.798(9)(11) ...............................................................................248, 271, 303
Independent college or university records
Exemption: 1008.24(4)(b) ...............................................................................301
Independent Education, Commission for
Exemption: 1005.38(6) ....................................................................................301
Individual board members, application of Sunshine Law ................................................. 8-12
Injunctive relief
344
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Sunshine Law ......................................................................................................... 55-56
Public Records Act ......................................................................................................192
Inspection trips ............................................................................................................. 24-25
Inspectors general personnel, personal information ...........................................................146
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.r. ....................................................................................236
Inspector general for local government, investigations .........................................................99
Exemption: 119.0713(2) ................................................................................... 238-239
Insurance records
Administrative supervision of insurers
Exemption: 624.82(1) ......................................................................................279
Agent credit and character reports
Exemption: 626.842(3) ....................................................................................280
Agent disciplinary hearing information
Exemption: 626.631(2) ....................................................................................280
Agent termination reports
Exemptions: 626.511(3); 626.8433(3) .............................................................280
Automobile Joint Underwriting Association
Exemption: 627.311(4)(a)(b) ...........................................................................281
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation
Exemption: 627.351(6)(x) ................................................................................281
Claim data exchange information ...............................................................................264
Exemption: 409.25661
Claim negotiations .....................................................................................................131
Exemption: 624.311(2) ....................................................................................279
Consumer information .................................................................................................92
Exemption: 624.23 .........................................................................................278
Dependent child of agency ocers or employees, personal information .............. 153-154
Exemption: 119.071(4)(b) ...............................................................................236
Emergency cease and desist orders
Exemption: 624.310(3)(f) ................................................................................279
Examination and investigation reports and workpapers
Exemption: 624.319(3) ....................................................................................279
Fraud investigations
Exemption: 626.989 ........................................................................................280
Guaranty Associations, see also Self-Insurers Guaranty Association
Exemptions: 631.398(1); 631.582; 631.62; 631.723; 631.724;
631.931; 631.932...................................................................................... 282-283
Health Choices Program information
Exemption: 408.910(14) ..................................................................................264
Holding companies
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
345
Exemption: 628.801(4) ....................................................................................282
Hurricane Catastrophe Fund, reports
Exemptions: 215.555(4)(f); 215.557 ...............................................................243
Hurricane loss data
Exemption: 627.06292(1) ................................................................................281
Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology, Commission on
Exemption: 627.0628(3)(g) ..............................................................................281
Insolvency reports and recommendations
Exemptions: 631.398(1); 631.62(2)(3); 631.723(1)(3) ............................ 282-283
Insurance anti-fraud reports
Exemption: 626.9891(11)(a) ............................................................................280
Investigative information and complaints against personnel
Exemptions: 626.601(6); 634.201(3); 634.348; 634.444 ................. 280, 283-284
Liability insurer annual claim reports, claimant names
Exemption: 627.9126(3)(a) ..............................................................................282
Life insurers, actuarial opinion on reserves
Exemption: 625.121(3)(a)9 ..............................................................................279
Lists of insurers or regulated companies
Exemption: 624.319(3) ....................................................................................279
Medical malpractice, Joint Underwriting Association claim les
Exemption: 627.351(4)(g) ................................................................................281
Motor vehicle personal injury protection and property damage liability policies
Exemption: 324.242 ........................................................................................250
Motor vehicle service agreement company guaranteeing organization lings
Exemption: 634.045(5) ....................................................................................284
Motor vehicle service agreement company salespersons, investigative information
Exemption: 634.201(3) ....................................................................................283
Ocers’ and directors’ liability insurance claims reports, names of injured persons
Exemption: 627.9122(2)(e) ..............................................................................282
Own-risk and solvency assessment summary reports
Exemption: 624.4212(3) ..................................................................................279
Professional liability claim reports
Exemptions: 456.051(1); 627.912(2)(e) ...................................................270, 282
Proprietary business information
Exemption: 624.4212(2) ..................................................................................276
Receiver, Department of Financial Services acting as
Exemption: 631.195 .........................................................................................282
Risk-based capital information
Exemption: 624.40851(1)(2) ...........................................................................279
Service warranty association guaranteeing organization lings
Exemption: 634.4065(5) ..................................................................................284
346
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Small employer health insurance carriers, rating and renewal information
Exemption: 627.6699(8)(c) ..............................................................................282
State programs ............................................................................................................131
Exemption: 284.40(2) ......................................................................................246
State university Board of Governors, self-insurance claims les ...................................131
Exemption: 1004.24(4) ....................................................................................299
Surplus lines agents
Exemption: 626.921(8) ....................................................................................280
Title insurance, proprietary information
Exemption: 626.84195(2) ................................................................................280
Trade secrets, insurance administrators
Exemption: 626.884(2) ....................................................................................280
Valuation of policies and contracts
Exemption: 625.1214(1) ..................................................................................280
Workers’ Compensation Joint Underwriting Association
Exemption: 627.3121 ......................................................................................281
Internal audit department personnel, personal information ...............................................146
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.r. ..........................................................................236
Internal auditor reports for local governments, audit notes and workpapers .................. 88-89
Exemption: 119.0713(2) .......................................................................... 238-239
Interlocal boards, application of open government laws .............................................1, 39, 60
International trust companies
Exemption: 663.416(2)(3) ...............................................................................287
Inventories of estates
Exemption: 733.604(1)(b) ...............................................................................287
Investigation records of non-law enforcement agencies ................................................ 97-101
Investment information held by State Board of Administration
Exemption: 215.4401(1)(2)(3) .........................................................................243
Jai alai fronton investigative information
Exemption: 550.0251(9) ..................................................................................276
Judges and magistrates, personal information ....................................................................147
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.e., g.; 119.071(5)(i) ......................................236, 237
Judicial records and proceedings ..........................................................12-16, 66-71, 189-190
Judicial nominating commissions ............................................................................ 14, 69-70
Judicial Qualications Commission proceedings ...........................................................14, 69
Juries
Grand juries ...................................................................................................... 14, 70-71
Exemptions: 905.17(1); 905.26; 905.27(1)(2); 905.28(1) ........................292, 293
Jury notes
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
347
Exemption: 40.50(2) ........................................................................................228
Jury selection information ............................................................................................71
Exemption: 322.20(9) ......................................................................................250
Trial juries.....................................................................................................................71
Juvenile probation and detention personnel, personal information ............................ 147-148
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.k ..........................................................................236
Juvenile records and proceedings
Criminal history information ......................................................................................116
Employment screening, records used for .............................................................116, 140
Exemption: 435.09
Expunged and sealed records
Exemption: 943.0582(5)
Fingerprints and photographs taken by law enforcement agencies .......................114, 115
Exemption: 985.11
Generally ............................................................................................................ 114-117
Juvenile proceedings and appeals
Exemptions: 985.04; 985.045(2); 985.534(4)(5)......................................297, 298
Juvenile welfare boards, child or parent identifying information
Exemption: 125.901(11) ..................................................................................240
Serious habitual juvenile oenders
Exemption: 985.047(2)(a) ................................................................................297
Trac violations .........................................................................................................115
Kidcare Program, identifying information
Exemption: 409.821 ........................................................................................265
Killing of law enforcement ocer; photographs, videos, or audio recording ................74, 125
Exemption: 119.071(2)(p) ...............................................................................235
Killing of victim of mass violence; photographs, videos, or audio recording .................74, 125
Exemption: 119.071(2)(p) ................................................................................235
Law enforcement agency audits, identity of informants
Exemption: 925.055(2) ....................................................................................293
Law Enforcement, Department of; public misconduct, investigatory records
Exemption: 943.03(2) ......................................................................................294
Law enforcement ocers, examinations of
Exemption: 943.173(3) ....................................................................................291
Law enforcement, geolocation information .......................................................................114
Exemption: 119.071(4)(e)
Law enforcement ocers, investigations concerning .................................................. 136-138
Exemptions: 112.532(4)(b); 112.533(2)(a); 943.1395(6)(b)
Law enforcement, Marsy’s Law ..........................................................................................121
Law enforcement personnel, personal information ............................................ 120, 148-149
348
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.a. ..........................................................................236
Law enforcement resource inventories and emergency plans ...................................... 119-120
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(d); 119.0714(1)(d) ............................................218, 234
Legislative committee, access to child abuse records .............................................................76
Legislative employees, requests for services by legislators ......................................................72
Exemption: 11.26(1) ........................................................................................224
Legislative meetings and records generally .......................................1, 7-8, 16-17, 71-72, 180
Exemption: 11.0431(2) ....................................................................................224
Library and Information Services, Division of; records
Exemption: 257.38(2)-(4) ................................................................................245
Library registration and circulation records........................................................................179
Exemption: 257.261 ........................................................................................245
Lifeline Assistance Plan participants, personal identifying information
Exemption: 364.107 ........................................................................................252
Liqueed petroleum gas
Exemptions: 527.0201(8); 527.062(1) .............................................................276
Lobbyists, investigative information ....................................................................................98
Exemption: 112.3215(8)(b) .............................................................................232
Local government audits ............................................................................................... 88-89
Exemption: 119.0713(2) .......................................................................... 238-239
Long-term care ombudsman councils, complaints and residents’ records
Exemption: 400.0077(1)(2) .............................................................................261
Lottery, department of
Exemptions: 24.1051(1)(2)(3); 24.108(7)(b) ...................................................225
Magistrate, application of Sunshine Law .........................................................................4, 11
Magistrates, personal information ..................................................................... 147, 148-149
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(d)2.g.; 119.071(5)(i) .........................................236, 235
Married couple, application of Sunshine Law ......................................................................17
Marsy’s Law .......................................................................................................................121
Mayor, application of Sunshine Law .................................................................. 3, 8-9, 20, 30
Mediation records and proceedings .............................................11, 15, 23, 29, 56, 192, 194
Exemptions: 44.102(3); 61.183(3) ...................................................................228
Medicaid investigative information
Exemptions: 409.910(17)(i); 409.913(12) ........................................................265
Medicaid Pharmaceutical and erapeutics Committee
Exemption: 409.91196(1)(2) ...........................................................................265
Medical devices, complaints, investigative information
Exemption: 499.051(7) ....................................................................................275
Medical Examiners Commission investigations and proceedings
Exemption: 406.075(3)(b) ...............................................................................263
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
349
Medical or storage facility identifying information
Exemption: 381.95(1) ......................................................................................255
Medical records
Ambulatory surgical centers ..........................................................................................95
Exemptions: 395.3025(4), (7)(a), (8), (9) .........................................................260
Animal records
Exemption: 474.2167 ......................................................................................273
Assisted living facilities
Exemptions: 400.0077(1), (2) ..........................................................................261
Cancer registry reports
Exemption: 385.202(3) ....................................................................................257
County health departments
Exemption: 381.0055(1)-(3) ............................................................................254
Dental practitioners, hepatitis B virus carriers; status reports
Exemption: 466.041(3) ....................................................................................272
Developmentally disabled persons, central records ........................................................95
Exemption: 393.13(4)(i) ..................................................................................258
Emergency medical services ..........................................................................................96
Exemptions: 401.30(4); 401.425(5) .................................................................262
Employers providing health or life insurance benets, medical condition of
public employee ..........................................................................................................153
Exemption: 760.50(5) ......................................................................................290
Health care access program
Exemption: 766.1115(4)(c) ..............................................................................290
Health Care Administration, Agency for; records obtained by
Exemptions: 408.061(9),(10) ...........................................................................264
Health care practitioners, generally ......................................................................... 95-96
Exemptions: 456.057(7)(a),(9) .................................................................270, 271
Health, Department of; records obtained by
Exemptions: 381.0055(1)-(3); 456.046 ....................................................254, 270
Health maintenance organizations
Exemptions: 641.515(2); .................................................................................284
Hepatitis test results ......................................................................................................94
Exemption: 960.003(3) ....................................................................................296
HIV test results .............................................................................................................94
Exemptions: 381.004(2)-(5); 945.10; 960.003(3) ....................................254, 296
Home health agencies
Exemption: 400.494(1) ....................................................................................262
Hospices
Exemption: 400.611(3) ....................................................................................262
Hospital patient records .......................................................................................... 95-96
350
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemptions: 395.3025(4)(7)(a)(8) ...................................................................260
Housing assistance program participants .......................................................................91
Exemption: 119.071(5)(f) ................................................................................237
Impaired educators
Exemptions: 1012.798(9), (11) ........................................................................303
Impaired practitioners, generally
Exemptions: 456.076(13) .................................................................................271
Inmates of detention facilities, serological tests for infectious diseases ...........................94
Exemption: 951.27(2) ......................................................................................296
Insurance Guaranty Association, claim les
Exemption: 631.582 ........................................................................................282
Joint underwriting association employees
Exemptions: 627.311(4)(a); 627.351(4)(g); 627.351(6)(x) ...............................281
Medical incident reports, health care facilities
Exemptions: 395.0197(6)(c), (7), (13), (14); 641.55(5), (6), (8) ..............259, 284
Medical marijuana personal identifying information
Exemption: 381.987(1)(2) ...............................................................................255
Medical negligence claimants, presuit examination reports
Exemption: 766.106(6)(b)3 .............................................................................290
Medical research information
Exemption: 405.03 ..........................................................................................263
Mental health patients .................................................................................. 95, 110-111
Exemptions:
394.4615(1)(7);394.464; 394.467(6)(a)3.; 916.107(8)
...........258, 293
Newborns, risk factor screening reports and case registry
Exemption: 383.14(3)(d) .................................................................................256
Nursing home residents ................................................................................................95
Exemptions: 400.0077(1)(2); 400.022(1)(m) ...........................................261, 262
Osteopathic physician practice violations, seized records
Exemption: 459.018 ........................................................................................272
Patient care quality assurance
Exemptions: 381.0055(1)-(3); 395.3025(4), (7)(a), (8);
395.4025(12); 395.51(1)(2)(3); 401.425(5) ......................254, 259, 260, 261, 262
Patient identifying information ..................................................................... 95, 153-154
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(b); 119.0712(1)......................................... 236, 237-238
Pharmacy records
Exemption: 465.017(3) ....................................................................................272
Physician practice violations, seized records
Exemption: 458.341 ........................................................................................272
Pregnancy termination reports
Exemption: 390.0112(3) ..................................................................................257
Prepaid health clinics
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
351
Exemptions: 395.3025(4)(7)(a)(8) ...................................................................260
Exemption: 641.515(2) ....................................................................................284
Prepaid limited health service organizations
Exemption: 636.064(1)-(3) ..............................................................................284
Professional license applicants
Exemptions: 455.229; 456.014 ........................................................................270
Public ocers and employees .............................................................................. 153-154
Exemptions: 110.123(10); 112.08(7), (8);119.071(4)(b);
760.50(5);1012.31(3) ...............................................................231, 236, 290, 302
Rural health networks ...................................................................................................61
Exemption: 381.0055(1)-(3) ............................................................................254
School students
Exemption: 381.0056(4)(a) ..............................................................................255
Sexually transmissible diseases .......................................................................................94
Exemptions: 381.004(2)-(5); 384.26(2); 384.29; 384.30(2);
960.003(3) ........................................................................................254, 257, 296
Substance abuse treatment records and proceedings, see drugs
Trauma care
Exemptions: 395.3025(4), (7)(a), (8); 395.4025(13);
401.30(3)(4) .....................................................................................259, 261, 262
Tuberculosis control
Exemptions: 392.54(2); 392.545(3); 392.65 ....................................................258
Veterans’ Domiciliary Home of Florida residents
Exemption: 296.09(1) ......................................................................................248
Workers’ compensation claims, treatment records
Exemption: 440.125 ........................................................................................268
Workers’ compensation managed care arrangements
Exemption: 440.132 ........................................................................................268
Medical review committee records and meetings
Corrections, Department of
Exemptions: 766.101(7)(c); 945.6032(3) .................................................290, 296
Emergency medical review committees
Exemption: 401.425(5) ....................................................................................262
Generally
Exemption: 766.101(7)(c) ................................................................................290
Medical sta disciplinary proceedings
Exemption: 395.0193(7) ..................................................................................259
Trauma agencies, committees assisting
Exemptions: 395.3025; 395.51(1)-(3); 401.30(3)(4) ........................260, 261, 262
Medical transportation services, investigatory records
Exemption: 401.414(3) ....................................................................................262
352
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Members-elect, application of open government laws ................................ 1, 6, 201, 213-214
Memory disorder research and care programs, identity of clients
Exemption: 430.504 ........................................................................................267
Military base realignment and closure records
Exemption: 288.985 ........................................................................................248
Mine operators and processes
Exemptions: 377.075(4)(f); 378.406(1)(a) ...............................................253, 254
Minutes of public meetings ....................................................... 42-43, 56, 80, 170, 193, 204
Mobile home park nancial records
Exemption: 723.006(3) ....................................................................................287
Money services businesses
Exemption: 560.129 ........................................................................................277
Mortgage brokers and mortgage lenders
Exemption: 494.00125(1)-(3) ..........................................................................274
Motor fuel marketing practices, investigations
Exemption: 526.311(2) ............................................................................ 275-276
Motor vehicle records
Crash reports .............................................................................................. 117-118, 190
Exemption: 316.066(2) ....................................................................................249
Driver disability reports and meetings
Exemptions: 322.125(3)(4); 322.126(3)...........................................................250
Driver history records
Exemption: 322.20(3) ......................................................................................250
Driver license number .............................................................................82-83, 117-118
Exemption: 97.0585(1); 119.0712(2)(b); 316.650(11) .....................230, 238, 249
Driver license photographic negatives or digital reproductions
Exemption: 322.142(4) ....................................................................................250
Emergency contact information, release ................................................................87, 118
Exemption: 119.0712(2)(d) .............................................................................238
Fees for Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles crash reports ..................190
Generally ............................................................................................................ 117-118
License plate automated recognition system images and data ......................................118
Exemption: 316.0777(2)(3) ..............................................................................249
License plates and registration issued under ctitious names
Exemption: 320.025(3) ....................................................................................249
Personal information .......................................................................................... 117-118
Exemption: 119.0712(2) ..................................................................................238
Personal injury protection and property damage liability insurance policies
Exemption: 324.242 ........................................................................................250
Trac citations ..........................................................................................................118
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
353
Exemption: 316.650(11) ..................................................................................249
Motor vehicle service agreement company guaranteeing organization lings
Exemption: 634.045(5) ....................................................................................283
Motor vehicle service agreement company salespersons investigative information
Exemption: 634.201(3) ....................................................................................283
Mug shots ................................................................................................................101, 116
Municipal utilities, bids prepared and submitted by ............................................................89
Exemption: 119.0713(3) ..................................................................................239
National Public Safety Broadband Network information
Exemption: 119.071(3)(d) ...............................................................................236
Natural gas transmission companies, proprietary condential business information
Exemption: 368.108 ........................................................................................252
Newborns left at re station, emergency medical services station, or hospital;
parent identity .....................................................................................................................73
Exemption: 383.51 ..........................................................................................257
911 and E911 communications systems, blueprints and location; records and meetings
Exemption: 119.071(3)(e)1. and 2.; 286.0113(4)(a) .................................207, 236
Nonprot corporation investigations
Exemption: 617.0503(6) ..................................................................................278
Nonviable birth certicates ..................................................................................................74
Exemption: 382.008(8)
Notice requirements, Sunshine Law ................................................................... 38-42, 44-46
Nurse Licensure Compact
Exemption: 464.0096 ......................................................................................272
Nursing assistants, employee screening information
Exemption: 464.208(2) ....................................................................................272
Nursing home records
Exemption: 400.119 ........................................................................................262
Nursing home residents .......................................................................................................95
Exemptions: 400.0077(1), (2); 400.022(1)(m); 400.0255(14) .................261, 262
Oender Review, Commission on; application of open government laws .................. 6, 72-73
Ocers-elect, application of open government laws ....................................see members elect
Oil and gas production, geophysical exploration operations reports
Exemptions: 377.22(2)(h); 377.2408(3); 377.2409; 377.2424(3) ....................253
Open Government Constitutional Amendment ....................1, 51, 57, 59, 60, 175, 176, 204
Open Government Sunset Review Act ......................................................... 51, 177, 223-224
Opportunity Fund
Exemption: 288.9626(2)(3) .............................................................................248
Organizational sessions, application of Sunshine Law ..........................................................26
Osteopathic physicians, records and reports involving
354
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemptions: 459.0083; 459.016(3); 459.017(3) ......................................271, 272
Overbroad public records request ......................................................................................166
Paramedics, disciplinary investigative information
Exemption: 401.414(3) ....................................................................................262
Paratransit services recipients or applicants
Exemption: 119.071(5)(h) ...............................................................................237
Parent locator service information
Exemption: 409.2577 .............................................................................. 264-265
Paternity determination proceedings
Exemption: 742.091 ........................................................................................288
Patient’s Compensation Fund claim les
Exemption: 766.105(3)(e) ................................................................................290
Pawn broker transaction records supplied to law enforcement ocials ....................... 118-119
Exemption: 539.003 ........................................................................................276
Payment instrument transaction database
Exemption: 560.312(1)(2) ...............................................................................277
Performing arts center, donor identities
Exemption: 265.7015 ......................................................................................245
Personal records, application of public records law .................................................... 132-134
Pesticide information
Exemptions: 487.031(5); 487.041(5) ....................................................... 273-274
Petroleum allocation and conservation, proprietary information
Exemption: 377.701(4) ....................................................................................253
Pharmacy records
Exemption: 465.017(3) ....................................................................................272
Physicians, records and reports involving
Exemptions: 458.3193; 458.337(3); 458.339(3) ..............................................271
Phosphate mine operators, annual reports
Exemption: 378.208(5) ............................................................................ 253-254
Pilots (ships), probable cause investigation and treatment provider information
Exemptions: 310.102(3), (5) ............................................................................248
Plant industry trade secrets
Exemption: 581.199 ........................................................................................278
Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, Oce of ..................................................88
Exemption: 11.51(4) ........................................................................................225
Political parties, Sunshine Law........... ..................................................................................20
Pollution control information
Exemptions: 403.067(7)(c)5; 403.111 .............................................................263
Pollution response action contract bids
Exemption: 287.0595(3) ..................................................................................246
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
355
Polygraph records ......................................................................................................119, 143
Port facilities; sale, use, or lease proposals
Exemption: 315.18 ..........................................................................................247
Pregnancy termination records and hearings ........................................................................16
Exemptions: 390.01114(6)(f); 390.01116; 390.01118; 390.0112(4) ...............257
Prekindergarten Education Program, records of enrollees
Exemption: 1002.72 ........................................................................................298
Prepaid College Program purchasers or beneciaries
Exemption: 1009.98(6) ....................................................................................302
Prepaid limited health service organizations
Exemption: 636.064(1), (2) .............................................................................284
Prepaid transit fare device purchasers, identifying information
Exemption: 341.0521 ......................................................................................251
Prison records ..............................................................................................64, 119, 179, 180
Exemption: 945.10 ..........................................................................................296
Prison work program corporation (PRIDE) ...................................................................17, 22
Exemption: 946.517 ........................................................................................296
Privacy, relationship to public records act ............................................................97, 139, 175
Private entities,
Application of Sunshine Law ............................................................................ 18-20, 54
Application of Public Records Act ...........................60-66, 119, 130, 188, 199, 216-218
Private cell phones, application of public records law ......................85-86, 158-159, 164, 175
Private investigative, security, or recovery services
Exemptions: 493.6121(5), (7); 493.6122 .........................................................274
Private entities leasing public health care facilities ................................................................95
Exemption: 395.3036 ......................................................................................260
Professional regulation
Complaints and investigatory proceedings ............................................................26, 100
Exemptions: 337.162; 455.225(2), (4), (10);
456.057(7)(a), (9); 456.073(2), (4), (9)(c), (10) ................................251, 269, 271
Disclosure of exempt records
Exemptions: 455.232(1); 456.082 ............................................................270, 271
Examinations ...................................................................................................... 142-143
Exemptions: 455.217(5); 455.229(1)(2); 456.014(1)(2); 456.017(4) ...............270
Impaired practitioner investigative material, generally
Exemptions: 456.076(13) .................................................................................271
Information supplied to Department of Business and Professional Regulation ..............92
Exemptions: 337.162; 455.229(1)(2) .......................................................251, 270
Information supplied to Department of Health ............................................................92
Exemption: 456.014(1)(2) ...............................................................................270
356
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
License applicant information and meetings
Exemptions: 455.229(1)(2); 456.014(1)(2) ......................................................270
Professional Counselors Licensure compact
Exemption: 491.017 .........................................................................................274
Regulated professions, management privatization corporation records
Exemption: 455.32(15) ....................................................................................270
Proprietary condential business information generally .....................................................160
Proxy votes, use at public meetings ......................................................................................50
Protective injunction petitions .............................................................................................78
Exemptions: 119.0714(1)(k); 741.30(3)(b),
784.046(4)(b) ........................................................................... 218-219, 288, 291
Public agency computer software ................................................................................... 83-84
Exemptions: 119.071(1)(f); 119.0714(1)(b) ............................................218, 233
Public guardians, personal information..............................................................................144
Exemptions: 744.2103 .....................................................................................289
Public and Professional Guardians, Oce of .......................................................................76
Exemptions: 744.2104(2); 744.2105(6) ...........................................................289
Public comment at board meetings ................................................................................ 46-48
Public defenders, personal information ..............................................................................149
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.l. ............................................................................26
Public employee records
Applications, resumes and references...........................................................................134
Collective bargaining, see that topic
Criminal history information ......................................................................................140
Exemptions: 39.821(1); 110.1127(2)(d)(e);
435.09; 1002.36(7)(d) ...................................................... 228, 230-231, 267, 298
Dependent eligibility determination ...........................................................................154
Exemption: 110.12301(3) ................................................................................231
Drug testing information, see Drugs, subtitle employee drug
testing information
Employee assistance program (mental health or substance abuse)
identifying information ..............................................................................................141
Exemptions: 110.1091(2); 125.585(2); 166.0444 ............................230, 240, 241
Evaluations
Generally........................................................................................................ 141-142
Hospital employees ........................................................................................ 141-142
Exemption: 395.3025(9) ..................................................................................260
School employees ...................................................................................................142
Exemption: 1012.31(3) ....................................................................................302
University and Florida College System institution employees .................................144
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
357
Exemptions: 1012.81; 1012.91 ........................................................................303
Examination questions and answer sheets, generally ........................................... 142-143
Exemption: 119.071(1)(a)
Generally........... ................................................................................................. 134-154
Health insurance dependent information ............................................................ 153-154
Exemptions: 110.12301(3); 119.071(4)(b)...............................................231, 236
Home addresses and other personal information ................................... 97, 143-153, 180
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(d)2; 119.071(5)(i);
395.3025(10)(11) .............................................................................236, 237, 260
Inspection of personnel records ........................................................................... 138-139
Medical information ................................................................................... 153-154, 180
Exemptions: 110.123(10); 112.08(7); (8); 119.071(4)(b);
760.50(5); 1012.31(3) ..............................................................231, 236, 290, 302
Misconduct complaints and related information
Department of Law Enforcement investigatory records
Exemption: 943.03(2) ......................................................................................294
Discrimination complaints, generally .......................................................................98
Generally........................................................................................................ 135-136
Exemption: 119.071(2)(k) ...............................................................................235
Inspector general records, certied............................................................................99
Exemption: 112.31901 .....................................................................................232
Law enforcement and correctional ocers ...................................................... 136-138
Exemption: 112.532(4)(b); 112.533(2)(a) ........................................................233
School employees ...................................................................................................138
Exemption: 1012.31(3) ....................................................................................302
University and Florida State College institution employees ....................................138
Exemptions: 1012.81; 1012.91 ........................................................................303
Whistleblower complaints and investigations .........................................................100
Exemptions: 112.3188(1)(2) .............................................................................232
Payroll deduction ........................................................................................................154
Retiree lists .................................................................................................................154
Exemption: 121.031(5) ....................................................................................239
Salaries........................................................................................................................154
Search rms ..........................................................................................................64, 141
Public Employees Relations Commission ..........................................................................187
Exemption: 447.205(10) ..................................................................................269
Public hospitals ...................................................................................................................97
Exemptions: 395.1056; 395.3035(2)-(5) ..................................................259, 260
Public school records and meetings
Examinations and tests .................................................................................................82
358
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemptions: 1008.23; 1008.24(4)(b) ...............................................................301
Personnel les .............................................................................. 134-154, 167, 169-170
Exemption: 1012.31(3) ....................................................................................302
School employee complaint investigations ..................................................................138
Exemptions: 1012.31(3); 1012.796(4) .............................................................302
School safety ..................................................................................37, 155-157, 199-200
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission meetings
Exemption: 943.687(8) .............................................................................296
Safe school ocers, identication information ..................................................157
Exemption: 1006.12(8) .............................................................................301
Suspicious activity reporting tool, reporting party and other information
Exemption: 943.082(6) .............................................................................295
Student records and hearings
Dropout prevention and academic intervention program participants
Exemption: 1003.53(6) ....................................................................................299
Exceptional student placement ................................................................................81
Exemption: 1003.57(1)(b) ...............................................................................299
Generally............................................................................................................ 81-82
Exemption: 1002.221 ......................................................................................298
Medical records
Exemption: 381.0056(4)(a)16 ..........................................................................255
Permanent cumulative records ..................................................................................81
Exemption: 1003.25(1) ....................................................................................298
Student expulsion hearings .................................................................................22, 81
Exemption: 1006.07(1)(a) ................................................................................301
Teacher certication examination materials ...................................................................82
Exemption: 1012.56(9)(g) ................................................................................302
Public utilities, condential business information
Electric companies, joint power supply projects
Exemption: 163.01(15)(m) ..............................................................................240
Electric companies, due diligence review
Exemption: 119.0713(4)(b) .............................................................................239
Generally........... .........................................................................................................160
Exemptions: 350.121; 366.093 ................................................................251, 252
Telecommunications companies
Exemptions: 202.195; 364.183 ................................................................242, 252
Water and water systems
Exemption: 367.156 ........................................................................................252
Public works contract bidders, nancial statement ...............................................................89
Exemption: 119.071(1)(c) ................................................................................233
Pugilistic exhibitions, promoter information
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
359
Exemption: 548.062(2) ....................................................................................276
Purpose of public records request .............................................................................. 162-163
Putative Father Registry information ...................................................................................73
Exemption: 63.0541 ........................................................................................229
Quick-response training
Exemption: 288.047(5)(e)(7) ...........................................................................247
Rabies vaccination certicates
Exemption: 828.30(5) ......................................................................................292
Racing animal drug test information
Exemption: 550.2415(1)(a) ..............................................................................276
Racing investigative information
Exemption: 550.0251(9) ..................................................................................276
Real property purchases, appraisals and oers ......................................................................36
Counties
Exemption: 125.355(1) ....................................................................................240
Educational facilities
Exemption: 1013.14(1)(a) ................................................................................303
Municipalities
Exemption: 166.045(1) ....................................................................................241
State agencies
Exemptions: 119.0711; 215.4401(1); 253.025(8)(f), (9)(d) .............237, 243, 244
Recording of public meetings ............................................................................35, 43, 48, 80
Recreation program participants, personal information .......................................................82
Exemption: 119.071(5)(c) ................................................................................237
Redaction of exempt information ...................................................................... 173-175, 212
Reemployment assistance records ........................................................................................91
Exemptions: 288.075(5); 443.1715(1) .....................................................247, 269
Registered public obligations, ownership or security interest records .............................91
Exemption: 279.11(1) ......................................................................................246
Regional planning council meetings, telephone or video conferencing .................................39
Requestor of public records, obnoxious behavior of ...........................................................162
Residential care facilities, educational programs
Exemption: 402.22(3) ......................................................................................263
Respite care programs, identity of clients
Exemption: 430.504 ........................................................................................267
Retail installment sellers, investigative information
Exemption: 520.9965 ......................................................................................275
Retention of public records ......................................................................... 85, 142, 200-203
Revenue collection and Department of Revenue personnel,
personal information ................................................................................................. 149-150
360
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.a. ..........................................................................236
Ridesharing arrangements, participants
Exemption: 119.071(5)(e) ................................................................................237
Risk management programs ........................................................................................31, 131
Exemptions: 284.40(2); 768.28(16)(b)(c)(d) .................................... 246, 290-291
Road construction contractors, nancial statements
Exemption: 119.071(1)(c) ................................................................................233
Road construction cost estimates and bid information ........................................................89
Exemptions: 337.14(1); 337.168 ......................................................................251
Roll call vote at public meeting ...........................................................................................50
Runaway youth programs and centers, client records
Exemption: 409.441(4) ....................................................................................265
Rural health network records
Exemption: 381.0055(1)-(3) ............................................................................254
Safe houses and safe foster homes for sexually exploited children,
location information
Exemption: 409.1678(6) ..................................................................................264
Saltwater products dealers, reports
Exemption: 379.362(6) ....................................................................................254
Scholarship-funding organization, contributing taxpayers
Exemption: 1002.395(6)(q) .............................................................................298
School food and nutrition program records
Exemption: 595.409 ........................................................................................278
School readiness program records
Exemption: 1002.97 ........................................................................................298
Schools and day care facilities attended by children of certain
government personnel ............................................................................................... 143-152
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(d),(5)(i) .............................................................236, 237
Seaport security plans ........................................................................................................155
Exemption: 311.13 ..........................................................................................248
Securities regulation
Exemptions: 517.12(14); 517.2015; 517.2016 .................................................275
Security background check information, generally .............................................................140
Exemption: 435.09 ..........................................................................................267
Security of data and information technology resources records and meetings,
see cybersecurity
Security-system plans and meetings, generally ................................................36-37, 155-157
Exemptions: 286.0113(1); 119.071(3)(a); 281.301 .........207, 236, 246
Security system permits ............................................................................................. 155-156
Self-Insurers Guaranty Association claims les and meetings
Exemption: 440.3851 ......................................................................................268
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
361
Senate, executive session journal ..........................................................................................72
Exemption: 15.07 ............................................................................................225
Serological test reports .........................................................................................................94
Exemption: 951.27(2) ......................................................................................296
Service warranty association guaranteeing organization lings
Exemption: 634.4065(5) ..................................................................................284
Service warranty associations, examination or investigation records
Exemption: 634.444 ........................................................................................284
Sexual battery victims, compensation payments
Exemption: 960.28(4) .............................................................................. 296-297
Sexual harassment victims, see also discrimination investigations .........................................98
Exemption: 119.071(2)(n) ...............................................................................235
Sexual oender information ......................................................................................113, 176
Exemption: 944.606(3)(d) ...............................................................................296
Sexual oense victims ................................................................................................ 123-126
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(h)(j); 119.0714(1)(h);
92.56; 741.313(7); 784.046;
794.024; 794.03; 960.28(4) ......................218, 219, 229, 239, 288, 291, 292, 296
Sexually transmissible disease control proceedings, name of subject .....................................94
Exemptions: 381.004(2)-(5); 384.282(3) .................................................254, 257
Sexually transmissible disease reports ...................................................................................94
Exemptions: 384.26(2); 384.29; 384.30(2) ......................................................257
Sexually violent predator records
Exemption: 394.921(2) ....................................................................................258
Social security numbers ............................................................................................. 157-158
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(a),(5)(a); 119.0714(1)(i)(2)(3);
193.114(5); 717.117(8) ....................................................218, 220, 236, 241, 287
Social events, application of sunshine law ............................................................................37
Space Florida .......................................................................................................................90
Exemptions: 288.075 .......................................................................................247
Speaking at public meetings .......................................................................................... 46-48
Stadium plans, blueprints, and diagrams ...........................................................................155
Exemption: 119.071(3)(c) ................................................................................236
Sta, exclusion from public meetings ..................................................................................48
Sta, application of Sunshine Law to
Sta committees ......................................................................................................... 3-5
Sta members serving as liaisons ............................................................................... 9-10
Sta members serving on boards ...................................................................................20
Stalking victims, personal information ..................................................................78, 83, 122
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(j); 741.4651; 784.046(4)(b)............................234, 288, 291
362
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
State attorney, executive order assigning to other circuit
Exemption: 27.151 ..........................................................................................226
State attorneys, personal information ................................................................................149
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.f. ..........................................................................236
State Fire Marshal investigatory records, meetings involving
Exemption: 633.126(5) ....................................................................................283
State surplus lands, valuation
Exemption: 253.0341(8)(a) ..............................................................................244
State university records
Applications for presidency of state university, records and meetings.....................34, 134
Exemption: 1004.098(1)(2) .............................................................................299
Budgets................................................................................................................... 89-90
Direct-support organizations ............................................................................ 19-20, 77
Exemptions: 1004.28(5); 1004.30 ............................................................ 299-300
Personnel records ........................................................................................................142
Exemption: 1012.91 ........................................................................................303
Prepaid College Program
Exemption: 1009.98(6) ....................................................................................302
Security of data and information technology ..............................................................155
Exemption: 1004.055(1) ..................................................................................299
Sponsored research, proprietary information ...............................................................194
Exemption: 1004.22(2) ....................................................................................299
Student records ....................................................................................................... 81-82
Exemption: 1006.52(1) ....................................................................................301
Statewide prosecutors, personal information ......................................................................149
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.f. ..........................................................................236
Stationary sources of air pollution, trade secret information
Exemption: 252.943 ........................................................................................244
Stock associations, stockholder lists
Exemption: 655.057(2) ....................................................................................288
Structured settlement transfer of payment, identifying information
Exemption: 119.0714(1)(l ) .............................................................................219
Subcontractors working for public agencies, application of public records act......................65
Sunshine State One-Call of Florida, Inc., proprietary condential business information
Exemption: 556.113 ........................................................................................276
Support enforcement program information
Exemptions: 409.2577; 409.2579 ............................................................264, 265
Surveillance techniques, procedures, or personnel ......................................................120, 194
Exemptions: 119.071(2)(d); 119.0714(1)(c) ............................................218, 234
Surveillance videos ....................................................................................................156, 179
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
363
Survey responses ..................................................................................................................80
Surveyor application and examination information and investigatory proceedings
Exemptions: 472.0131(5); 472.0201(1), (2); 472.02011;
472.033(2), (4), (10) ................................................................................. 272-273
Tax collectors, personal information ..................................................................................145
Exemption: 119.071(4)(d)2.n ..........................................................................236
Tax records
Communications services tax records
Exemption: 202.195 ........................................................................................242
Convention development tax records
Exemption: 212.0305(3)(d) .............................................................................242
Corporate income tax, declaration of estimated tax
Exemption: 220.242 ........................................................................................244
Debt collection or auditing agency records
Exemption: 213.27(6) ......................................................................................243
Economic development agencies, information held by
Exemption: 288.075 ........................................................................................247
Email addresses of taxpayers
Exemption: 197.3225 .......................................................................................242
Federal tax information obtained pursuant to s. 26 U.S.C. s. 6103
Exemption: 192.105 ........................................................................................241
Generally ................................................................................................................ 92-93
Minerals severance tax returns
Exemption: 211.33(5) ......................................................................................242
Motor fuel tax records
Exemption: 206.27(2) ......................................................................................242
Oil and gas production tax returns
Exemption: 211.125(10) ..................................................................................242
Property tax information
Assessment roll studies
Exemption: 195.096(2)(e) ........................................................................ 241-242
Exemption applications
Exemptions: 193.114(5); 196.101(4)(c) ...................................................241, 242
Information exchanged among governmental agencies
Exemption: 195.084(1) ....................................................................................241
Returns ........................................................................................................ 91, 92-93
Exemptions: 193.074; 288.075(7) ............................................................241, 247
Sale or purchase of property, information form
Exemption: 195.027(6) ....................................................................................241
Taxpayer records ................................................................................................. 92-93
Exemption: 195.027(3) ....................................................................................241
364
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Registration information, sharing between local governments and state agencies
Exemption: 213.0535(5) ..................................................................................243
Returns and reports, generally ................................................................................. 92-93
Exemption: 213.053(2)(a) ................................................................................242
Tax compromise records
Exemption: 213.21(3)(a) ..................................................................................243
Taxpayer information obtained from Internal Revenue Service
Exemption: 213.28(6) ......................................................................................243
Tax deduction information in school system employee personnel records
Exemption: 1012.31(3) ....................................................................................302
Taxpayer technical assistance advisements
Exemption: 213.22(2) ......................................................................................243
Technology development programs
Exemption: 288.9520 ......................................................................................247
Technology transfer centers, Florida College system institutions
Exemption: 1004.78(2) ....................................................................................301
Telecommunications access system applicant information
Exemption: 427.705(6) ....................................................................................267
Telecommunications service providers ...............................................................................158
Exemption: 119.071(5)(d) ...............................................................................237
Telephone and virtual meetings, application of Sunshine Law ....................................... 37-40
Telephone records ...........................................................................85-86, 131-132, 156-157
Television signals and videotapes produced under public agency agreement
Exemption: 119.071(1)(e) ................................................................................233
Temporary cash assistance recipients, identifying information .............................................92
Exemptions: 414.106; 414.295(1)
Termination of parental rights proceedings ..........................................................................16
Exemptions: 39.809(4); 39.814(3),(4); 39.815(4),(5) ..............................227, 228
Terrorism response plans of hospitals
Exemption: 395.1056 ......................................................................................259
Text messages see electronic records and meetings
reatened or endangered species, site-specic information
Exemption: 379.1026 .......................................................................................254
Time for responding to public records requests...........................................169-171, 198-199
Tobacco settlement agreement records
Exemption: 569.215(1) ....................................................................................277
Toll payment or prepayment, personal identifying information ...........................................92
Exemption: 338.155(6) ....................................................................................251
Tourism marketing and advertising research information
Exemption: 125.0104(9)(d) .............................................................................240
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
365
Trade secrets, generally ...................................................................................... 159-190, 172
Exemptions: 119.0715, 815.045 ..............................................................239, 292
Trac crash reports, personal information ................................................................. 117-118
Exemption: 316.066(2)(a) ................................................................................249
Transportation, Department of
Exemptions: 334.049(4); 337.14(1); 337.162; 337.168;
339.0805(1)(c), 339.55(10(a) ...........................................................................251
Travel records, application of Public Records Act ...............................................................154
Trauma agencies, patient care quality assurance information
Exemptions: 395.3025; 395.4025(12); 395.51; 401.30 ....................259, 260, 261
Tuberculosis control information
Exemptions: 392.54(2); 392.545(3); 392.65 ....................................................258
Twitter ................................................................................................................................85
U.S. Attorneys, judges, and magistrates, personal information...........................................148
Exemption: 119.071(5)(i) ................................................................................237
U.S. Census Bureau address information
Exemption: 119.071(1)(g) ................................................................................233
Unclaimed property ...........................................................................................................72
Exemptions: 717.117(8); 717.1301(5) .............................................................287
Undercover personnel of criminal justice agencies, information revealing ..................105, 120
Exemptions: 119.071(4)(c); 119.0714(1)(g) .............................................218, 236
Utilities, information related to security of information technology
and industrial control technology
Exemption: 119.0713(5)(a) ..............................................................................239
Utility payment records .......................................................................................................92
Vaccination policies, employee complaints
Exemption: 381.00318 ....................................................................................254
Vendor negotiations with agencies ................................................................................. 35-36
Exemption: 286.0113(2) .......................................................................... 206-207
Venue in public records cases .......................................................................................76, 196
Vessel registration or decal records
Exemption: 328.40(3) ......................................................................................250
Veterinarians, records and reports, involving
Exemption: 474.2185 ......................................................................................273
Violent Crime and Drug Control Council meetings, criminal intelligence
Exemption: 943.031(9)(c)(d) ...........................................................................294
Virtual meetings ............................................................................................................ 37-40
Volunteer re departments, application of open government laws ...........................20, 60, 62
Vocational rehabilitation program records
Exemptions: 413.012(1); 413.341 ....................................................................266
366
GOVERNMENT-IN-THE-SUNSHINE-MANUAL
Vote-by-mail ballots, record of requests and delivery information ........................................82
Exemption: 101.62(3) ......................................................................................230
Voter or voter registration information .......................................................................... 82-83
Exemptions: 97.0585; 98.045(3); 98.075(2)(c);741.465 ..........................230, 288
Voting systems software
Exemption: 101.5607(1)(d) .............................................................................230
Vulnerable adult abuse records and reports ..........................................................................76
Exemptions: 415.107(1), (3)(l), (6) ..................................................................266
Wards of public guardian ............................................................................................... 76-77
Exemption: 744.2103(2); 744.2111(1) ............................................................289
Water management district employee medical records .......................................................153
Exemption: 112.08(8) ......................................................................................231
Water management district lands, appraisal information and oers
Exemption: 373.139(3)(a) ................................................................................252
Water management districts, surplus land valuations
Exemption: 373.089(1)(b)(c) ...........................................................................252
Water treatment facility plans, blueprints, and diagrams ....................................................155
Exemption: 119.071(3)(b) ...............................................................................236
Whistle-blower information ...................................................................................... 100-101
Exemptions: 20.055(6)(b); 112.3188(1), (2) ............................................225, 232
Wireless emergency 911 telephone service providers
Exemption: 365.174 ........................................................................................252
Workers’ compensation records and reports
Exemptions: 440.108; 440.125; 440.132; 440.1851(1); 440.25(3); 440.39(7);
440.515; 624.23........................................................................................268, 278
Workshop meetings ......................................................................... 25-26, 38-40, 41, 44-46
Written public records request, authority to require ................................................... 166-167
