|
|
Print Version
Frequently Asked Questions for Municipalities
Revised January 2007
PDF Version (pdf)
The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy (FOIP) Act aims to
strike a balance between the public’s right to know and the individual’s
right to privacy, as those rights relate to information held by public bodies in
Alberta.
- What is a "local government body" under the FOIP Act?
- The Act defines a local government body in section
1(i).
- The definition includes municipalities, improvement districts, special
areas, regional services commissions, housing management bodies, public
libraries, police services, police commissions, drainage and irrigation
districts, Metis settlements, and certain boards, committees, etc. of these
local government bodies.
- Which local government boards, committees, etc. are subject to the FOIP Act?
- Section 1(i)(xii) of the FOIP Act sets out the test
for whether a local government agency is subject to the FOIP Act.
- To determine whether an entity is covered, ask the following questions:
- Is the entity a board, committee, commission, panel, agency or corporation?
- Is it created or owned by a local government body?
- Are all of its members/officers appointed or chosen by the local government body?
- If the answer to all three questions is "yes", then the entity is subject to the
FOIP Act.
- EPCOR and ENMAX and their gas or electric subsidiaries are specifically excluded from the scope of the
Act.
- Are Community Lottery Boards subject to the FOIP Act?
- Yes. Community Lottery Boards are covered under Alberta Gaming. Requests for records should be referred to the
FOIP Coordinator for Alberta Gaming.
- What is a "record"?
- Section 1(q) of the FOIP Act defines a record as "information
in any form and includes notes, images, audio-visual recordings, x-rays,
books, documents, maps, drawings, photographs, letters, vouchers and
papers and any other information that is written, photographed, recorded
or stored in any manner, but does not include software or any mechanism
that produces records".
- It includes handwritten notes and electronic correspondence or messages,
which are in the custody or control of the municipality.
- Not all records need to be kept by the public body. You can routinely
discard transitory records, those that have only short-term, immediate or no
value to your organization and that you won’t need again in the future.
For more information about transitory records, see
Official and
Transitory Records: A Guide for Government of Alberta Employees.
- If the information in a record will have some future administrative,
financial, legal, research or historical value to the public body, then you
should file the record. For example, e-mail messages that record approvals,
recommendations, opinions, decisions or business transactions have future
value, and are not transitory and should be filed. You can print and
file them in your manual filing system or store them in an electronic filing
system.
- What records of municipalities are subject to the FOIP Act?
- All records that are in the custody or under the control of
the municipality are subject to the FOIP Act (section
4(1)) unless a
specific exclusion applies.
- A municipality has custody of a record when the record is in the
possession of the municipality. This includes situations where the records
of a third party are kept on the premises of the municipality.
- A record is under the control of a municipality when it has the authority
to manage the record, including restricting, regulating and administering
its use, disclosure and disposition.
- How long should a municipality keep its paper/electronic records?
- There is no simple answer to this question. Each organization should
establish records retention and disposition schedules or a retention bylaw
for its records, including electronic and transitory records.
- A records retention and disposition schedule is a document that
identifies and describes records, and indicates the length of time they
shall be retained as active before transfer to semi-active storage; the
length of time they should be retained as semi-active prior to final
disposition; and the final disposition of the records.
- The FOIP Act allows the destruction of records in accordance with your
records retention bylaw. If a municipality does not have such a bylaw, the
Act allows destruction as authorized by the council (section
3(e)(ii)).
- Under section 53(1)(a) of the FOIP Act, the Information and Privacy Commissioner has the power to conduct an
investigation into how a municipality is managing its records. Specifically,
the Commissioner can check to make sure that a municipality is following any
bylaw it has regarding the destruction of records.
- Municipalities are required by section 35 of the FOIP Act to keep
personal information about an individual for at least one year if that
personal information has been used by the municipality to make a decision
about the individual.
- Should e-mail be printed before it is deleted, or should it be saved instead of being deleted?
- The same records management principles for paper files/records should
also apply to e-mail documents. Transitory e-mails may be deleted.
- How or where the e-mail documents are retained will depend on the
municipality’s records and information management program standards, and
whether it has the capability of electronically filing documents required
for future use. If the municipality does not have that capability, records
should be printed and filed in the paper filing system.
- Who is an "employee" under the FOIP Act?
-
The definition of "employee" in the FOIP Act includes a person
who performs a service for the public body as an appointee, volunteer or
student or under a contract or agency relationship with the public body (section
1(e)). This means that volunteers, students on work experience
arrangements, contractors, and appointed board members have the same
responsibility to protect privacy as other employees of the municipality.
- Are records of contractors subject to the FOIP Act?
- The definition of "employee" in the FOIP Act includes a person
retained under contract to perform services for the public body (section
1(e)).
- A record may be under the control of a municipality where a contract
permits the municipality to inspect, review or copy records produced,
received or acquired by a contractor.
- Often municipalities have contracts with an organization to provide some
kind of service to individuals. Services such as assessments and water
utilities may be provided through contracts. The contractor is functioning
in the place of the municipality; the records the contractor creates are
subject to the same privacy and access rules as records of the municipality.
As a result, contracts need to include privacy protection clauses, clarity
on control of and access to records, as well as records retention and
destruction clauses.
- The
Managing Contracts under the FOIP Act, A Guide for Government of Alberta Contract Managers and FOIP Coordinators
addresses these issues in detail and may be referred to for more information.
- Are records of elected officials of municipalities excluded from the FOIP Act?
- Personal or constituency records of a council member are excluded from the
Act
(section 4(1)(m)). This exclusion is intended to cover:
- records such as private correspondence of an elected official that has not been sent or received by the official
in his or her capacity as a council member but which may be maintained in his or her office for convenience.
- records relating to the election campaign of a council member (other than those records required to be submitted
to the authority governing the election).
- records relating to the private business activities of a council member.
- Records dealing with the business of the municipality are covered by the Act even if they are stored at a
councillor's home.
- Who is responsible for FOIP within a municipality?
- The governing body of the municipality (the council) must designate a
head by bylaw under section
95(a) of the FOIP Act. The head is
responsible and accountable for all decisions taken under the Act.
- The head can be an individual (e.g. Chief Administrative Officer, member
of council, or someone else responsible to the council) or the council or
one of its committees.
- Appointing council or a committee as the head could present practical
difficulties in meeting the timelines for responding to FOIP requests or in
defending a complaint to the Information and Privacy Commissioner.
- Once the head is designated, the head can delegate any of his or her
responsibilities in writing, under section 85 of the Act (except the
ability to delegate).
- Does the FOIP Act still apply to health information held by
municipalities, since the Health Information Act came into effect in
April 2001?
- Yes. The Health Information Act applies only to health information
held by health care bodies such as regional health authorities, physicians’
offices, pharmacies and laboratories. Health information held by
municipalities is still covered as personal information by the FOIP Act.
- Does a public body have any control over how records that have been released in response to a FOIP request are
used by the applicant?
- No. A public body does not have any control over the use of information
once it is released to an applicant.
- How should municipalities handle letters from residents that become part of the council agenda packages
forwarded to council members?
- Letters from residents normally include personal information, such as
name, address, phone numbers, and possibly opinions and other personal
information. In deciding whether to disclose the personal information of
individuals at public council or committee meetings, municipalities need to
balance the dual objectives of open government and protection of privacy.
- Under section 197 of the Municipal Government Act (MGA), meetings
of a council or a council committee must be conducted in public, except
where there is authority to hold the meetings in the absence of the public.
Under section 198 of the MGA, the public has a right to be present at
council and committee meetings that are conducted in public. Given the
public nature of council and committee meetings, an individual writing to a
councillor or to the administration of a municipality may have a reasonable
expectation that their correspondence, including their personal information,
could be disclosed at a public council or committee meeting.
- If this is the practice of the municipality, then notice of this practice
should be made available to the public. For example, notice may be placed in
a brochure and on the municipality's web site, or in publications the public
may refer to when looking up council member contact information.
- Sometimes individuals will send in letters containing sensitive personal
information, such as information about the health of family members,
vacation plans or financial circumstances. When it is not clear that the
writer expected the information to be made public, the municipality should
contact the individual and confirm that it was their intention that the
information be disclosed to the public. Alternatively, a severed record or
summary of the information inquiry or complaint could be prepared for use at
the council meeting.
- Where the disclosure of such a letter would clearly be an invasion of the
author’s personal privacy but the personal information is needed by
councillors to fully inform their decision-making, the matter could be
discussed in a portion of the meeting that is closed to the public. In that
case, the letter would not be attached to or distributed as part of the
agenda package.
- How should municipalities handle records containing personal information of individuals that are used during
in camera meetings?
- Section 197(2) of the MGA authorizes a council and its committees to
close all or part of their meetings to the public if a matter to be
discussed is within one of the exceptions to disclosure contained in Division
2 of Part 1 of the FOIP Act. One of the exceptions
includes disclosures of personal information that would be an unreasonable
invasion of a third party’s personal privacy (section
17(1)).
- The information of an identifiable individual must be discussed in a
closed meeting if the disclosure would be an unreasonable invasion of
privacy to have the discussion with members of the public present.
- Any motion arising from those discussions must then be voted upon in
public. Consistent with the principle of open government, a municipality
should try to make public as much information as possible about the general
nature of the matter considered without disclosing the personal information
of the individual in question.
- See question 18 for further information about in camera meetings.
- Is a letter sent by a ratepayer to a councillor that is not brought to the attention of the
council and does
not form part of council records, subject to the access provisions in Part 1, Division 2 of the
FOIP Act?
of the Act says that the Act applies to
all records in the custody or under the control of a public body. Subsection
(m) excludes personal or constituency records of an elected member of a
local public body and subsection (n) excludes personal records of an
appointed or elected member of the governing body of a local public body.
This section has yet to be considered by the Information and Privacy
Commissioner in an Order.
Using the tests set out in FOIP Bulletin #6, "Records of Elected
and Appointed Officials of Local Public Bodies", this record would
be considered a "personal record" of the councillor if it did not
in any way relate to the business of the municipality but rather related to
the personal business dealings of the councillor. The record would be
considered a "constituency record" of the councillor if it dealt
with the political activities of the councillor, such as election
contributions or campaign issues.
If the record could not be considered to be a "personal" or
"constituency" record of the councillor, the municipality would
have to determine whether it was in its custody or under its control. A
record may not be in a municipality’s custody or control if
- the record was not deposited with the council or the municipality;
- the municipality had no power to compel the councillor to produce the record even when referred to in a council
meeting;
- the municipality had no authority to regulate or dispose of the record;
- the record was referred to as part of the councillor’s mandate to represent the constituent and not as a basis
for action by the municipality; and
- the record was not integrated with municipality records in the office of the
councillor.
(These factors were taken from Ontario IPC Order M-813).
- How should additional sets of council records, such as agendas, supporting documents and minutes retained by
council members be treated?
- Councillors should understand that these records are subject to the FOIP
Act, regardless of where the records are located.
- Municipalities should develop a policy regarding the retention and
disposition of these records. The policy could state that these types of
records are retained by councillors until the formal minutes produced by
council have been approved and then returned for confidential
recycling/shredding; or that they be retained by councillors for a specified
period of time (e.g. one year) and then returned for confidential
recycling/shredding.
- Can municipal councils continue to meet in camera, that is, in the absence of the public?
- On October 1, 1999, section 197(2) of the MGA was repealed, and
replaced with the following, "Councils and council committees may close
all or part of their meetings to the public if a matter to be discussed is
within one of the exceptions to disclosure in Division 2 of Part 1
of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act."
- Councils and their committees can make a motion to go in camera when the
substance of their deliberations relate to the matters covered by the
exceptions to disclosure in the FOIP Act, sections 16 to 29.
For example, a discussion regarding the employment of an individual should
be held in camera to protect the privacy of that individual.
- There is no requirement to take notes or minutes during in camera
sessions. If notes have been prepared, they may be requested as part of a
FOIP request. The municipality has the discretion to refuse to disclose
these notes under section 23 of the FOIP Act, local public body
confidences.
- The council minutes should show that a motion was made to go in camera
and then another to return to the open meeting so that section 23 may
be applied.
- If a municipality receives a FOIP request for the salaries of all employees and councillors, does the
information have to be released?
- Under section 217(3) of the Municipal Government Act (MGA), the
salaries of councillors, the chief administrative officer and designated
officers of the municipalities must be released on request. This section
prevails over the FOIP Act.
- Section 217(3) of the MGA remains in force. Section 216, the
remainder of section 217 and section 218 of the MGA were repealed on October
1, 1999.
- For the remaining municipal staff, under section
17(2)(e) of the
FOIP Act, disclosing the salary range and discretionary benefits of
employees is not an unreasonable invasion of privacy. The exact salary could
be released only with an employee's consent.
- If a municipality receives a FOIP request for the severance package given to
an employee, does the information have to be released?
- In
Order
2001-020, the City of Calgary received a request for all
information related to a buy-out for managers since 1999.
- The Information and Privacy Commissioner upheld the City’s decision to
release standard clauses from the severance agreements, the individual’s job
title or position, and the amount of severance paid. This information could be
released in accordance with section
17(2)(e) of the FOIP Act.
- The City withheld the individuals' names and signatures (section
17(4)(g)(i) of the FOIP Act), and employee numbers, and termination and retirement dates
as employment history (section 17(4)(d)
of the FOIP Act).
- It is not clear how the Order would apply if the applicant had asked for the
severance package information of a named individual. However, it appears that
the same considerations of sections 17(2) and
17(4) may apply and the outcome
may be the same.
- Can the municipality disclose personal information of employees, such as salary, benefits, or home address, to
council members?
- Personal information of employees can be disclosed to a council member if
the information is necessary for the performance of the duties of the
council member (section 40(1)(h)of the FOIP Act).
- Only the information which the council member needs to know can be
disclosed (section 40(4) of the FOIP Act).
- For example, in a municipality with a small number of employees, council
members may need to receive information on individual employees' salaries as
part of the budget process, depending on how the budget is normally
prepared. In a larger municipality, budget decisions may be made on summary
information, so in that case individual salaries would not need to be
disclosed.
- Can a municipality verify an employee’s salary to a lending institution or finance company, where the
employee has applied for credit?
- Yes, but only with the employee’s consent. Financial
information of an employee is the employee’s personal information and so
consent is required before you can disclose it.
- Can a municipality disclose and/or verify the employment status and home address of an employee to a collection
agency?
- A municipality can only confirm whether an individual is an employee.
- The disclosure of a home address would be an unreasonable invasion of
privacy, without consent.
- If a municipality receives a FOIP request for a travel expense claim of an employee or councillor, does the
information have to be released?
- Expense claims have frequently been the subject of FOIP requests.
- Under section 17(2)(e) of the FOIP Act disclosing employment
responsibilities of employees is not an unreasonable invasion of privacy.
Travel for business purposes is part of an employee's employment
responsibilities.
- Expense claim records can also be released if section
17(5)(a) of
the FOIP Act applies, where the disclosure is desirable for the purpose of
subjecting the activities of the municipality to public scrutiny. The
records would be severed, for example, to withhold employee's credit card
numbers or home address, and the names of third parties.
- Can municipalities charge fees for handling FOIP requests?
- Section 93
of the FOIP Act, and sections 9 to 13
and Schedule 2 of the FOIP Regulation set out when fees may be
charged for processing FOIP requests.
- Section 95(b)
of the FOIP Act says that a municipality may, by bylaw,
set any fees it requires to be paid under section 93 as long as they
don't exceed the fees provided for in the Regulation.
- What fees can be charged for handling a request for an individual's own personal information?
- Applicants are not required to pay an initial fee when requesting access to their own personal information.
-
Fees may only be charged for producing a copy of the records (items
3 to 6 of Schedule 2), and then only when those fees exceed $10. When
the estimated cost exceeds $10, then the total amount is charged.
- An applicant may request that the fees be waived if the applicant cannot afford payment or if for other reasons it is fair to excuse payment. These requests should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
- What fees can be charged for handling a request for other records, i.e., an access request?
- Applicants are required to pay an initial fee of $25 for a one-time
request, or $50 for a continuing request, before processing of the request
will begin.
- When the estimated cost of processing the request exceeds $150, then the
total amount is charged. When the estimated cost is less than $150, then no
fee above the $25 initial fee is charged to the applicant.
- Municipalities can charge for the time to search, locate and retrieve a
record; to prepare the record for disclosure (severing the record); copying
costs; computer processing and programming cost; the cost of supervising an applicant who
wishes to examine an original record; and shipping costs.
- Preparing a record for disclosure does not include the time the
municipality takes to decide or discuss what will or will not be severed.
- An applicant may request that the fees be waived if the applicant cannot
afford payment or for other reasons if it is fair to excuse payment. These
requests should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
- Should municipalities collect GST on FOIP fees?
- No. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency does not require municipalities to
collect GST on fees paid for handling a FOIP request.
- Should municipalities follow the FOIP fee schedule when releasing records outside of the
FOIP Act?
- No. The FOIP Act does not replace existing procedures for access to
information or records, and does not change the fees municipalities may be
charging for these services. This is in section 3 of the FOIP Act.
- Can municipalities still collect the personal information they need for the property assessment roll?
- Yes. Under section 33(a) of the FOIP Act, a municipality can
collect personal information that other legislation authorizes it to
collect.
- The Municipal Government Act (MGA) sets out what information must
be collected for assessment purposes. Section 303 of the MGA sets out
specific information that must be included in the assessment roll.
- Should municipalities still make the assessment roll available for inspection?
- Yes. The MGA, section 307, allows individuals to "inspect the
assessment roll during regular business hours on payment of the fee set by
the council."
- One suggestion is to maintain the complete version of the assessment
roll, including owners' names, addresses and phone numbers, in the municipal
office. This copy would be available for inspection during office hours.
Another version of the roll, containing the property information but not the
personal information, could be made more widely available.
- Can a municipality release information it receives from companies regarding notices of construction for access
roads, well-sites, etc.?
- If the information requested relates to an application for a development
permit or subdivision approval, then refer to questions 55 to
58 below.
- The records requested should be reviewed to determine whether any of the
exceptions to disclosure in the FOIP Act would apply, especially section
16, and then all or part of the records would be released based on this
review.
- If the notice refers to an individual rather than to a company, personal
information such as home phone number or home address, if different than the
location of the work site, should not be disclosed without the individual’s
consent.
- A municipality may be asked regularly for notice information. If this is
the case, a municipality could compile and maintain a list of notices,
including the names of the companies and the legal land descriptions
referred to in the notices. This should not be done when the affected
companies have an expectation of confidentiality regarding the business
information in the notice. To ensure that companies are aware of this
practice, municipalities should provide notice of the intended use of this
information.
- Can a municipality disclose the address of a person to a bailiff or private investigator?
- All requestors have the same status under the FOIP Act, whether
they are bailiffs, private investigators, companies collecting on overdue
accounts, individuals collecting on a judgment, bailiffs seizing property,
or process servers wishing to serve court orders, warrants or other
documents on individuals.
- Section 17(4)(e)
of the FOIP Act says that disclosure of
information gathered for the purpose of collecting a tax is presumed to be
an unreasonable invasion of privacy. A municipality should not disclose
addresses from the assessment roll.
- In
Order 2000-024, the Information and Privacy Commissioner found
that the names and mailing addresses on the City of Calgary’s assessment
roll could not be disclosed.
- However, anyone may ask to inspect the assessment roll under section 307
of the MGA and may locate an address this way.
- Individuals requesting addresses may be referred to the Land Titles
Office. The Land Titles Office will provide a legal description of land held
by an individual if the person requesting the information is entitled to
register or has registered certain instruments against a debtor’s land.
These are a Writ of Enforcement or a court order permitted by legislation or
permitted by the terms of the order to be registered.
- Can a Real Property Report be released to a prospective purchaser of property, to a new owner or to anyone
else?
- The records requested should be reviewed to determine whether any of the
exceptions to disclosure in the FOIP Act would apply and then all or
part of the records would be released based upon the application of the Act.
- It is unlikely that the report on a residential property would contain
personal information or commercial or technical information under section
16 of the Act.
- Can a Fire Prevention Inspection Report, prepared by a municipality, be released upon request to anyone?
- Fire Prevention Inspection Reports may be prepared at the request of a
property owner or as part of a municipality’s Quality Management Plan.
- Section 63(1) of the Safety Codes Act (SCA) applies to the
release of these reports since they are created pursuant to the Alberta Fire
Code which is considered to be an enactment under the SCA. That
section imposes a duty on anyone administering the SCA to preserve
the confidentiality of information and documents created for the purposes of
the Act, except in certain circumstances. One of those circumstances would
be disclosure of a Report with the consent of the owner.
- If the Inspection Report relates to a building or other structure owned
or leased by a municipality, provided any personal information of
non-employees is severed, or their consent to the release of the information
is obtained, the Inspection Report could be released without a FOIP request.
- If the Inspection Report relates to a building or other structure that is
not owned or leased by the municipality, but is inspected as part of the municipality’s
Quality Management Plan, the consent of the owner of the building or
structure would be required before the report could be released, unless
there was a court order or the disclosure was authorized by another act. In
addition, any personal information of non-employees should be severed, or
their consent to the release of the information obtained.
- What information can a municipality release on a tax certificate?
- Section 350 of the MGA authorizes the release of tax arrears information.
It says that on request a municipality can release the amount of taxes
imposed and the amount of taxes owing in the current year, and the total
amount of tax arrears.
- The MGA is silent on whether the name of the property owner is to be
released. Any disclosure of personal information under FOIP should be
limited to "the extent necessary to enable the public body to carry out
the purposes in a reasonable manner (section
40(4) of the FOIP Act).
Normally the name of the property owner would not need to be disclosed.
- Can municipalities still prepare rural maps that contain the names of land owners?
- Often rural maps contain the first initial and last name of land owners,
legal land descriptions, and the location of houses. These maps are prepared
for use by municipal staff, such as emergency services, utilities, and
others who need to locate owners. Maps are often made available to the
public as well.
- Many municipalities are continuing to produce these maps since they
believe the use of the owners’ names on the maps is not an unreasonable
invasion of personal privacy under section 17 of the FOIP Act. The
disclosure would be permitted under section
40(1)(b) of the FOIP Act
once the municipality makes the decision. Unless there is an investigation
of a privacy complaint by the Commissioner and the resulting report
recommends removing the names, municipalities may decide to continue to
produce the maps.
- Can a municipality put the complete cemetery record, such as names, dates of
births and deaths, and locations of burial sites, on a web page?
- This information is personal information of individuals. The disclosure
would be an unreasonable invasion of privacy if the individuals have been
dead for less than 25 years (section
17(2)(i) of the FOIP Act).
- Disclosures of this information should be considered on a case-by-case
basis.
- Can a municipality disclose personal information to Alberta Justice
Maintenance Enforcement Program?
- Yes. Section 40(1)(y) of the FOIP Act permits the disclosure of
personal information about individuals for the purposes of enforcing a
maintenance order under the Maintenance Enforcement Act. If this is
the basis for requesting the information, the official for Maintenance
Enforcement would have to provide proof of identity and specific authority
under which the information is being requested.
- Municipalities should only disclose the personal information necessary to
the enforcement process relating to the order.
- Can municipalities use the personal information on the assessment roll for other purposes related to the
operation of the municipality?
- Yes. Under section 39(1)(a) of the FOIP Act, a municipality
may use personal information for the purpose for which the information was
collected or a consistent purpose.
- The name and mailing address of the property owner was collected for the
purpose of operating the municipality, including compiling the assessment roll. This
information may be used for other purposes related to the operation of the
municipality, such as providing services and utilities.
- When the personal information is collected directly from an individual,
notice should be given about how their personal information may be used, as
required by section 34(2) of the FOIP Act.
- Can a municipality sell the personal information on the assessment roll to external groups or companies, such
as marketers?
- No. In
Order 2000-024, the Information and Privacy Commissioner found
that the names and mailing addresses on the assessment roll could not be
disclosed outside of the municipality.
- The Commissioner found that the personal information was collected for
the purpose of determining tax liability and/or for collecting a tax.
Therefore section 16(2) of the FOIP Act applies to the personal
information, and the information must not be disclosed in responding to a
FOIP request. This is a mandatory exception to disclosure in the FOIP Act.
- When the information is requested, without a FOIP request, the
information could only be disclosed under section 40 of the FOIP Act.
The most likely section is 40(1)(b), if the disclosure would not be
an unreasonable invasion of privacy. Under section
17(4)(e) of the
FOIP Act, a disclosure of personal information collected for the purpose of
collecting a tax is presumed to be an unreasonable invasion of privacy.
- However, if the property owners’ names and mailing addresses were
removed, the remaining information on the assessment roll could be
disclosed.
- If a municipality is asked to provide the address or legal description of property owned or leased by an
individual and that information is part of the assessment roll, can the address of the individual be disclosed?
- The disclosure of the names and mailing addresses of property owners for
these purposes would likely be an unreasonable invasion of the property
owner’s personal information under
section 17(4)(e) of the FOIP
Act. If a FOIP request was submitted, the municipality would have to refuse
to disclose to an applicant information about a third party that was
collected for the purpose of determining tax liability or collecting a tax (section
16(2) of the FOIP Act).
- The Information and Privacy Commissioner, in
Order 2000-024,
upheld the City of Calgary’s decision not to disclose the names and
mailing addresses of property owners in the assessment roll in response to a
FOIP request.
- Note that an individual could ask to inspect the assessment roll, and in
doing so would be able to identify the individual's mailing addresses and
legal description of property. The MGA requires that municipalities provide
access to the assessment roll during office hours on the payment of a fee
set by council. Being allowed to inspect the roll does not mean that a
complete copy of the roll, containing names and contact information, can be
disclosed by the municipality.
- If a gas drilling company gives a municipality a list of legal land
descriptions and asks for the names and mailing addresses of property owners
from the assessment roll, can the municipality provide the information?
- The Energy and Utilities Board may require a company drilling a sour gas
well to prepare an Emergency Response Plan containing the names and
addresses of affected residents in the vicinity of the sour gas well.
- The personal information may be disclosed when there are compelling
circumstances affecting anyone’s health or safety, for example because the
activity represents a potential hazard or safety hazard. The disclosure of
the requested information would not be an unreasonable invasion of personal
privacy under section 17(2)(b) of the FOIP Act. A written notice of
the disclosure should be given to the third party.
- A municipality should ask the requestor to put their request in writing,
including the reason for requesting the information, i.e. to prepare an
Emergency Response Plan for a sour gas well drilling operation. The
municipality could then make the disclosure for affected residents under section
17(2)(b), and would need to provide a written notice to the residents
that it has done so.
- A sample notice letter can be found in
Appendix 3, Model Letter R, of the
FOIP Guidelines and Practices manual.
- If a municipality is given a list of legal land descriptions, and is asked to provide the names and mailing
addresses of property owners from the assessment roll, can it do so?
- The disclosure of the names and mailing addresses of property owners is
normally an unreasonable invasion of the property owner’s personal
information (section 17(4)(e) of the FOIP Act). If a FOIP request was
submitted for the information, the municipality would have to refuse to
disclose to an applicant information about a third party that was collected
for the purpose of determining tax liability or collecting a tax (section
16(2)) of the FOIP Act.
- Note that an individual could ask to inspect the assessment roll, and in
doing so may be able to identify the individual's mailing addresses and
legal description of property. The MGA requires that municipalities provide
access to the assessment roll during office hours on the payment of a fee.
Being allowed to inspect the roll does not mean that a complete copy of the
roll, containing names and contact information, can be disclosed by the
municipality.
- If there is any requirement for notification of property owners under
another statute or regulation of Alberta or Canada (e.g. an environmental
protection or energy statute or regulation), then section
40(1)(e) or
(f) of the FOIP Act would permit disclosure of the mailing
address of the owner and/or legal description of the property.
- Can a municipality disclose a copy of the assessment roll or information on the assessment roll to a school
board?
- Yes. Under section 167 of the School Act, a municipality is
required to provide a copy of the whole or any part of the roll to a school
board, on request. This disclosure would be in accordance with section
40(1)(e) of the FOIP Act.
- Although the whole roll may be disclosed for this purpose, the
municipality should consider disclosing only the personal information that
is necessary to carry out that purpose.
- Can a municipality disclose information on the assessment roll to an assessed person who is appealing the
assessment of their property?
- Yes. Section 299(1) of the MGA allows an assessed person to access
sufficient information to show how their own property was assessed. This
would include information on how the property was first assessed and how the
property compares with other similar properties.
- In addition, under section 300 of the MGA, an assessed person may ask the
municipality for a summary of any assessed property in the municipality and
the municipality must comply with the request if it is satisfied that
necessary confidentiality will not be breached.
- In most appeal situations, a municipality would not have to disclose
another owner’s personal information to carry out this purpose and so
would only disclose the property information.
- Can real estate agents and/or appraisers request legal land descriptions, parcel size/dimensions, assessment
taxes, etc., on behalf of their clients when consent from the land owners is implied by virtue of the agent or
appraiser working for their client?
- When the address of the land owner’s property is provided, the
disclosure of only the property information (i.e. legal land description, parcel size and
dimension, assessment and taxes) by the municipality would not be an
unreasonable invasion of privacy. This is not personal information.
- Note that real estate agents and appraisers could ask to inspect the
assessment roll, and in doing so may be able to identify the individual’s
name. The MGA requires that the municipalities provide access to the
assessment roll during office hours on the payment of a fee. Being allowed
to inspect the roll does not mean that a complete copy of the roll,
containing names and contact information, can be disclosed by the
municipality.
- Can a municipality provide information on the assessment roll to 911 operators and ambulance service providers?
- Yes. Under section 39(1)(a) of the FOIP Act, a municipality may
use personal information for a use consistent with the purposes for which
the information was collected, including operating the municipality. The
information on the roll can be used for purposes related to the operation of
the municipality such as the provision of emergency services by contracted
providers.
- When the personal information is collected directly from an individual,
notice should be given to residents as to how their personal information may
be used and disclosed, as required by section
34(2) of the FOIP Act.
- Can a municipality provide information on the assessment roll to municipal utility staff, or the utility’s
contractors?
- Yes. Under section 39(1)(a) of the FOIP Act, a municipality may
use personal information for a use consistent with the purpose for which the
information was collected. In addition to using the information for the
purposes of collecting property taxes, the information on the roll can be
used for purposes related to the operation of the municipality such as the
provision of utility services.
- When the personal information is collected directly from an individual,
notice should be given to residents as to how their personal information may
be used and disclosed, as required by section
34(2) of the FOIP Act.
- Can a municipality provide the names and addresses of their residents (from the assessment roll) to
recreation boards created by a municipal bylaw for the purpose of sending notices about upcoming
recreation board events?
Could the municipality charge a fee for the staff time involved in retrieving the names and addresses and printing
address labels?
- If the recreation board was created by a municipal bylaw with members
appointed in accordance with that bylaw, the municipality is using this
vehicle to provide for the recreational and social activities of its
residents. The programs and activities offered by the board would likely be
considered to be programs and activities of the municipality. The disclosure
of names and addresses of the residents would be a consistent use of the
personal information since it would have a reasonable and direct connection
to the collection (for assessment purposes and for the operation and
administration of the municipality’s programs) and would be necessary to
operate recreational programs (under the mandate of the municipality).
- For this purpose, the municipality could provide the names and addresses
of the ratepayers within the geographic area served by a recreation board.
The municipality should put clear limits on the use of the mailing list and
indicate that it reserves the right to discontinue providing the mailing
list to the board if it learns that the list has been used or disclosed for
other purposes.
- Since the request for disclosure of the personal information is not a
FOIP request, the municipality could charge fees set in the bylaw for such
services.
- For recreation boards that are not created by bylaw, or for which no
special tax has been levied, the municipality could offer to do the mailout
for the recreation board if they determined that an activity of the board
was a consistent use of the information collected. The municipality could
not disclose the personal information to these recreation boards.
- Can a municipality disclose information to a public health inspector?
- Public health inspectors may ask for the name and contact information of
a business license holder such as a restaurant. The disclosure of business
license information, even if the business is owned by an individual, would
not be an unreasonable invasion of privacy under section
17(2)(g) of
the FOIP Act and may be disclosed.
- Public health inspectors may also ask for information on a particular
property. Normally contact information may not be disclosed. In
Order
2000-024, the Information and Privacy Commissioner found that the names and
mailing addresses on the assessment roll could not be disclosed outside of
the municipality.
- Note that the inspector could ask to inspect the assessment roll, and in
doing so may be able to identify the individual's mailing addresses and
legal description of property. The MGA requires that municipalities provide
access to the assessment roll during office hours on the payment of a fee.
Being allowed to inspect the roll does not mean that a complete copy of the
roll, containing names and contact information, can be disclosed by the
municipality.
- If the inspector is carrying out an investigation of a complaint, or
other law enforcement activity under an enactment, the municipality may
disclose the information under section
40(1)(q) of the FOIP Act. The
municipality may want to require the inspector to make the request for
information in writing, for example, by completing the Law Enforcement
Disclosure Form (from the FOIP Guidelines and Practices manual).
- Can a municipality disclose names and addresses of new residents (from the assessment roll or from applications
for utilities) to organizations like Welcome Wagon?
- Not without the consent of the residents. In
Order 2000-024, the
Information and Privacy Commissioner found that the names and mailing addresses
on the assessment roll could not be disclosed outside of the municipality. See
also question 41.
- Can a municipality disclose personal information about a resident to
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (formerly known as Revenue Canada)?
- Yes. Sections 40(1)(e) and (f) of the FOIP Act allow for
disclosure to comply with another Act of Alberta or Canada, such as the
Income Tax Act. That Act authorizes the collection of personal
information by employees of Canada Customs and Revenue Agency ("CCRA")
for certain purposes. For example, section 231.1(1) of that Act
authorizes an inspection, audit, or examination of records of any person
(including a municipality) that relate or may relate to information that is
or should be in the books or records of a taxpayer or to any amount payable
by the taxpayer under the Act.
- If section 231.1(1) were the basis for the request for information, the
individual making the request would need to demonstrate that he or she is a
duly authorized employee of CCRA. CCRA has advised that requests to examine
records pertaining to taxpayers, under the authority of the Income Tax
Act, typically come from Collections Officers or their superiors,
during site visits. To verify identity, the municipality can request the
Collections Officer to provide a business card or show his or her
identification card.
- The Income Tax Act also allows CCRA to require the production of
information and documents by written demand under section 231.2. Information
may be disclosed in response to these requests under the same provisions of
the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, as set
out above.
- Can the records related to assessment reviews dealt with by assessment review boards be released to anybody
upon request?
Submissions:
- The municipality who issued the assessment notice, must be provided with
a copy of the complaint about the assessment within 30 days of receipt by
the designated officer. The municipality, the complainant and any other
person affected by the assessment must be given notice of the review
hearing.
Minutes/Records of Proceedings:
- If there are records of the proceedings of assessment review boards, they
must be released in accordance with any policies of the municipality.
Decisions:
- Section 469(1) of the MGA requires that a decision of an assessment
review board and the reasons for a decision (if requested at the time of the
hearing) must be sent to all persons who were required to have notice of the
hearing. If the decision contained personal or business information, then sections
16 and 17 of the FOIP Act would have to be applied to
determine what information could be released. Note that under section
17(4)(e), disclosure of information gathered for the purpose of collection
of a tax is presumed to be an unreasonable invasion of privacy.
- If a decision of an assessment review board is appealed to the Municipal
Government Board, as a matter of practice, the contents of the appeal file
could be released by the board to anyone upon request.
- Can the records related to development applications and subdivision approvals dealt with by municipal planning
commissions and development and subdivision authorities be released to anybody upon request?
Applications for Development Permits or Subdivision Approval:
- Application files may contain statements from provincial government
departments, utility companies or other agencies to whom the application was
referred; technical reports prepared by or for the applicant, including
groundwater evaluation, soil suitability for private sewage disposal;
specialty engineering or design reports and property appraisal reports if
required in determining cash in place of reserves.
- These records may be released in accordance with any policies of the
municipality.
Minutes/Records of Proceedings:
- Under section 197(2.1) of the MGA, these bodies may deliberate and
make decisions in meetings closed to the public.
- If hearings of the above bodies are held in camera, and if any notes of the
proceedings are kept, they would not be routinely released. If a municipality
received a FOIP request for access to the records of such meetings (if there
were any), the head of a municipality might refuse to disclose information
which could reveal the substance of deliberations at the in camera meetings (section
23(1)(b) of the FOIP Act) unless the subject-matter of the deliberations
were considered in a public meeting.
- If hearings of the above bodies are open to the public, records of the
meetings or hearings could be released in accordance with any policies of the
municipality.
Decisions:
- Under section 640 of the MGA, a land use bylaw establishes a method
for development authorities (including municipal planning commissions) to make
decisions on applications for development permits. Pursuant to section 653,
subdivision approvals are made by subdivision authorities (including municipal
planning commissions) in accordance with the MGA.
- Section 656 of the MGA requires decisions of a subdivision authority
to be given to an applicant, to government departments and to other persons
and local authorities as required by subdivision and development regulations.
Once a subdivision plan has been registered at a Land Titles Office,
individuals can obtain a copy of the registered plan from that registry.
- See question 57 for the release of information regarding development
permits.
For more information contact:
- FOIP Help Desk
Access and Privacy Branch
Service Alberta
3rd Floor, Commerce Place
10155 - 102 Street
Edmonton, Alberta T5J 4L4
Phone: (780) 427-5848
Call toll free by dialing 310-0000 first
Fax: (780) 427-1120
E-mail: foiphelpdesk@gov.ab.ca
Web site: www.foip.gov.ab.ca
- Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing
Municipal Advisory Services
18th Floor, Commerce Place
10155 - 102 Street
Edmonton, Alberta T5K 4L4
Phone: (780) 422-8834 (call toll free by dialing 310-0000 first)
Fax: (780) 422-4923
E-mail: wilma.sisk@gov.ab.ca
Municipal Advisors
Sandra Dohei, phone (780) 422-8104
Rick Grimson: (780) 422-8098
Niven Parliament: (780) 422-8110
Call toll free by dialing 310-0000 first
- Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner
#410, 9925 - 109 Street
Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2J8
Phone: (780) 422-6860
Toll free: 1-888-878-4044
Fax: (780) 422-5682
E-mail: generalinfo@oipc.ab.ca
Web site: www.oipc.ab.ca
- Queen's Printer
Edmonton: (780) 427-4952
Calgary: (403) 297-6251
Call toll free by dialing 310-0000 first
E-mail: qp@gov.ab.ca
Web site: www.qp.gov.ab.ca
- FOIP Act and Regulation
- FOIP Guidelines and Practices
- Annotated FOIP Act
|
|