Transparency News 8/23/16

 

A federal court in Virginia has awarded the Virginia-Pilot $100,000 in attorney’s fees for its suit against the FBI to disclose records concerning its investigation of the deaths of several agents in an accident.  The agency initially disclosed 29 pages, but after the Virginia-Pilot filed suit the agency located 889 responsive pages, of which the agency disclosed 10 pages in full and 83 pages in part.  The Virginia-Pilot initially requested $86,260 in fees, but added an additional $39,504 for the additional attorney’s fees litigation.  The court found the Virginia-Pilot was not entitled to fees for time spent on administrative proceedings before it filed suit.  The court noted that “while it may be necessary for Plaintiffs’ attorneys to review actions taken during the administrative proceedings for litigation purposes, tasks completed during administrative proceedings are not compensable under FOIA.”  The court indicated that the litigation on the issue of attorney’s fees was not particularly complicated and that the Virginia-Pilot’s claimed hours were excessive.  The court pointed out that “the issue of a proper award of attorney’s fees is not complex, especially in contrast to the previous contentions in this case.”  The court agreed that the Virginia-Pilot was forced to litigate further to establish that it had substantially prevailed for purposes of eligibility.  The court also found that the Virginia-Pilot could claim time it spent consulting with the New York Times and the Media Law Resource Center.   The court rejected the FBI’s contention that the Virginia-Pilot had not succeeded on many of its claims.  The court, instead, noted that “the degree of success in this matter is not purely indicated by the total number of documents disclosed.  This suit was successful in procuring Defendant’s compliance with FOIA pursuant to the statute’s requirements and provision approving litigation for this purpose.”  (Virginia-Pilot Media Companies v. Department of Justice, Civil Action No. 14-577, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division, Aug. 10)
Leagle, via Access Reports

Lawmakers pledged Monday to close a gap in the oversight of local and regional jails laid bare by the death of 24-year-old Jamycheal Mitchell. Officials’ failure during the past year to explain how Mitchell was allowed to waste away over 101 days at Hampton Roads Regional Jail is unacceptable, said Del. Robert B. Bell, R-Albemarle. Bell said he would consider requiring the results of jail death reviews be released publicly as part of a proposal for lawmakers to take up during the 2017 legislative session.
Richmond Times-Dispatch

A coalition of open-government advocates is raising concerns that the public could be barred from reviewing records and attending meetings held by a new multistate agency responsible for overseeing the safety of the Metro system. The push to create a new state-based safety oversight committee is part of an effort to beef up scrutiny of Metro’s operations and has been a priority for federal officials, who have been frustrated at what they saw as a lack of action by local jurisdictions. Earlier this year, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx threatened to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding from the District, Maryland and Virginia if they failed to create a new oversight body by the end of this year. The proposed legislation does seek give the commission more authority, including the authority to adopt and enforce Metro safety rules, conduct inspections, order “corrective action plans,” impose citations and fines for noncompliance, issue subpoenas during safety-related investigations, and compel the transit agency to “prioritize spending on safety-critical items.” But the confidentiality provisions in the proposed 18-page legislation have open-government experts concerned.
Washington Post



National Stories
​

Over the course of the 23 thousand (and counting!) records requests we’ve filed, MuckRock has seen all sorts of responses. While the overwhelming majority of which have been polite and professional, there are a few that … well, weren’t. But nothing tops this response from a Massachusetts police department, which stands out as the closest we’ve gotten to a middle finger by fax.
MuckRock

The judge overseeing Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s military trial said Monday that a top general must testify about destroying letters that he received from supporters and critics of the soldier who walked off his post in Afghanistan. The judge, Army Col. Jeffery Nance,  expressed skepticism about the relevance of the approximately 100 letters that Gen. Robert B. Abrams put in a “burn bag” to be incinerated, but the judge still decided that the head of U.S. Army Forces command must testify. Abrams has been traveling and has the option to testify in person or by phone at a pretrial hearing this week.
USA Today

Questions surrounding Hillary Clinton’s email practices flared up again, with a Federal District Court judge ordering the State Department to provide a timetable for releasing nearly 15,000 new emails uncovered by the FBI investigation of her personal email account and server while she was secretary of state. The judge, James E. Boasberg, pressed the State Department to accelerate its review of those emails, which were on a disc that the FBI turned over to the department in late July.
New York Times