A lawsuit alleging that State Auditor Rob Sand violated Iowa’s public records law can continue after the Iowa Supreme Court issued an opinion Friday directing a lower court to hold further proceedings to determine if the auditor’s office illegally withheld some emails.
Justice Matthew McDermott wrote in the unanimous opinion that the auditor’s office may have unreasonably delayed the release of one email and may have improperly applied exemptions to withhold others, and that the district court should get more information from Sand to determine if he violated the public records law.
Alan Ostergren, the head of a conservative law firm called the Kirkwood Institute, sued Sand, a Democrat, after the auditor’s office withheld some emails that Ostergren requested in 2021 under the state’s public records law. Ostergren requested auditor’s office emails with and about a liberal blogger and an Associated Press reporter.
After privately reviewing the emails that were withheld, a district court judge ruled in favor of Sand, saying the auditor’s office could keep them secret under exemptions in the public records law.
Ostergren appealed that decision to the Iowa Supreme Court.
In the opinion released Friday, McDermott wrote the Court is “not persuaded” by the auditor’s argument that nine of the emails must be kept confidential under an exemption for communications received in the course of an audit or examination.
“The auditor’s office should present evidence for each email to establish that the specific email was actually received in the course of an audit or examination, such as the specific audit or examination to which it relates, a copy of any audit report, and the start and end dates of the audit or examination,” McDermott wrote.
He also wrote the auditor’s office may have violated the public records law by unreasonably delaying the release of an email from the auditor’s chief of staff, John McCormally, to liberal journalist Laura Belin related to Sand’s claim that Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds violated state law by appearing in taxpayer-funded public service announcements about slowing the spread of COVID-19. A state panel later found Reynolds did not violate the law.
Belin quoted from the email on her blog, but the auditor’s office did not provide the email to Ostergren until months after he filed a lawsuit.
The Court said Ostergren can continue his effort to get the auditor’s office to pay a civil penalty, attorney fees and court costs if the district court determines Sand violated the public records law.
The Iowa Supreme Court ruled Sand did not violate the law by withholding a separate email sent by a member of the public because “the auditor’s office could reasonably believe that the sender would be discouraged from making such communications if the auditor’s office publicly disclosed it.”
Editor's note: This story was corrected to reflect that the Kirkwood Institute's records request for emails with and about two investigative reporters was not only asking for emails related to the audit of the governor's PSA on COVID-19. An earlier version of this story wrongly implied the records request was only for communications related to the COVID-19 PSA audit.
