2024-02-14T13:41:12-06:00 2023-09-30 141442607 BST & CO CPAS LLP 10 BRITISH AMERICAN BLVD LATHAM NY 12110 990 2022-10-01 813942898 GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER INC GOVE 5184343125 PO BOX 7113 ALBANY NY 12224 CAMERON J MACDONALD EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 5184343125 2024-02-13 1 CAMERON MACDONALD 999009999 0 JEREMY COLE P00436330 5184596700 2024-01-22 2 AAL1 IAL1 2022 2023-04-26 12:10:37Z CAMERON J MACDONALD PO BOX 7113 ALBANY NY 12224 240411 0 X GOVJUSTICE.ORG X 2016 NY TO PROTECT TAXPAYERS FROM GOVERNMENT WASTE, NEGLIGENCE, MISAPPROPRIATION, AND OTHER IMPROPER ACTIONS. 6 6 1 6 0 0 174809 240411 0 0 0 0 0 0 174809 240411 0 0 0 0 140159 140193 0 0 0 49030 98251 189189 238444 -14380 1967 0 12015 4628 14676 -4628 -2661 TO PROTECT TAXPAYERS FROM GOVERNMENT WASTE, NEGLIGENCE, MISAPPROPRIATION, AND OTHER IMPROPER ACTIONS. 0 0 175187 LEGAL SERVICES THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER, INC. PROVIDES LEGAL SERVICES TO THOSE SEEKING TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTIONAL RULE OF LAW AND PROMOTE GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A DESCRIPTION OF CASES LITIGATED AND THE RATIONALE FOR THE DETERMINATION THAT THE LITIGATION BENEFITS THE PUBLIC GENERALLY. 175187 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 NY X CAMERON J MACDONALD 5184343125 PO BOX 7113 ALBANY NY 12224 DEBI GHATE BOARD PRESIDENT 5.00 X X 0 0 0 TIMOTHY P HOEFER DIRECTOR 5.00 X 0 0 0 HON ROBERT S SMITH DIRECTOR 5.00 X 0 0 0 JAMES COPLAND DIRECTOR 5.00 X 0 0 0 CAMERON J MACDONALD EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/TREASUR 40.00 X X 131466 0 5163 MARK WALSH SECRETARY 5.00 X X 0 0 0 KENNETH MOLTNER DIRECTOR 5.00 X 0 0 0 JULIE KILLIAN DIRECTOR 5.00 X 0 0 0 131466 0 5163 1 0 0 0 0 240411 240411 240411 0 0 0 130052 97539 32513 10141 7606 2535 63250 47437 15813 248 248 3000 3000 5014 5014 4109 3081 1028 283 283 3600 3600 3063 2152 911 1000 1000 5774 4331 1443 RESEARCH, SUBSCRIPTIONS 6001 6001 FEES 2009 2009 PARKING 900 900 238444 175187 63257 0 12015 0 12015 2768 14676 1860 0 4628 14676 X -4628 -2661 -4628 -2661 0 12015 1967 0 X 0 0 0 X 40383 233747 186217 169534 240411 870292 40383 233747 186217 169534 240411 870292 870292 870292 113005 1.00000 1.00000 X RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY INC SUBSTANTIAL CONTRIBUTOR 125150 GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER HAD A FISCAL SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT WITH EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND TIM HOEFER AND DEBI GHATE ARE MEMBERS ON BOTH BOARDS. 0 EMPIRE CONFIGURATION SUBSIDIARY OF EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY, INC 63250 GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER PAID EMPIRE CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT FEES DURING THE YEAR AND TIM HOEFER AND DEBI GHATE ARE BOARD MEMBERS OF BOTH ORGANIZATIONS. 0 FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11B THE FORM 990 IS DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD MEMBERS WHO REVIEW PRIOR TO FILING. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12C NEW BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS ARE EVALUATED FOR ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND IF IDENTIFIED, ANY INTERESTED PARTIES RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM DELIBERATION OF SUCH RELATIONSHIPS. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19 GOVERNING DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (PART 1 OF 3): THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER DETERMINES WHICH CASES TO ACCEPT BASED ON THE ISSUES INVOLVED AND THE IMPACT FOR THE LITIGANT AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND NOT BASED ON ANY EXPECTATION OF FINANCIAL AWARD OR BENEFIT FOR THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER. IN ADDITION TO LAWSUITS FILED AGAINST PUBLIC BODIES, GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUBMITS PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS TO UNCOVER GOVERNMENT MISAPPROPRIATION, FRAUD, AND ABUSE. IT ALSO PROVIDES INFORMATION TO TAXPAYERS REGARDING TRANSPARENCY RELATING TO PUBLIC RECORDS AND OPEN MEETINGS UNDER STATE LAWS. ROXANNE DELGADO ET AL V. STATE OF NEW YORK ET AL FOUR TAXPAYERS FILED A LAWSUIT IN STATE COURT TO BLOCK UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS BY THE STATE COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION. THE COMMITTEE MOVED TO RAISE STATE LAWMAKERS' BASE PAY BY 64 PERCENT, RADICALLY CHANGE THE RULES SURROUNDING SERVING IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND RAISE THE PAY OF THE GOVERNOR AND OTHER STATE ELECTED OFFICIALS AND APPOINTEES. THE LEGISLATURE VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION BY DELEGATING ITS LAWMAKING POWER TO THE COMMITTEE. LETTING A COMMITTEE SET THE PAY FOR MEMBERS OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY AND SENATE VIOLATES EXPLICIT LANGUAGE IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION. THE LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTIONAL RULE OF LAW AT THE STATE LEVEL. KATHERINE C. SULLIVAN ET AL V. NEW YORK STATE JOINT COMMISSION ON PUBLIC ETHICS ET AL GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUED TO STOP THE STATE'S ABUSE OF POLITICAL POWER THROUGH ITS JOINT COMMISSION ON PUBLIC ETHICS (JCOPE), WHICH IS TASKED WITH REGULATING LOBBYING IN NEW YORK. JCOPE INVESTIGATED KAT SULLIVAN, A RAPE SURVIVOR WHO WAS PUSHING FOR THE PASSAGE OF THE CHILD VICTIMS ACT, FOR WHAT JCOPE DEEMED "UNREGISTERED LOBBYING" IN SUPPORT OF THE LEGISLATION. GIVEN THIS CLEAR ATTEMPT TO CHILL SULLIVAN'S RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER STEPPED IN AND FILED A CASE ON HER BEHALF. JCOPE EVENTUALLY DROPPED ITS INVESTIGATION INTO SULLIVAN THANKS TO GJC'S BACKING. GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER IS CONTINUING TO PURSUE MS. SULLIVAN'S FIRST AMENDMENT CHALLENGE TO NEW YORK'S LOBBYING ACT ON APPEAL. THE LOBBYING ACT IS OVERBROAD AND VAGUE ON ITS FACE AND IT IS NOT NARROWLY TAILORED TO ADDRESS A COMPELLING STATE INTEREST. THE STATE DEEMED MS. SULLIVAN'S ACTIVITIES GRASSROOTS LOBBYING, BUT THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO INVOLVED FOR THE STATE TO HAVE ANY INTEREST. THE CASE REPRESENTS AN ABUSE OF POWER BY THE STATE THAT THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER IS WORKING TO STOP. ELIZABETH CELLA ET AL V. SUFFOLK COUNTY FOR SEVERAL YEARS, LONG ISLAND'S SUFFOLK COUNTY AVOIDED RAISING GENERAL FUND TAXES BY IMPOSING NEW OR INCREASED FEES ON CERTAIN RESIDENTS. T HE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A LAWSUIT IN THE STATE SUPREME COURT TO PUT AN END TO THE ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF RAISING GENERAL REVENUE THROUGH SUCH FEES. SUFFOLK COUNTY SKIRTED THE LAW BY INCREASING FEES FAR BEYOND THEIR LEGAL LIMIT. UNDER STATE LAW, FEES CHARGED MUST NOT EXCEED THE COST OF SERVICE. EXCESS FEES USED FOR GENERAL REVENUE PURPOSES ARE UNAUTHORIZED TAXES. WORSE, THESE FEES UNFAIRLY TARGET A SUBSET OF THE POPULATIONNEW HOMEBUYERS, FOR EXAMPLETO RAISE REVENUE FOR EVERYONE. THE MOST EGREGIOUS CATEGORY IS FEES FOR FILING REAL ESTATE DOCUMENTS. THE TAX MAP VERIFICATION FEES IN QUESTION WERE PROJECTED TO BRING IN $65 MILLION IN 2017FROM AN AGENCY THAT COSTS JUST OVER $1 MILLION PER YEAR TO RUN. THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER EXISTS TO STAND UP FOR TAXPAYERS AND ENSURE THAT GOVERNMENT PLAYS BY THE RULES. ROBERT ARRIGO V. THOMAS P. DINAPOLI IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUED ON BEHALF OF A TAXPAYER TO HAVE THE STATE LEGISLATURE COMPLY WITH THE STATE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS FOR SETTING THE GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR COMPENSATION AMOUNTS. THE CONSTITUTION ALLOWS GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR SALARIES TO BE SET BY JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE LEGISLATURE. IT ALSO FORBIDS THE LEGISLATURE FROM INCREASING OR DECREASING THEIR SALARY AMOUNTS DURING THEIR ELECTED TERMS TO ENSURE THEIR INDEPENDENCE AS STATE OFFICERS. THE CURRENT STATE CONSTITUTION'S PROVISIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW AND POLICY IN THE STATE FOR OVER TWO HUNDRED YEARS. IN 2019, HOWEVER, THE LEGISLATURE PASSED A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION PROVIDING RETROACTIVE RAISES TO THE GOVERNOR AND THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DURING THEIR ELECTED TERMS. GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUED TO STOP THE COMPTROLLER FROM UNLAWFULLY EXPENDING STATE FUNDS ON UNCONSTITUTIONAL HIGHER SALARIES. THE LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTIONAL RULE OF LAW AT THE STATE LEVEL. DIANE ECKEL V. NASSAU COUNTY LIKE MANY OTHERS IN NASSAU COUNTY, DIANE ECKEL GRIEVES HER REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS. THE STAKES ARE HIGH. TAXPAYERS CAN SAVE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN SUCCESSFUL CHALLENGES. BUT KNOWING HOW THE COUNTY DETERMINES VALUES IS CRITICAL TO MAKING A CHALLENGE. PARTICULARLY HELPFUL ARE THE COMPARABLE SALES THE COUNTY USES TO DETERMINE VALUE. ECKEL MADE A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW REQUEST FOR THOSE COMPS AND NASSAU COUNTY REFUSED TO DISCLOSE THEM. THE COUNTY ARGUED THAT COMPS ARE ASSESSOR OPINIONS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. THIS UNJUSTIFIED NONDISCLOSURE LEFT ECKEL COMPLETELY IN THE DARK. ECKEL SUED FOR A COURT RULING THAT COMPS ARE "FACTUAL DATA" THAT SHOULD BE SHARED. THE NASSAU COUNTY SUPREME COURT AGREED AND ORDERED THEM TO BE DISCLOSED. REGARDING THE COUNTY'S DELIBERATIVE PROCESS DEFENSE, THE COURT "DOES NOT SEE HOW PROVIDING THE COMPS WILL IN ANYWAY INFRINGE UPON THE DELIBERATIVE PROCESS. ECKEL IS NOT, AND WOULD NOT BE, ENTITLED TO ANY INFORMATION THAT WOULD INDICATE WHY [THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMISSION] CHOSE THE COMPS, AND HOW THESE COMPS ASSISTED THEM IN REACHING A DETERMINATION." THIS CASE IS IMPORTANT TO THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY AS PRECEDENT THAT NEW YORKERS STATE-WIDE CAN USE IN CHALLENGING ASSESSMENTS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (PART 2 OF 3): QUEENSRAIL CORPORATION V. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUED ON BEHALF OF QUEENSRAIL CORPORATION, WHICH ADVOCATES FOR REACTIVATING THE FORMER LONG ISLAND RAILROAD ROCKAWAY BEACH BRANCH THAT HAS BEEN IDLE IN NEW YORK CITY SINCE 1962. IT HAS DEVELOPED AND PROPOSED A PLAN FOR "QUEENSLINK" A DUAL RAIL AND PARK PROJECT TO PROVIDE A NEW NORTH-SOUTH TRANSIT LINK IN QUEENS FOR BOTH RAIL AND TRAIL USE. THE QUEENSLINK CORRIDOR CAN PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN IMPROVING MOVEMENT, ACCESSIBILITY, AND EFFICIENCY OF TRAVEL WITHIN QUEENS, BY PROVIDING MUCH NEEDED INTEGRATION OF QUEENS COMMUNITIES, BY CONNECTING THE EXISTING EAST-WEST SUBWAY AND COMMUTER RAIL LINES TO PROVIDE ACCESS ACROSS THE CITY. IN 2018, A METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (MTA) CONSULTANT PROVIDED AN ASSESSMENT, AT A SKETCH PLANNING LEVEL, OF THE PHYSICAL ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONAL FEASIBILITY AND ORDER-OF-MAGNITUDE COSTS OF REACTIVATING THE ROCKAWAY BEACH BRANCH FOR SUBWAY OR COMMUTER RAIL USE BETWEEN QUEENS AND MIDTOWN MANHATTAN. THE CONSULTANT ESTIMATED THE COST TO REACTIVATE THE ROCKAWAY BEACH BRANCH AS A SUBWAY LINE TO BE $8.1 BILLION. QUEENSRAIL CONTENDS THAT THE COST SHOULD BE CLOSER TO $3.4 TO $3.7 BILLION. QUEENSRAIL SUBMITTED A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW REQUEST FOR THE CONSULTANT'S RECORDS TO SUPPORT THE HIGHER COST. MTA REFUSED TO DISCLOSE CERTAIN RECORDS AS NOT BELONGING TO MTA AND BEING THE CONSULTANT'S WORK PRODUCT EXCEPTED FROM DISCLOSURE. GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUED ON BEHALF QUEENSRAIL BECAUSE A GOVERNMENT AGENCY SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RECORDS OUT OF THE PUBLIC'S REACH BY OUTSOURCING ITS WORK TO CONSULTANTS AND THE PUBLIC IS ENTITLED TO KNOW THE DATA USED TO MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION OR DETERMINATION ON A PUBLIC MATTER. THIS LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO PROMOTE GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY BY MAKING THE FACTS UNDERLYING DECISION-MAKING AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND NOT HIDDEN IN A CONSULTANT'S WORK PRODUCT. SIMON V. KINSELLA ET AL V. LONG ISLAND POWER AUTHORITY ET AL THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF LONG ISLAND RATEPAYERS AGAINST THE LONG ISLAND POWER AUTHORITY AND SOUTH FORK WIND, FORMALLY KNOWN AS DEEPWATER WIND SOUTH FORK, FOR VIOLATING NEW YORK STATE'S PROCUREMENT LAWS. SPECIFICALLY, SOUTH FORK WIND DID NOT MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED IN THE SOUTH FORK REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. SOUTH FORK WIND'S PROPOSED PROJECT FOR OFFSHORE WIND TURBINES WOULD COST THE LONG ISLAND POWER AUTHORITY (LIPA) CUSTOMERS AN ESTIMATED $1.6 BILLION FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY OVER 20 YEARS, AT A SUBSTANTIAL PREMIUM PER KILOWATT HOUR TO OTHER POWER SOURCES AT THE TIME. LIPA REQUESTED PROPOSALS FOR LOCAL RESOURCES TO MEET PEAK ELECTRICAL DEMAND DURING SUMMER AFTERNOONS AND EVENINGS WHEN RESIDENTIAL AIR CONDITIONING USE DRIVES ELECTRICITY DEMAND ON LONG ISLAND'S SOUTH FORK. ANY POWER PRODUCTION RESOURCE NEEDED TO BE AVAILABLE ON DEMAND AND COULD NOT REQUIRE NEW TRANSMISSION FACILITIES. LIPA, HOWEVER, SIGNED A POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH FORK WIND FOR AN OFFSHORE WIND PROJECT THAT WAS NOT RESPONSIVE TO LIPA'S RFP. NOT ONLY IS THE OFFSHORE WIND PROJECT NOT A LOCAL RESOURCEIT IS LOCATED 30 MILES OFF LONG ISLAND, BUT IT CAN PROVIDE POWER ONLY INTERMITTENTLY (ESPECIALLY DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS) AND REQUIRES A NEW 60-MILE-LONG ONSHORE/OFFSHORE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM AND RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE. GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER SUED TO STOP LIPA'S WASTE AND ABUSE THAT WILL HURT ALL ITS CUSTOMERS ON LONG ISLAND WITH HIGHER ENERGY COSTS. JOHN AND KATE EISENHAUER V. WATERTOWN CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION COMMISSIONER AFTER THEIR SCHOOL DISTRICT REJECTED A BALLOT PROPOSITION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE EISENHAUERS TO REMOVE A LIBRARY TAX FOR A NON-SCHOOL LIBRARY. THE DISTRICT DETERMINED THAT THE EISENHAUERS DID NOT OBTAIN ENOUGH SIGNATURES, CITING A STATUTORY PROVISION THAT ALSO REQUIRES ANY CHANGES TO THE TAX LEVY TO BE APPROVED BY THE LIBRARY TRUSTEES. BUT SCHOOL DISTRICT VOTERS HAVE NO SAY IN WHO IS APPOINTED TO THE LIBRARY AND THE DISTRICT CANNOT TELL THE EISENHAUERS HOW MANY SIGNATURES THEY NEED UNDER THE FORMULA IN THE STATUTORY PROVISION. HOWEVER, IN PRIOR LITIGATION OVER THE DISTRICT IMPLEMENTING THE TAX IT ASSURED AN APPELLATE COURT THAT THE EISENHAUERS HAD THE ABILITY TO PETITION FOR A BALLOT PROPOSITION TO END THE TAX. BY REVERSING ITS POSITION THE DISTRICT CONFIRMED THE EISENHAUERS' ARGUMENT THAT LIBRARY TAX IS AN EXAMPLE OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY V. NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A PETITION UNDER THE NEW YORK FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW FOR STATEWIDE GRADES 3-8 ASSESSMENT SCORES. NYSED INFORMED EMPIRE CENTER THAT "DUE TO THE SCOPE AND NATURE OF THE REQUEST, AND THE EFFORT TO IDENTIFY AND COLLATE THE APPROPRIATE RECORDS," IT WOULD NOT BE RESPONDING TO EMPIRE CENTER'S FOIL REQUEST UNTIL MONTHS LATER. NYSED VIOLATED THE LAW BY FAILING TO PROVIDE EMPIRE CENTER WITH A REASONABLE DATE CERTAIN FOR GRANTING THE REQUEST AND AN ADEQUATE WRITTEN EXPLANATION FOR ITS INABILITY TO GRANT THE REQUEST WITHIN 20 DAYS OF ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF EMPIRE CENTER'S REQUEST. EMPIRE CENTER APPEALED THE DETERMINATION AND EXPLAINED THAT THE RECORDS REQUEST DESCRIBED THE SAME INFORMATION NYSED POSTED IN PRIOR YEARS BY EARLY FALL IN THE FORM OF A "COMPREHENSIVE 3-8 ELA AND MATH RESEARCHER FILE, [T]HE 3-8 ASSESSMENT DATABASE WITH ALL PUBLIC STATEWIDE, DISTRICT AND SCHOOL LEVEL AGGREGATE DATA OF THE TEST RESULTS." THE DATABASE IN PRIOR YEARS COULD BE ACCESSED IN A SPREADSHEET CONTAINING THE INFORMATION EMPIRE CENTER REQUESTED. EMPIRE CENTER EXPRESSED ITS CONCERN THAT NYSED WAS USING A FICTIONAL "PRELIMINARY" VERSUS "FINAL DISTINCTION FOR TEST RESULTS DATA AS A PRETEXT NOT TO DISCLOSE THE RECORDS. NYSED MANAGED TO COLLATE OR AGGREGATE THE DATA IN PRE-PANDEMIC YEARS, AS EARLY AS JULYIN 2012 AND 2016AND NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER, AND NOT MAKE ANY DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DATA RELEASES. GOLDWATER INSTITUTE V. RYE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A PETITION FOR A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW REQUEST GOLDWATER MADE TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUESTING PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO A CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL AND A RELATED RACE, INCLUSIVITY & COMMUNITY TASK FORCE ("TASK FORCE"), INCLUDING COMMUNICATIONS TO AND FROM THE TASK FORCE INSIDE THE DISTRICT ABOUT THE "SEVEN COMMUNITY NORMS CREATED BY THE TASK FORCE. THE DISTRICT RESPONDED TO THE RECORDS REQUEST BUT DID NOT COMPLETELY DISCLOSE THE REQUESTED RECORDS. THE DISTRICT PROVIDED ONE EMAIL, THE PROPOSAL FROM THE CONSULTANT AND MISCELLANEOUS NOTES FROM TASK FORCE MEETINGS. IT DID NOT PROVIDE ANY EMAILS BETWEEN TASK FORCE MEMBERS AND DISTRICT ADMINISTRATORS OR ANY OTHER RECORDS RESPONSIVE TO THE REQUEST. RESPONDING TO GOLDWATER'S QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THE DISTRICT'S DISCLOSURE, THE DISTRICT STATED THAT THERE WERE NO OTHER RESPONSIVE DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS. THE DISTRICT, HOWEVER, DID NOT CERTIFY THAT IT MADE A DILIGENT SEARCH. AND THE DISTRICT EXCLUDED ALL EMAILS IN ITS RESPONSE IN THEIR ENTIRETY. SUCH A BROAD EXCLUSION VIOLATED THE DISTRICT'S DISCLOSURE OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW. AT MINIMUM, THE PARTIES TO, TIMES OF, AND SUBJECT LINES OF EMAILS ARE THEMSELVES FACTUAL DATA THAT MUST BE DISCLOSED. THIS LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO PROMOTE GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY BY MAKING THE FACTS UNDERLYING DECISION-MAKING AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (PART 3 OF 3): EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY V. OFFICE OF PAYROLL ADMINISTRATION THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A PETITION FOR EMPIRE CENTER'S PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST TO OPA RELATING TO EMPLOYEE UNION MEMBERSHIP COUNTS AND EMPLOYEE UNION DUES AND AGENCY FEE DEDUCTIONS MAINTAINED IN OPA'S PAYROLL SYSTEM. THE RECORDS NEEDED TO EXIST FOR OPA TO MAKE CORRECT DEDUCTIONS FROM EMPLOYEE WAGES AND TO REMIT ACCURATE AMOUNTS TO ITS EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS. YET OPA DID NOT PROVIDE THAT PUBLIC INFORMATION. RATHER THAN DISCLOSE THE RECORDS, OPA RESPONDED WITH A REQUEST FOR A CHECK OR MONEY ORDER FOR $28,097.25 TO COVER THE COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION OF THE RECORDS. OPA PROVIDED HOURLY BREAKDOWNS OF TIME FOR REQUIREMENTS GATHERING, DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT AND UNIT TEST, SYSTEMS TESTING, AND DEPLOYMENT TOTALING 462 HOURS OF AGENCY EMPLOYEE TIME. THE OPA COST ESTIMATE REPRESENTED MORE THAN SEVEN WEEKS OF FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT WORK TO FULFILL THE REQUEST. OPA DID NOT PROVIDE EMPIRE CENTER WITH FURTHER DETAIL OF THE WORK OR ANY OTHER INFORMATION EXPLAINING WHY THE WORK MUST BE DONE. EMPIRE CENTER APPEALED OPA'S DETERMINATION AND NOTED THAT OPA FAILED TO PROVIDE ANY DETAILS SUPPORTING EACH CATEGORY OF WORK IN OPA'S LIST. EMPIRE CENTER ALSO NOTED THAT OPA PROVIDED NO INFORMATION ABOUT OPA'S OPERATING SYSTEM OR THE DATABASE OR PLATFORM WHERE THE DATA RESIDES. NOR DID OPA EXPLAIN HOW GENERATING A REPORT FROM ITS RECORDS WOULD DIFFER FROM THE PAYROLL DATA EXPORTS TO DOWNLOADABLE SPREADSHEETS OPA MAKES AVAILABLE ONLINE EACH YEAR. EMPIRE CENTER ADDED THAT IT HAS RECEIVED THE SAME REQUESTED INFORMATION FROM OTHER AGENCIES IN THE STATE, INCLUDING THE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, WITH NO ISSUES. IN SHORT, OPA DID NOT MEET ITS BURDEN UNDER THE LAW TO STATE A REASON FOR ITS INABILITY TO GRANT EMPIRE CENTER'S REQUEST. THIS LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO PROMOTE GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY BY MAKING A GOVERNMENT AGENCY MEET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF FOR NOT DISCLOSING RECORDS UNDER THE LAW. G. TRAVIS WHITEHEAD V. WARREN COUNTY THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A PETITION FOR A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW REQUEST FOR A RECORD REFLECTING THE FACTS UNDERLYING THE COUNTY'S DECISION TO TAKE NO ACTION ON A WORKPLACE VIOLENCE COMPLAINT WHITEHEAD LODGED AGAINST A COUNTY SUPERVISOR. THE COUNTY OUTSOURCED ITS INVESTIGATION OF THE COMPLAINT TO AN OUTSIDE LAW FIRM. THE LAW FIRM PURPORTEDLY PROVIDED THE RESULTS OF ITS INVESTIGATION TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION UNDER THE COUNTY'S POLICY. WHITEHEAD ASSERTED THE COUNTY WAS WRONGFULLY WITHHOLDING THE LAW FIRM'S REPORTCONTAINING THE FACTS IT GATHEREDIN ITS ENTIRETY AND SOUGHT DISCLOSURE OF THE FACTS UNCOVERED IN THE INVESTIGATION THAT THE COUNTY USED TO MAKE ITS DECISION. THIS LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO PROMOTE GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY BY MAKING THE FACTS UNDERLYING DECISION-MAKING AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND NOT HIDDEN IN A CONSULTANT'S WORK PRODUCT. EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY ET AL V. LETITIA JAMES THE GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER FILED A PETITION TO COMPEL THE NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL TO DESTROY IRS FORM 990 DONOR SCHEDULES FILED WITH ITS CHARITIES BUREAU AND TO COMPEL THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO STOP COLLECTING REDACTED VERSIONS OF THE SCHEDULES. UNDER NEW YORK LAW, CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS OPERATING IN THE STATE MUST REGISTER AND FILE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS WITH THE CHARITIES BUREAU. FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS REQUIRED REGISTERED ORGANIZATIONS TO SUBMIT COPIES OF THEIR COMPLETE IRS FORM 990S WITH SCHEDULES AS PART OF THEIR ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS. THOSE FORM 990 SCHEDULES INCLUDE SCHEDULE BS, WHICH GENERALLY CONTAIN DONOR NAMES AND ADDRESSES AS WELL AS DONATION AMOUNTS FOR DONORS CONTRIBUTING $5,000 OR MORE IN AGGREGATE. IN AFP V. BONTA, DECIDED ON JULY 1, 2021, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CONCLUDED THAT THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REQUIREMENT THAT CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS FILE THEIR IRS 990 SCHEDULE B IMPOSED "A WIDESPREAD BURDEN ON DONORS' ASSOCIATIONAL RIGHTS." THE COURT CONCLUDED THAT CALIFORNIA'S REQUIREMENT WAS NOT NARROWLY TAILORED TO ACHIEVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S INTEREST IN INVESTIGATING FRAUD. THE COURT ALSO CONCLUDED THAT CALIFORNIA'S INTEREST IN ADMINISTRATIVE CONVENIENCE WAS NOT COMPELLING ENOUGH TO JUSTIFY THE BURDEN ITS REQUIREMENT PLACED UPON DONORS' ASSOCIATIONAL RIGHTS. THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT "UP-FRONT COLLECTION OF SCHEDULE BS IS FACIALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL." THE SUPREME COURT NOTED THAT NEW YORK WAS ONE OF THREE STATES OTHER THAN CALIFORNIA THAT COLLECTED SCHEDULE BS UP-FRONT. THE CHARITIES BUREAU PURPORTED TO STOP COLLECTING SCHEDULE BS AFTER THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN AFP V. BONTA. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FORMALLY AMENDED THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS EFFECTIVE MARCH 16, 2022. THE PUBLIC, HOWEVER, HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE DOES NOT MAINTAIN ADEQUATE SECURITY OVER THE SCHEDULE BS THAT IT MAY STILL POSSESS. IN AUGUST 2022, AN UNREDACTED SCHEDULE B WITH A NEW YORK CHARITIES BUREAU STAMP WAS PUBLISHED IN A POLITICO NEWS MAGAZINE STORY, REVEALING CONFIDENTIAL DONOR INFORMATION FOR NIKKI HALEY'S NONPROFIT POLICY ADVOCACY GROUP, STAND FOR AMERICA, INC. THE LAWSUIT IS CONSISTENT WITH GOVERNMENT JUSTICE CENTER'S MISSION TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTIONAL RULE OF LAW AT THE STATE LEVEL.