COMMENTARY: FOIA Costs Put Public Info out of Reach
City and College recently required hundreds of dollars to fill basic requests
Earlier this year in Richmond, a bill was introduced which would cap the amount of money that local governments in Virginia can charge for responses to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Unfortunately, the effort, led by State Senator Danica Roem (30th District), died once again in committee. A report by Charlotte Rene Woods in the Virginia Mercury noted that Senator Roem believes the high costs charged by local governments are a barrier for public oversight of their governments. “You’re making it so that your constituents of limited means don’t have a right to know what their government’s doing,” Roem said according to the reporting.
The fact is that much of the information people want to know is often hidden away from public view by matter of practice and policy. That’s where the FOIA request comes into the picture. Over the past month, I’ve filed FOIA requests with both the City of Williamsburg and the College of William and Mary, only to come up against required fees totalling over $300 each, putting the information out of reach for me, and thus you too.
In order to raise public awareness and make the information we report accessible to anyone, all of the new content in the newsletter is available on our website free for 7 days after it’s published; community contributions will always remain free. It’s been rewarding to watch the growth of our subscriber base in just a few months, confirming that others are also committed to open and honest discussions about the future of our communities. This is the case across our entire region, as we have readers in Williamsburg, James City County and York County. We have subscribers from other local news outlets. Almost a quarter of our subscribers are from out of state. And because of your interest, the Williamsburg Independent is already listed as one of the top news sites on our hosting platform, Substack.
Despite this growing support, it’s still safe to say the Williamsburg Independent has “limited means.” While some news outlets cater to advertisers, the WI is 100% dependent on our subscribers — not ads, not grants, not sponsorships. While others defer to power brokers, we’re only accountable to our readers.
We certainly don’t reprint press releases or just accept the information provided in official communications. Part of the job of delivering fact-based, original news and commentary is watching public meetings and digging through information and data. Often, there’s a nugget or two buried in hundreds of pages of official documents, or something pertinent said during a three hour meeting. But sometimes, to tell the whole story, more detail is needed. This is why acquiring previously undisclosed information is imperative for effective public oversight.
Below is my account of several recent instances where I believe the cost to acquire relevant public information was unnecessarily prohibitive.
City of Williamsburg FOIA response
The City funds a program called the Tourism Promotion Contingency Fund. The program was established a decade ago by the City Council to attract out-of-town visitors. A presentation about the program was recently given to the City Council by economic development staff. The presentation included a summary of the program’s recipients and data about the amount of each was awarded over the past decade. Yet, at the time of this writing, the only reference to the program on the City’s website is supposedly data from 2023, yet even that link is broken.
Because it was difficult to find relevant information about this discretionary program, I want to know how recipients were chosen to receive funds. I believe it’s reasonable to understand how and why the City supports certain organizations and not others. In order to tell the whole story, a review of correspondence between staff, City Council and applicants is necessary. Thus the reason for my FOIA request regarding this tourism-related program.
The correspondence with the City of Williamsburg about a recent FOIA request about the Tourism Promotion Contingency Fund can be downloaded below:
Initially, I requested all information regarding this program dating back to its inception. Admittedly, that was swinging for the fences and the $1,002.57 cost I was given reflected that. In this case, I tried to refine my request in order to make it more affordable. So I decided to focus on the center of Williamsburg’s government, the City Manager, Andrew Trivette. At that time, I was informed that the City’s secretive policy — using a legal, but not required, executive privilege clause — is to refuse all disclosure of communications from the City Manager. I’ve written in the past why this standard refusal to provide his correspondence is quite problematic.
In a further attempt to reduce the cost, I requested that my inquiry be limited to correspondence of City Council Members related to the fund. The price for that information was $550.11. In one last attempt to receive any relevant information from the City regarding their deliberation and selection process for this program, I asked for the underlying data presented in a graph to the City Council by the City’s tourism manager. Obviously, this was information already collected, compiled and summarized, yet the cost to receive the information was $324.63. I contend a figure this high for data that’s been summarized and presented to the City Council puts it out of reach for the typical resident in our city, just as Senator Roem described.
Overall, I find it difficult to understand the City’s policy for charging for FOIA requests. In another recent example, I received information regarding the proposed splash park — as limited as it was — without charge (though I’m guessing that won’t happen again).
The correspondence with City of Williamsburg related to a recent FOIA request about the children’s splash park can be downloaded below:
When I asked for an explanation of fees being charged in some instances, but not others, I was pointed to a FOIA-related page on the website that didn’t answer my question.
If the City can and will provide requested information for free in some instances, why not make that the standard policy? They can still charge fees when absolutely necessary. And while they’re at it, go ahead and get rid of the secretive refusal to divulge any of the City Manager’s activities.
William & Mary FOIA response
In February 2020, the College commissioned a “comprehensive Housing and Dining Master Plan.” Five years later, the College now states that the 10 year plan will ultimately wind up with the same number of beds as before. This decision leaves many of their neighbors scratching their heads because of the College’s student body growth. In fact, according to the most recent statistics on the William and Mary website, in the period between 2013-2023, the school’s undergraduate enrollment increased by 11.2%, totalling 6,887 in 2023. During the same period, graduate enrollment increased by 38%, totalling 2,857 in Fall 2022.
Many believe this growth has left the College with a shortage of beds, which the school’s master plan will not adequately address. Reporting in The Flat Hat by Lisa Coleman, Shradha Dinesh, and Abhayprad Jha back in 2023 describes a situation where 500 students were placed on a wait list for housing. Though College administrators point out that all students on the waitlist each year eventually get assigned housing, the reason is likelky because many students decide to find housing elsewhere due to the uncertainty of the school’s housing supply and decisions.
Against this background, I tried to acquire correspondence to and from the College’s Senior Associate Vice President for Communications, Brian Whitson, regarding student housing. My request was for information dating back to 2020, when the master plan was first commissioned. As the head of communications for the College, it’s reasonable to think Whitson was involved in both decision making and communication about the housing issue, as well as concerns of students and neighbors. It’s also reasonable to believe that Whitson might have corresponded with other community stakeholders, including representatives of the City, which is relevant to understanding the problem and the response to it.
The correspondence from William & Mary related to a recent FOIA request related to student housing can be downloaded below:
The price quote to gather and review the correspondence in question was estimated at $350. The College’s FOIA representative offered to work with me to reduce the scope of my request, and thus the cost, but I have not taken them up on the offer. One reason is that I don’t want to get in a negotiation with government officials every time I file a FOIA. The other reason is that I believe that all the information requested of the College is likely to be relevant in understanding the dynamics of student housing and its effect on other residents in the City. Because of this, I don’t feel it’s appropriate to alter the request as that might preclude information necessary to write a complete and accurate account of the situation. Though I was unable to write the original story as of now, the details of the College’s response to my inquiry are also relevant.
Public FOIA database
I am working with another local, independent news source to develop a public database of local FOIA requests and responses. We intend for the information to be free to the public, as well as other news outlets. If you’d like to share any FOIA information that you might have collected in the past, please let me know.
(Update 3-14-25: Corrected mistake identifying Danica Roem as a Delegate when in fact, she is a State Senator representing the 30th District. Senator Roem served as a Delegate from 2018-2024, and won election to the Senate in 2023.)
(Update 3-15-25: fixed grammar)
George Arbogust is Founder and Editor of the Williamsburg Independent.Consider buying him a cup of coffee.