Lisa
Madigan
KI"
I'()
RN
ISI'.(
HN
E
RAI.
OFFICE
OF
THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
S'
IA'
I'
E
OF
ILLINOIS
November
14,
2018
PUBLIC
ACCESS
OPINION
18-
016
Request
for
Review
2018
PAC
54236)
FREEDOM
OF
INFORMATION
ACT:
Disclosure
of
Records
of
Traffic
Crashes
Involving
Minor
Passengers
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Hupy
and
Abraham
6952
Rote
Road
Suite
200
Rockford,
Illinois
61107
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
Chief
of
Police
Rock
Island
Police
Department
1212
Fifth
Avenue
Rock
Island,
Illinois
61201
Dear
Mr.
Carlson
and
Mr.
VenHuizen:
This
is
a
binding opinion
issued
by
the
Attorney
General
pursuant
to
section
9.
5(
0
of
the
Freedom
of
Information
Act (
FOIA) (
5
ILCS
140/
9.
5(
0 (
West
2016)).
For
the
reasons
discussed
below,
this
office
concludes
that
the
Rock
Island
Police
Department'
s (
Department)
denial
of
Ms.
Barbara
Forster'
s
July
17,
2018,
FOIA
request
for
a
copy
of
a
traffic
accident
report
violated
the
requirements
of
FOIA.
BACKGROUND
On
July
17,
2018,
Ms.
Forster,
on
behalf
of
the
Hupy
and
Abraham
law
firm,
submitted
a
FOIA
request
to
the
Department
seeking
a
copy
of
Report
Number
2018- 007633,
a
500
South
Second
Street.
Springfield,
Illinois
62706 • (
217)
782-
1090 • "
ITV: (
877)
844-
5461 •
Fax: (
217) 782-
7046
100
West
Randolph
Street.
Chicago,
Illinois
60601 • (
312) 814-
3000 •
TTY: (
800) 964-
3013 •
Fax: (
312)
814-
3806
601
South
University
Avenue.
Spire
102.
Carbondale,
Illinois
62901 • (
618).
529-
640(
1 •
TTY: (
877)
675-
9339 •
Fax: (
618)
529-
6416
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
2
c]
rash
report
for
accident
on
7/
4/
2018
at
18th
Ave.
and
43rd
St.[ ]
Rock
Island
Illinois."
i
In
a
letter
dated
July
19,
2018,
the
Department
cited
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
Juvenile
Court
Act (
JCA)
705
ILCS
405/
1-
7(
A) (
West
2016),
as
amended
by
Public
Act
100-
285,
effective
January
1,
2018)
as
its
basis
for
denying
the
request,
asserting
that "
all
juvenile
records"
are
sealed.
2
On
July
30,
2018,
this
office
received
via
e-
mail
a
Request
for
Review
from
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson,
on
behalf
of
Hupy
and
Abraham,
contesting
the
Department'
s
denial
of
Ms.
Forster'
s
FOIA
request.
3
Mr.
Carlson'
s
correspondence
stated
that
the
records
concern:
a]
rear -
end
motor
vehicle
accident
that
resulted
in
a
traffic
citation
being
issued
to
an
adult
driver.
Although
there
were
some
minor
passengers
whose
names
are
on
the
police
report,
to
my
knowledge
none
of
them
were
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody.
Their
names
were
merely
listed
on
a
report,
and
therefore
705
ILCS
405/
1-
7(
A)
does
not
apply.[
41
On
August
1,
2018,
the
Public
Access
Bureau
sent
a
copy
of
the
Request
for
Review
to
the
Department
and
asked
it
to
provide
copies
of
the
records
it
withheld
for
this
office'
s
confidential
review,
together
with
a
detailed
explanation
of
the
factual
and
legal
bases
for
the
applicability
of
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA.
5
On
August
7,
2018,
legal
counsel
for
the.
Department
provided
this
office
with
a
written
answer
and
copies
of
the
withheld
records
for
case
2018-
007633,
including
traffic
crash
and
incident/
investigation
reports.
On
August
7,
Rock
Island]
Police -
Freedom
of
Information
Request (
FOIA) —
Submission #
964
from
Barbara
Forster,
Hupy
and
Abraham, (
July
17,
2018). •
Letter
from
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen,
Chief
of
Police,
Rock
Island,
Illinois [
Police
Department],
to
Barbara
Forster,
Hupy
and [
Abraham] (
July
19,
2018).
E-
mail
from
James
D..
Carlson,
Attorney
At
Law,
Hupy
and
Abraham,
to
Public
Access [
Bureau,
Office
of
the
Attorney
General] (
July
30,
2018).
4E -
mail
from
James
D.
Carlson,
Attorney
At
Law,
Hupy
and
Abraham,
to
Public
Access [
Bureau,
Office
of
the
Attorney
General] (
July
30,
2018).
5Letter
from
Matt
Hartman,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Public
Access
Bureau,
Office
of
the
Attorney
General,
to
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen,
Chief
of
Police,
Rock
Island
Police
Department (
August
1,
2018).
Letter
from
David
G.
Morrison,
Attorney
at
Law,
Rock
Island,
Illinois,
Legal
Department,
to
AAG
Matt
Hartman (
August
7,
2018).
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
3
2018,
the
Public
Access
Bureau
forwarded
a
copy
of
the
Department'
s
answer
to
Mr.
Carlson.
He
replied
on
August
14,
2018.
8
On
September
26,
2018,
this
office
extended
the
time
in
which
to
issue
a
binding opinion
by
30
business
days,
to
November
14,
2018,
pursuant
to
section
9.
5(
1)
of
FOIA.
9
ANALYSIS
It
is
a
fundamental
obligation
of
government
to
operate
openly
and
provide
public
records
as
expediently
and
efficiently
as
possible
in
compliance
with [
FOIA]."
5
ILCS
140/
1 (
West
2016). "
All
records
in
the
custody
or
possession
of
a
public
body
are
presumed
to
be
open to
inspection
or
copying.
Any
public
body
that
asserts
that
a
record
is
exempt
from
disclosure
has
the
burden
of
proving
by
clear
and
convincing
evidence
that
it
is
exempt."
5
ILCS
140/
1.
2 (
West
2016).
Section
3(
a)
of
FOIA (
5
ILCS
140/
3(
a) (
West
2016))
further
provides:
Each
public
body
shall
make
available
to
any
person
for
inspection
or
copying
all
public
records,
except
as
otherwise
provided
in
Sections
7 and
8. 5
of
this
Act."
The
exemptions
from
disclosure
contained
in
section
7
of
FOIA
are
to
be
narrowly
construed.
See
Lieber
v.
Board
of
Trustees
of
Southern
Illinois
University,
176
Ill.
2d
401,
407 (
1997).
Section
7.
5(
bb)
of
FOIA
and
the
Juvenile
Court
Act
Section
7.
5(
bb)
of
FOIA (
5.
ILCS
140/
7.
5(
bb) (
West
2017
Supp.))
exempts
from
inspection
and
copying "[
i]
nformation
which
is
or
was
prohibited
from
disclosure
by
the
Juvenile
Court
Act
of
1987."
The
Department
asserted
that
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
prohibits
the
disclosure
of
the
traffic
crash
reports
requested
by
Ms.
Forster
because
the
crash
involved
six
minors
who
were
witnesses
to
the
crash
and
listed
as
victims
in
the
reports.
10
At
the
time
of
Ms.
Letter
from
Matt
Hartman,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Public
Access
Bureau,
Office
of
the
Attorney
General,
to
James
D.
Carlson,
Hupy
and
Abraham (
August
7,
2018). ,
8E -
mail
from
James
D.
Carlson,
Attorney
At
Law,
Hupy
and
Abraham,
to [
Matt]
Hartman (
August
14,
2018).
Letter
from
Matt
Hartman,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Public
Access
Bureau,
Office
of
the
Attorney
General,
to
James
D.
Carlson,
Hupy
and
Abraham,
and
David
G.
Morrison,
Legal
Department,
City
of
Rock
Island (
September
26,
2018).
10Letter
from
David
G.
Morrison,
Attorney
at
Law,
Legal
Department,
City
of
Rock
Island,
to
AAG
Matt
Hartman (
August
7,
2018),
at [
1].
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
4
Forster'
s
request,'
l
section
1-
7(
A),
titled "
Confidentiality
of
law
enforcement
and
municipal
ordinance
violation
records[,]"
provided,
in
pertinent
part:
All
juvenile
records
which
have
not
been
expunged
are
sealed
and
may
never
be
disclosed
to
the
general
public
or
otherwise
made
widely
available.
Sealed
records
may
be
obtained
only
under
this
Section
and
Section
1-
8
and
5-
915
of
this
Act,
when
their
use
is
needed
for
good
cause
and
with
an
order
from
the
juvenile
court,
as
required
by
those
not
authorized
to
retain
them.
Inspection
and
copying
of
law
enforcement
records
maintained
by
law
enforcement
agencies
or
records
of
municipal
ordinance
violations
maintained
by
any
State,
local,
or
municipal
agency
that
relate
to
a
minor
who
has
been
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody
before
his
or
her
18th
birthday
shall
be
restricted
to
the
following[.] (
Emphasis
added.)
In
its
response
to
this
office,
the
Department
asserted
that
Public
Act
100-
285,
effective
January
1,
2018,
which
added the
language
emphasized
above,
demonstrates
the
General
Assembly'
s
intent
to
prohibit
disclosure
of
all
law
enforcement
records
concerning
minors: "
The
breadth
of
that
first
sentence
is
indisputable.
The
new
statutory
language
plainly
says '
All
juvenile
records'—
not
just
those
relating
to
investigation,
arrest,
or
custody.
And
no
modifiers
limit
the
temporal
scope
of '
may
never
be
disclosed.
ii12
The
Department'
s
denial
rests
on
the
premise
that the
traffic
crash
reports
are "
juvenile
records." .
As
discussed
below,
however,
this
office
concludes
that
the
traffic
crash
reports
at
issue
simply
do
not
fall
within
the
scope
of
section
1-
7(
A)
the
Juvenile
Court
Act.
Standards
for
Statutory
Construction
The
primary
objective
of
statutory
construction
is
to
ascertain
and
give
effect
to
the
intent
of
the
General
Assembly.
Paris
v.
Feder,
179
Ill.
2d
173,
177 (
1997).
The
most
reliable
indicator
of
legislative
intent
is
the
language
used
in
the
statute.
People
v.
Perry,
224
I11.
2d
312,
323 (
2007).
Legislative
intent
is
determined
by
examining
the
statute
as
a
whole.
Ultsch
v.
Illinois
Municipal
Retirement
Fund,
226
I11.
2d
169,
181 (
2007).
As
part
of
examining
the
After
Ms.
Forster
submitted
her
FOIA
request
on
July
17,
2018,
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
Juvenile
Court
was
amended
by
Public
Act
100-
720,
effective
August
3,
2018,
and
Public
Act
100463,
effective
August
14,
2018.
Letter
from
David
G.
Morrison,
Attorney
at
Law,
Rock
Island,
Illinois,
Legal
Department,
to
AAG
Matt
Hartman (
August
7,
2018),
at [
1].
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen.
November
14,
2018
Page
5
statute
as
a
whole,
a
court
should
consider
the "
words
and
phrases
in
light
of
other
relevant
statutory
provisions
and
not
in
isolation..
Each
word,
clause
and
sentence
of
a
statute
must
be
given
a
reasonable
meaning,
if
possible,
and
should
not
be
rendered
superfluous."
People
v.
Chenoweth,
2015
IL
116898, ¶
21,
25
N.
E.
3d
612,
617 (
2015).
Viewing
the
statute
as
a
whole
includes "
interpreting
a
specific
provision
in
the
context
of
other
parts
of
the
statute,
including
the
heading
under
which
the
provision
appears."
Illinois
Bell
Telephone
Co.
v.
Illinois
Commerce
Comm'
n,
362
Ill.
App.
3d
652,
659 (
2005).
Juvenile
Records
As
noted
above,
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA,
which
concerns
the
confidentiality
of
law
enforcement
records,
provides
that
all "
juvenile
records"
that
have
not
been
expunged
are
sealed
and
may
not
be
publicly
disclosed.
The
term "
juvenile
records"
is
not
defined
in
the
JCA,
but
a "
law
enforcement
record"
is
defined
in
Article
V
of
the
JCA
as:
Law
enforcement
record"
includes
but
is
not
limited
to
records
of
arrest,
station
adjustments,
fingerprints,
probation
adjustments,
the
issuance
of
a
notice
to
appear,
or
any
other
records
or
documents
maintained
by
any
law
enforcement
agency
relating
to
a
minor
suspected
of
committing
an
offense
or
evidence
of
interaction
with
law
enforcement.
705
ILCS
405/
5-
915(
0.
05)
West
2016),
as
amended
by
100-
285,
effective
January
1,
2018.
During
the
House
debate
on
House
Bill
No.
3817,
which,
as
Public
Act
100-
285,
effective
January
1,
2018,
amended
section
1-
7(
A)
and
section
5-
915(
0. 05)
of
the
JCA,
Representative
Nekritz
explained:
I
have
just
one
other
statement
for
legislative
intent
here.
By
law
enforcement
record,
which
as
that
term
is
defined
as...
as
that
term
is
in
the
Bill,
it'
s
our
intent
that
this
includes
but
is
not
limited
to
records
of
arrest,
station
adjustments,
fingerprints,
probation
adjustments,
the
issuance
of
a
notice
to
appear,
or
any
other
records
or
documents
maintained
by
any
law
enforcement
agency
relating
to
a
minor
suspecting
of
committing
an
offense. * * *
By
records
or
documents
relating
to "
evidence
of
interaction
with
law
enforcement"
it
is
our
intent
that
this
relates
to
records
or
documents
that
relate
to
the
minor
being
suspected
of
committing
an
offense
and
not
related
to
the
minor
in
other
roles,
such
as
being
a
possible
victim,
witness,
or
missing
per...
person...
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
6
missing
person. (
Emphasis
added.)
Remarks
of
Rep.
Nekritz,
May
31,
2017,
Senate
Debate
on
House
Bill
No.
3817,
at
93-
94.
Although
the
definition
of "
law
enforcement
record"
in
section
5-
915(
0.05)
of
the
JCA
is
limited
to
section
5-
915
of
the
JCA (
705
ILCS
405/
5-
915 (
West
2016),
as
amended
by
100-
285,
effective
January
1,
2018),
Representative
Nekritz'
s
remarks
stating
that
the
General
Assembly
did
not
intend "
law
enforcement
record"
in
the
JCA
to
refer
to
minors
as
victims
or
witnesses
is
instructive
to
the
meaning
of
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA.
Those
remarks
coupled
with
the
heading
of
section
1-
7(
A)—"[
c]
onfidentiality
of
law
enforcement
and
municipal
ordinance
violation
records"—
and
its
statutorylanguage
identifying
records
that "
have
not
been
expunged"
and
which "
relate
to
a
minor
who
has
been
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody
before
his
or
her
18th
birthday"
as
those
that
must
be
restricted
from
public
disclosure
provide
insight
into
which "
juvenile
records"
the
legislature
intended
to
seal.
These
factors
all
undercut
an
interpretation
that
requires
sealing
records
concerning
minors
who
were
victims
of
or
witnesses
to
a
vehicle
crash.
In
support
of
its
assertion
that
the
JCA,
as
amended
by
Public
Act
100- 285,
prohibits
the
disclosure
of
all
law
enforcement
records
concerning
minors
who
were
victims
of
or
witnesses
to
traffic
accidents,
the
Department
stated
the
General
Assembly'
s
deletion
of
language
in
section
1-
7(
C)
of
the
JCA (
705
ILCS
405/
1-
7(
C) (
West
2016),
as
amended
by
Public
Act
100-
285,
effective
January
1,
2018)
altered
the
types
of
juvenile
records
available
under
FOIA.
Section
1-
7(
C)
previously
provided:
C)
The
records
of
law
enforcement
officers,
or
of
an
independent
agency
created
by
ordinance
and
charged
by
a
unit
of
local
government
with
the
duty
of
investigating
the
conduct
of
law
enforcement
officers,
concerning
all minors
under
18
years
of
age
must
be
maintained
separate
from
the
records
of
arrests
and
may
not
be
open
to
public
inspection
or
their
contents
disclosed
to
the
public
except
by
order
of
the
court
presiding
over
matters
pursuant
to
this
Act
or
when
the
institution
of
criminal
proceedings
has
been
permitted
or
required
under
Section
5-
805
or
such
a
person
has
been
convicted
of
a
crime
and
is
the
subject
of
pre -
sentence
investigation
or
proceedings
on
an
application
for
probation
or
when
provided
by
law.
For
purposes
of
obtaining
documents
pursuant
to
this
Section,
a
civil
subpoena
is
not
an
order
of
the
court. (
Emphasis
added.)
705
ILCS
405/
1-
7(
C) (
West
2016).
Section
1-
7(
C)
was
subsequently
amended
by
Public
Act
100-
285
to
state:
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
7
C)
The
records
of
law
enforcement
officers,
or
of
an
independent
agency
created
by
ordinance
and
charged
by
a
unit
of
local
government
with
the
duty
of
investigating
the
conduct
of
law
enforcement
officers,
concerning
all minors
under
18
years
of
age
must
be
maintained
separate
from
the
records
of
arrests
and
may
not
be
open
to
public
inspection
or
their
contents
disclosed
to
the
public[.]
For
purposes
of
obtaining
documents
under
pursuant
to
this
Section,
a
civil
subpoena
is
not
an
order
of
the
court.
The
Department
asserted
that
the
deletion
of
language
from
section
1-
7(
C)
expanded
the
protection
of
records
concerning
juveniles.
According
to
the
Department,
b]
efore
the
legislature
deleted
or
when
provided
by
law,
FOIA
was
reasonably
viewed
as
an
exception
to the
general
rule
that
records
concerning
juveniles
could [
not]
be
disclosed.
That
exception
no
longer
operates,
however,
so
the
FOIA'
s
provisions
no
longer
permit
the
disclosure
of
records
concerning
juveniles.
i13 (
Emphasis
in
original.)
The
Department'
s
argument
is
misplaced.
FOIA
has
never
been
an
exception
to
the
confidentiality
requirements
of
the
JCA.
Section
7.
5(
bb)
of
FOIA
expressly
provides
that
records
prohibited
from
being
disclosed
by
the
JCA
are
exempt
from
disclosure.
Section
7(
1)(
a)
of
FOIA (
5
ILCS
140/
7(
1)(
a) (
West
2017
Supp.))
also
permits
a
public
body
to
withhold
i]
nformation
specificallyprohibited
from
disclosure
by
federal
or
State
law
or
rules
and
regulations
implementing
federal
or
State
law."
Notably,
Public
Act
100-
285
left
unchanged
sections
1-
7(
C)(
1), 1-
7(
C)(
2),
and
1-
7(
C)(
3)
of
the
JCA (
705
ILCS
405/
1-
7(
C)(
1), (
2), (
3) (
West
2016),
as
amended
by
Public
Act
100- 285,
effective
January
1,
2018),
which
provide:
1)
In
cases
where
the
law
enforcement,
or
independent
agency,
records
concern
a
pending
juvenile
court
case,
the
party
seeking
to
inspect
the
records
shall
provide
actual
notice
to
the
attorney
or
guardian
ad
litem
of
the
minor
whose
records
are
sought.
2)
In
cases
where
the
records
concern
a
juvenile
court
case
that
is
no
longer
pending,
the
party
seeking
to
inspect
the
records
shall
provide
actual
notice
to
the
minor
or
the
minor'
s
parent
or
legal
guardian,
and
the
matter
shall
be
referred
to
the
chief
judge
presiding
over
matters
pursuant
to
this
Act.
3)
In
determiningwhether
the
records
should
be
available
for
inspection,
the
court
shall
consider
the
minor'
s
interest
in
Letter
from
David
G.
Morrison,
Attorney
at
Law,
Rock
Island,
Illinois,
Legal
Department,
to
AAG
Matt
Hartman (
August
7,
2018),
at [
2].
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
8
confidentiality
and
rehabilitation
over
the
moving
party'
s
interest
in
obtaining
the
information.
Any
records
obtained
in
violation
of
this
subsection (
C)
shall
not
be
admissible
in
any
criminal
or
civil
proceeding,
or
operate
to
disqualify
a
minor
from
subsequently
holding
public
office
or
securing
employment,
or
operate
as
a
forfeiture
of
any
public
benefit,
right.
privilege,
or
right
to
receive
any
license
granted
by
public
authority.
Reading
section
1-
7
as
a
whole,
it
is
apparent
that
section
1-
7(
C) is
intended
to
require
notice
when
a
court
order
seeking
records
is
sought
in
cases
that
are
or
were
the
subject
of
a
proceeding
in
juvenile
court,
and
to
require
the
court
to
give
priority
to
the
minor'
s
interests
in
determining
whether
to
disclose
the
records.
The
elimination
of
the
words "
or
when
provided
by
law"
in
section
1-
7(
C)
harmonizes
that
provision
with
section
I -
7(
A),
which
was
amended
to
require
a
court
order
to
unseal
records
encompassed
by
the
Act.
There
is
no
indication
that
these
changes
were
intended
to
expand
the
types
of
records
that
are
prohibited
from
being
disclosed
by
the
JCA.
This
office'
s
interpretation
of "
juvenile
record"
to
mean
a
minor
who
has
been
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody
is
consistent
with
the
express
purpose
of
the
JCA.
Section
1-
2
of
the
JCA (
705
ILCS
405/
1-
2 (
West
2016))
expresses
the
Act'
s
purpose
and
policy,
such
as "
to
secure
for
each
minor
subject
hereto
such
care
and
guidance,
preferably
in
his
or
her
own
home,
as
will
serve
the
safety
and
moral,
emotional,
mental,
and
physical
welfare
of
the
minor
and
the
best
interests
of
the
community[.]"
The
Illinois
Supreme
Court
has
stated
that
t]
he
overriding
purpose
of
the
Juvenile
Court
Act
is
to
ensure
that
the
best
interests
of
the
minor,
the
minor'
s
family,
and
the
community
are
served."
In
re
CJV.,.
196111.
2d
181,
209
2001).
Additionally,
the
General
Assembly'
s
intent
articulated
in
Article
V
of
the
JCA,
which
governs
juvenile
delinquency
proceedings,
is "
to
promote
a
juvenile
justice
system
capable
of
dealing
with
the
problem
of
juvenile
delinquency,
a
system
that
will
protect
the
community,
impose
accountability
for
violations
of
law
and
equip
juvenile
offenders
with
competencies
to
live
responsibly
and
productively."
705
ILCS
405/
5-
101(
1) (
West
2016).
To
fulfill
this
intent,
section.
5-
101(
1)
enumerates
four
purposes
of
the
JCA: (
1)
to
protect
citizens
from
juvenile
crime; (
2)
to
hold
juvenile
offenders
accountablefor
their
actions; (
3)
to
provide
an
individualized
assessment
of
each
alleged
and
adjudicated
delinquent
juvenile
to
prevent
further
delinquent
behavior;
and ( 4)
to
provide
due
process
to
the
minor
and
all
other
interested
parties.
The
policy
statement
embodied
by
section
5-
101,
which
was
added
to
the
JCA
in
1998,
14
represents
a
fundamental
shift
from
the
singular
goal
of
rehabilitation
to
include
the
overriding
concerns
of
protecting
the
public
and
holding
juvenile
offenders
accountable
for
violations
of
the
14See
Public
Act
90-
590,
effective
January
1,
1999.-
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
9
law.'".
In
re
B.
C.
P.,.
2013
IL
113908, ¶
13,
990.
N.
E.
2d
1135, 1139 (
2013) (
quoting
People
v.
Taylor,
221
Ill.
2d
157, 167 (
2006)).
The
Department
has
asserted
that
the
amendment
to
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
exempts
all
law
enforcement
records
concerning
minors
in
all
contexts.
Under
this
interpretation,
any
law
enforcement
record
involving
a
minor
would
be
exempt
from
disclosure
under
FOIA
in
its
entirety.
For
example,
reports
of
an
officer -
involved
shooting
in
which
a
minor
is
incidentally
mentioned
as
being
present
at
the
scene,
or
dashboard
camera
footage
of
a
police
chase
that
captured
a
minor
walking
on
the
sidewalk,
would
not
be
accessible
under
FOIA.
Construing
those
types
of
records
as "
juvenile
records"
protected
by
the
confidentiality
provisions
of
the
JCA
simply
because
a
juvenile
is
involved
is
contrary
to the
express
public
policy
of
FOIA:
A]
ll
persons
are
entitled
to
full
and
complete
information
regarding
the
affairs
of
government
and
the
official
acts
and
policies
of
those
who
represent
them
as
public
officials
and
public
employees
consistent
with
the
terms
of
this
Act.
Such
access
is
necessary
to
enable
the
people
to
fulfill
their
duties
of
discussing
public
issues
filly
and
freely,
making
informed
political
judgments
and
monitoring
government
to
ensure
that
it
is
being
conducted
in
the
public
interest.
5
ILCS
140/
1 (
West
2016).
Nothing
in
the
JCA
suggests
that
the
General
Assembly
intended
the
term
juvenile
records"
to
be
so
broadly.
applied
as
to
include
law
enforcement
records
in
which
minors
are
victims
or
merely
witnesses
to
incidents
concerning
adults.
TQ
the
contrary,
it
must
be
assumed
that
the
General
Assembly
did
not
intend
the
amendment
of
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
to
produce
absurd
and
unjust
results
such
as
this,
in
which
an
attorney
for
an
individual
injured
in
a
traffic
crash
has
been
denied
a
routine
accident
report
simply
because
it
was
Witnessed
by
minor
passengers
who
were
not
arrested
or
investigated
in
connection
with
the
crash.
Consequently,
the
requested
traffic
crash
reports
are
not
exempt
from
disclosure
in their
entireties
under
section
7. 5(
bb)
of
FOIA.
FINDINGS
AND
CONCLUSIONS
After
full
examination
and
giving
due
consideration
to the
available
information,
the
Public
Access
Counselor'
s
review,
and
the
applicable
law,
the
Attorney
General
finds
that:
1)
On
July
17,
201.
8,
Ms.
Barbara
Forster,
on
behalf
of
Hupy
and
Abraham,
submitted
a
FOIA
request
to the
Rock
Island
Police
Department
seeking
copies
of
traffic
crash
reports
of
an
accident
occurring
on
July
4,
2018,
at
18th
Avenue
and
43rd
Street
in
Rock
Island.
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
10
2)
In
a
letter
dated
July
19,
2018,
the
Department
denied
the
request
for
traffic
crash
reports
pursuant
to
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA.
3)
On
July
30,
2018,
this
office
received
a
Request
for
Review
from
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson,
on
behalf
of
Hupy
and
Abraham,
contesting
the
Department'
s
denial,
asserting
that
the
traffic
crash
reports
involving
minors
as
passengers
were
not
exempt
from
disclosure
because
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
only
exempts
law
enforcement
records
of
minors
who
have
been
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody.
The
Request
for
Review
was
timely
filed
and
otherwise
complies
with
section
9.
5(
a)
of
FOIA.
4)
On
August
1,
2018,
the
Public
Access
Bureau
sent
a
copy
of
the
Request
for
Review
to
the
Department
and
asked
it
to
provide
copies
of
the
withheld
traffic
crash
reports
for
this
office'
s
confidential
review;
together
with
a
detailed
explanation
of
the
factual
and
legal
bases
for
the
Department'
s
claim
that
disclosure
of
the
reports
was
specifically
prohibited
from
disclosure
by
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA.
5)
On
August
7,
2018,
the
Department,
through
its
legal
counsel,
provided
this
office
with
the
requested
materials,
and
asserted
that
the
plain
language
of
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
prohibits
the
disclosure
of
all
law
enforcement
records
concerning
minors.
The
same
day,
this
office
forwarded
a
copy
of
the
Department'
s
answer
to
Mr.
Carlson
for
comment..
Mr.
Carlson
submitted
a
reply.
on
August
14,
2018.
6)
On
September
26,
2018,
this
office
extended
the
time
within
which
to
issue
a
binding
opinion
by
30
business
days,
to
November
14,
2018, -
pursuant
to
section
9.
5(
f)
of
FOIA.
Therefore,
the
Attorney
General
may
properly
issue
a
binding
opinion
with
respect
to
this
matter.
7)
Section
7.
5(
bb)
of
FOIA
exempts
from
disclosure ':[
i]
nformation
which
is
or
was
prohibited
from
disclosure
by
the
Juvenile
Court
Act
of
1987."
Section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
states: "
Al]
juvenile
records
which
have
not
been
expunged
are
sealed
and
may
never
be
disclosed
to
the
general
public
or
otherwise
made
widely.
available[, ]"
unless
their
use
is
needed
for
good
cause
and
the
juvenile
court
orders
them
to
be
disclosed.
Section
1-
7(
A)
further
provides
that
disclosure
of "
law
enforcement
records
maintained
by
law
enforcement
agencies
or
records
of
municipal
ordinance
violations
maintained.
by
any
State,
local,
or
municipal
agency
that
relate
to
a
minor
who
has
been
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody
before
his
or
her
18th
birthday
shall
be
restricted"
to
certain
authorized
individuals.
8)
The
traffic
crash
report
at
issue
concerns
a
traffic
accident
in
which
minors
are
listed
as
passengers
in
oneof
the
vehicles.
None
of
the
minors
listed
in
the
reportswas
investigated,
arrested,
or
taken
into
custody
in
connection
with
the
crash.
Therefore
the
crash
report
is
not
a "
juvenile
record"
within
the
meaning
of
the
JCA.
The
Department'
s
interpretation
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
November
14,
2018
Page
11
of
a
single
sentence
in
section
1-
7(
A)
of
the
JCA
to
apply
to
records
of
incidents
in
which
the
minor
was
a
victim
or
witness
is
incongruous
with
the
intent
of
the
JCA
and
its
other
provisions
concerning
minors.
It
is
also
contrary
to the
legislative
history
of
the
amendment
to
section
1-
7(
A)
and
the
public
policy
of
FO1A.
Accordingly,
the
traffic
crash
reports
are
not
exempt
from
disclosure
under
section
7. 5(
bb)
of
FOIA.
For
the
reasons
stated
above,
it
is
the
opinion
of
the
Attorney
General
that
the
Department'
s
denial
of
Ms.
Forster'
s
Freedom
of
Information
Act
request
violated
the
requirements
of
FOIA.
Accordingly,
the
Department
is
directed
to
take
immediate
and
appropriate
action
to
comply
with
this
binding opinion
by
providing
Hupy
and
Abraham
with
a
copy
of
the
requested
traffic
crash
report.
This
opinion
shall
be
considered
a
final
decision
of
an
administrative
agency
for
the
purposes
of
administrative
review
under
the
Administrative
Review
Law.
735
ILCS
5/ 3-
101
et
seq. (
West
2016).
An
aggrieved
party
may
obtain
judicial
review
of
the
decision
by
filing
a
complaint
for
administrative
review
with
the
Circuit
Court
of
Cook
or
Sangamon
County
within
35
days
of
the
date
of
this
decision
naming
the
Attorney
General
of
Illinois
and
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
as
defendants.
See
5
ILCS
140/
11.
5 (
West
2016).
By:
Very
truly
yours,
LISA
MADIGAN
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
teadirteress—
Michael
J.
Luke
Counsel
to
the
Attorney
General
cc:
Mr.
David
G.
Morrison
Morrison,
Marquis,
Campbell,
Lareau &
Weng
1515
Fourth
Avenue,
Suite
301
Rock
Island,
Illinois
61201-
8613
CERTIFICATE
OF
SERVICE
Sarah
L.
Pratt,
Public
Access
Counselor,
hereby
certifies
that
she
has
served
a
copy
of
the
foregoing
Binding
Opinion (
Public
Access
Opinion
18-
016)
upon:
Mr.
James
D.
Carlson
Hupy
and
Abraham
6952
Rote
Road,
Suite
200
Rockford,
Illinois
61107
jcarlson@hupy.
com
Mr.
Jeffrey
R.
VenHuizen
Chief
of
Police
Rock
Island
Police
Department
1212
Fifth
Avenue
Rock
Island,
Illinois
61201
policemail@rigov.
org
Mr.
David
G.
Morrison
Morrison,
Marquis,
Campbell,
Lareau &
Weng
1515
Fourth
Avenue,
Suite
301
Rock
Island,
Illinois
61201-
8613
dmorrison@mmcwlaw.
com
by
causing
a
true
copy
thereof
to
be
sent
electronically
to
the
addresses
as
listed
above
and
by
causing
to
be
mailed
a
true
copy
thereof
in
correctly
addressed,
prepaid
envelopes
to
be
deposited
in
the
United
States
mail
at
Springfield,
Illinois
on
November
14,
2018.
SARAH
L.
PRATT
Public
Access
Counselor
SARAH
L.
PRATT
Public
Access
Counselor
Office
of
the
Attorney
General
500
South
Second
Street
Springfield,
Illinois
62701
217)
557-
0548
