FOIA charges stand; more FOIA requests pending
By Barb Pert Templeton
Being treated fairly, like any other citizen in the city.
That desire is what prompted Marine City Commissioner Michael Hilferink to leave his seat at the commission table at an Aug. 3 meeting and take to the podium to make a presentation as a resident.
The 65-minute discussion ultimately had a majority of the commission voting to deny Hilferink’s request to postpone an appeal related to a FOIA request. Then after hearing the appeal, the commission unanimously voted to upheld the city’s $74 in fees for the FOIA request Hilferink made on July 19.
Hilferink’s reason for seeking the postponement was the fact that he had not received all the documents from the city that he had requested via FOIA. At the same time, the whole issue started because he was appealing the $76 charge for the documents he did get.
Those documents pertained to a police call that was answered on July 18 at 10:45 p.m. at 414 Woodworth Street in the city. Hilferink’s FOIA sought all the body cam footage and audio from the incident and stated that the complaint being alleged at the time was against him.
At the Aug. 3 meeting City Attorney Robert Davis explained that the Hilferink would leave the commission table and go to the podium and give his presentation and City Clerk Jason Bell, as FOIA Coordinator, would respond to it.
“I tell you sometimes I feel like sitting over there (as he pointed to his seat at the commission table) puts tape right over my mouth,” Hilferink said as he began his presentation after removing a piece of tape covering his mouth. “It’s nice to be at this podium again, like it feels good to be up here as just a John Q citizen, private citizen with all the rights afforded as such.”
Hilferink said it was crazy to him that he even had to come to the podium to seek a postponement of his FOIA appeal. He said he reached out to Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Hendrick, City Manager Scott Adkins and City Attorney Robert Davis and the request was shut down by all of them.
Davis then explained that the entire city commission has to vote on the request to postpone, it’s not something the individuals Hilferink approached could just allow.
Hilferink then referred to a past appeal process involving a citizen where their request was granted and played back a recording from an Oct. of 2021 city commission meeting that had Davis stating the citizen had the right to postpone an appeal.
“It’s a bit confusing to me as to why I’m not being offered the same exact benefits that another citizen was given back in 2021?” Hilferink said.
Documents and tape recordings shared
Hilferink went on to share documents from the past noting that the city has hard deadlines for adding things to the city commission’s agenda – 10 days were required – yet his appeal was literally placed on the agenda the day before the recent August 3 meeting.
The Marine City Commission meets on the first and third Thursdays of each month at 7 p.m.
He also noted that he had called Hendrick the night before the current meeting and asked about the postponement and she told him it wasn’t possible because of the FOIA laws and the process. As proof that other residents weren’t treated the same Hilferink played several snippets from a past meeting where Hendrick and Commissioner Jacob Bryson thought a postponement was fine.
Davis then asked to interject a clarification, he said the resident Hilferink is referring to asked the commission for a postponement and Mike had not. He said all Mike had to do was ask the full commission for a postponement.
Hilferink continued to state that he asked Hendrick, Adkins and Davis and they said it wasn’t allowed and he took the attorney’s opinion as the rule.
“So, you violated the charter by contacting me directly?” Davis asked. “Mike if we’re going to play by the rules, we are going to play by all of them and I’m never going to answer another email that you send me.”
Marine City Clerk Jason Bell gives a rebuttal to Michael Hilferink’s presentation objecting to FOIA fees incurred by the city.
“Fair enough,” Hilferink said.
Bell then explained that Hilferink was appealing the costs for a FOIA that was approved and ready to be provided to him and the FOIA documents he’s still waiting on weren’t even relevant so there was no need for a postponement. (The other FOIA Hilferink filed on July 27 pertained to a Feb. incident when Hilferink was arrested but the prosecutor ultimately didn’t file any charges and former Mayor Cheryl Vercammen filed a FOIA request for the police footage from that night – Hilferink wants to see what she paid for her FOIA request to make sure he is being treated fairly.)
“I would suggest the next time you do an appeal do it when you collect all your information instead of appealing without having all the information,” Hendrick said.
After more discussion, Hendrick made a motion to adjourn or postpone the appeal process per Hilferink’s request, the motion was seconded by Commissioner William Klaassen. In a roll call vote the motion was denied with the mayor and commissioners Ross, Bryson and Roehrig voting no.
Spelling out objections to the fees
The denial of the postponement meant Hilferink now had to present his objection to the FOIA costs. He said the hour and seven minutes charged to locate the file was excessive and he cited the fact that Bell has been employed by the city’s police department and would know how to do this in a much timelier manner.
Bell replied that locating the information and examining it, while redacting things that don’t fall under FOIA, was what took over an hour.
“It’s my job to watch every minute of that video so I know what to redact and not to redact via the FOIA laws,” Bell said.
As to the FOIA provision that states the lowest paid employee will conduct the search Bell said it’s him or the chief of police who are certified in FOIA matters and his rate of pay, $32.29 was used as he obviously makes less than the chief.
Robert Davis, attorney for Marine City, said Michael Hilferink’s interpretation of things was simply wrong.
Roehrig pointed out that Bell actually had the right to charge Hilferink more because an hourly rate plus fringe benefits costs are allowed in the statute.
Bell said that was correct.
As Hilferink concluded his presentation he said he’d like to know exactly where it is that Bell works, the clerk’s office or the police department and how it took him only 30 minutes to redact information from a nearly two-hour video.
“A lot of things aren’t quite adding up, the numbers aren’t adding up, the information isn’t adding up,” Hilferink said. “It’s all very, very, very fishy, this experience with these FOIA requests. And my relations with the city have really gone downhill for asking questions but that’s my job.”
Bell responded to Hilferink’s questions about where he belongs or works stating he does work at both the city and the police department currently. He said when a FOIA request comes in to the clerk it is forwarded to whichever office it pertains to. In this case, it was the police department and since he works for both offices, he is the one to process the request. He then explained the step-by-step process of reviewing the video and taking notes on what has to be redacted.
“Now we get to the redaction piece of 30 minutes and this is a totally separate thing from watching the video,” Bell said. “I already have the redactions written down so I use the software and I pull out those segments and blur out, mute or bleep the sound out from it. That portion only does take about 30 minutes, in this case it took 41 minutes …but the statue says I have to round down.”
The entire commission then voted to stand-by the clerk’s charges for the FOIA request.
Hilferink concluded the matter by telling the commission and city administrators, “thank you for your time and consideration and this will be filed in civil court.”
