RICHMOND, Va. (WRIC) – A judge rejected Richmond’s request to throw out a lawsuit from two advocates who want years of meals tax enforcement documents.
Open government advocates Josh Stanfield and Paul Goldman sued after claiming no one with the city responded to their records requests by the deadline set in state law.
They want a judge to order officials to hand over documents on Richmond’s meals tax enforcement — some dating back to 2014.
The lawsuit was filed in January as Richmond restaurant owners began publicly sharing their issues with the city’s meals tax collection process, including not being notified of past-due balances, getting inaccurate information and having their bills balloon with massive penalties.
READ MORE: New report gives snapshot of Richmond’s meals tax notification process
With the judge’s decision to overrule Richmond’s motion to dismiss the case, the lawsuit can go to trial or both sides could reach a deal on the records request. The case, Stanfield and Goldman said, underscores the city’s issues with properly following the Freedom of Information Act.
“The city doesn’t take FOIA seriously,” Goldman told 8News after the June 14 hearing.
Stanfield and Goldman made similar worded FOIA requests to different city officials in January, including Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney, the city’s Chief Administrative Officer Lincoln Saunders, Inspector General James Osuna and Finance Department Director Sheila White.
The Jan. 19 requests to Stoney, Saunders and Osuna asked for “any and all documents and communications mentioning or concerning meals tax enforcement in the City of Richmond” within their respective offices, according to the lawsuit.
Fired city employee alleges Richmond breaks FOIA public records law in whistleblower lawsuit
Stanfield and Goldman asked Osuna to limit their request for records from Jan. 1, 2017, to Jan. 19, 2024, and for the request to Stoney and Saunders to include records from Jan. 1, 2014, to Jan. 19, 2024.
The request to White asked for “any and all documents and communications within the Department of Finance mentioning or concerning: (1) Meals tax enforcement; (2) Penalties, fees, fines, or interest as it pertains to meals, property, or admissions taxes that were ultimately reduced from the initial bill or eliminated entirely” from Jan. 1, 2014, until Jan. 19.
Stanfield and Goldman claim in their lawsuit that they “never received any replies to any of these requests” in the required five working days deadline under FOIA.
In a motion to dismiss the case, the city’s attorney’s office argued that Stanfield and Goldman did not state a cause of action to bring forward a lawsuit and sent most of the requests to outdated mailboxes and not to the appropriate FOIA officers for the city officials.
Candidates and voting rules for Virginia’s 2024 congressional primaries
The city also disputed that no one within the administration responded to the requests, claiming in its motion that the inspector general responded that his office didn’t have the records and that the city’s acting FOIA officer requested clarification on the request but didn’t receive a response from Stanfield or Goldman.
The city’s attorney’s office argued in court that the requests required review for confidential taxpayer information and didn’t identify “records with reasonable specificity” as stated in FOIA.
Stanfield and Goldman disputed those claims, saying that arguments that their requests were sent to outdated email addresses were not backed with evidence and they received responses from officials in the inspector general’s office apologizing for a late response.
READ MORE: Richmond wants former FOIA officer’s whistleblower lawsuit thrown out
Richmond Circuit Court Judge Richard B. Campbell overruled the city’s motion to throw out the case, saying that while there are a variety of factors involved in the case, he had to go back to the statute that stipulates an entity must respond to a FOIA request within five working days.
“It wasn’t done,” Campbell said at the June 14 hearing.
The FOIA lawsuit now heads to the trial phase, although a path for both sides to agree on the requested records could help avoid a court case.
The case could be complicated by the vast number of documents that the city could have to turn over as the Richmond City Attorney’s Office said the finance department identified about 4 million documents that may be responsive to the requests.
RICHMOND, Va. (WRIC) – A judge rejected Richmond’s request to throw out a lawsuit from two advocates who want years of meals tax enforcement documents.
Open government advocates Josh Stanfield and Paul Goldman sued after claiming no one with the city responded to their records requests by the deadline set in state law.
They want a judge to order officials to hand over documents on Richmond’s meals tax enforcement — some dating back to 2014.
The lawsuit was filed in January as Richmond restaurant owners began publicly sharing their issues with the city’s meals tax collection process, including not being notified of past-due balances, getting inaccurate information and having their bills balloon with massive penalties.
READ MORE: New report gives snapshot of Richmond’s meals tax notification process
With the judge’s decision to overrule Richmond’s motion to dismiss the case, the lawsuit can go to trial or both sides could reach a deal on the records request. The case, Stanfield and Goldman said, underscores the city’s issues with properly following the Freedom of Information Act.
“The city doesn’t take FOIA seriously,” Goldman told 8News after the June 14 hearing.
Stanfield and Goldman made similar worded FOIA requests to different city officials in January, including Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney, the city’s Chief Administrative Officer Lincoln Saunders, Inspector General James Osuna and Finance Department Director Sheila White.
The Jan. 19 requests to Stoney, Saunders and Osuna asked for “any and all documents and communications mentioning or concerning meals tax enforcement in the City of Richmond” within their respective offices, according to the lawsuit.
Fired city employee alleges Richmond breaks FOIA public records law in whistleblower lawsuit
Stanfield and Goldman asked Osuna to limit their request for records from Jan. 1, 2017, to Jan. 19, 2024, and for the request to Stoney and Saunders to include records from Jan. 1, 2014, to Jan. 19, 2024.
The request to White asked for “any and all documents and communications within the Department of Finance mentioning or concerning: (1) Meals tax enforcement; (2) Penalties, fees, fines, or interest as it pertains to meals, property, or admissions taxes that were ultimately reduced from the initial bill or eliminated entirely” from Jan. 1, 2014, until Jan. 19.
Stanfield and Goldman claim in their lawsuit that they “never received any replies to any of these requests” in the required five working days deadline under FOIA.
In a motion to dismiss the case, the city’s attorney’s office argued that Stanfield and Goldman did not state a cause of action to bring forward a lawsuit and sent most of the requests to outdated mailboxes and not to the appropriate FOIA officers for the city officials.
Candidates and voting rules for Virginia’s 2024 congressional primaries
The city also disputed that no one within the administration responded to the requests, claiming in its motion that the inspector general responded that his office didn’t have the records and that the city’s acting FOIA officer requested clarification on the request but didn’t receive a response from Stanfield or Goldman.
The city’s attorney’s office argued in court that the requests required review for confidential taxpayer information and didn’t identify “records with reasonable specificity” as stated in FOIA.
Stanfield and Goldman disputed those claims, saying that arguments that their requests were sent to outdated email addresses were not backed with evidence and they received responses from officials in the inspector general’s office apologizing for a late response.
READ MORE: Richmond wants former FOIA officer’s whistleblower lawsuit thrown out
Richmond Circuit Court Judge Richard B. Campbell overruled the city’s motion to throw out the case, saying that while there are a variety of factors involved in the case, he had to go back to the statute that stipulates an entity must respond to a FOIA request within five working days.
“It wasn’t done,” Campbell said at the June 14 hearing.
The FOIA lawsuit now heads to the trial phase, although a path for both sides to agree on the requested records could help avoid a court case.
The case could be complicated by the vast number of documents that the city could have to turn over as the Richmond City Attorney’s Office said the finance department identified about 4 million documents that may be responsive to the requests.