Attorney General of Florida — Opinion.
July 20, 2006
RE: STATEWIDE ADVOCACY COUNCIL — LOCAL ADVOCACY COUNCILS — GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW — HUMAN RIGHTS — CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS — local advocacy council members attending closed session of statewide advocacy council. ss. 402.165 and 402.166, Fla. Stat.
Advocacy Council, attendance at closed session
Ms. Betty Busbee Acting Chair, Florida Statewide Advocacy Council 2727 Mahan Drive, MS-57 Tallahassee, Florida 32308
Charlie Crist, Attorney General
Dear Ms. Busbee:
As Acting Chair of the Florida Statewide Advocacy Council, you ask substantially the following question:
May members of a local advocacy council, who are attending a closed session of the statewide advocacy council during the discussion of one of the local council’s cases, remain during the entire closed session of the statewide advocacy council which is considering cases from other advocacy councils unrelated to any of the local advocacy council’s cases?
The Florida Statewide Advocacy Council (SAC) and Local Advocacy Councils (LAC) were created to serve as a volunteer network of councils to discover, monitor, and investigate the presence of conditions that constitute a threat to the rights, health, safety or welfare of persons who receive services from state agencies.[1] The LACs operate under the direction and supervision of the SAC.[2] While section 402.166(7), Florida Statutes, provides in part that an LAC shall first seek to resolve a complaint with the appropriate local administration, agency, or program, any matter not resolved by the local council is to be referred to the statewide council.[3]
You state that historically when an LAC has forwarded a case to the SAC for further investigation and resolution, the members of the LAC where the case originated have been permitted to sit in on that portion of the closed session of the SAC when the LAC’s case is being discussed.[4] Upon completion of the discussion of the case relevant to the LAC, those LAC members have been requested to leave the closed session. A question has been raised by LAC members as to whether they must leave the closed SAC session.
Sections 402.165(8)(a)2. and 402.166(8)(a), Florida Statutes, respectively authorize the SAC and an LAC, “[i]n the performance of its duties,” to have access to all client records, files, and reports from any program, service, or facility that is operated, funded, or contracted by a state agency that provides client services and any records that are material to its investigation and are in the custody of any other agency or department of government.[5] Information obtained or produced by an LAC that is made confidential by law, that relates to the identity of any client or group of clients subject to the protection of this section, or that relates to the identity of an individual who provides information to the local council about abuse or about alleged violations of constitutional or human rights, is confidential and exempt from disclosure.[6]
Section 402.165(8)(c), Florida Statutes, exempts from the open meetings law that portion of a SAC meeting that relates the identity of a client or group of clients subject to the protections of the statute or to the identity of an individual who provides information to the SAC about abuse or about alleged constitutional or human rights violations of constitutional or human rights, or when testimony is provided relating to records otherwise made confidential by law. A similar exemption exists for LAC meetings.[7]
Thus, while the statutes permit an LAC to have access to confidential material in carrying out its duties, I find nothing in sections 402.164—402.167, Florida Statutes, which grant an LAC access to such confidential material which is not related to one of its investigations or cases. As noted above, the statutes authorize an LAC access to confidential information when carrying out its responsibilities. While it may be appropriate for LAC members attending a closed session of the SAC which is considering a case referred to it by that LAC, I cannot conclude that the statutes permit the dissemination of such confidential material to LAC members that have no jurisdiction over the case being discussed.[8]
Accordingly, I am of the opinion that members of a local advocacy council, who are attending a closed session of the statewide advocacy council during the discussion of one of the local council’s cases, may not remain in the closed session when the statewide advocacy council is considering cases from other advocacy councils which are unrelated to the local advocacy council’s cases.
Sincerely,
Charlie Crist Attorney General
CC/tjw