Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transparency Foia topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears public support for FOIA library and administration requests more time to refine proposal
Summary
Council members and dozens of residents urged the Government Operations Committee to pass ordinances creating a FOIA library and open‑data tools; administration officials asked for more time to define scope and to align technology and staffing. Committee continued the FOIA and open‑data papers to the Oct. 22 meeting.
The Government Operations Committee on Oct. 1 heard extensive public support for proposed ordinances to create a citywide Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) library and related open‑data tools and then voted to continue the measures so administration and council sponsors could refine scope, staffing and liability questions.
Councilors proposed three related transparency ordinances, including an ordinance to establish an online FOIA library. Numerous residents and civic groups — including Electrify RVA, Richmond for All and individual journalists and community organizers — urged the committee to adopt the FOIA‑library measure and related transparency items, saying a public repository would speed information access and reduce duplicative FOIA requests. Commenters said typical problems include long delays, fragmented responses and high fees for requested records. Several speakers noted the city had already purchased FOIA management software (referred to at the meeting as JustFOIA) and urged the city to deploy it promptly.
Administration presenters including the Office of Strategic Communications said they support a FOIA library in principle and noted the city began work on a FOIA library previously; they asked for more time to define the operational rubric for which records would be posted, to align implementation with the new FOIA software and to address potential legal and privacy exceptions. Ross Catron of the Office of Strategic Communications explained that not every record requested under FOIA is suitable for a public archive because exemptions and redactions — for example in active criminal investigations, human‑services records or ambulance and fire reports — may apply. Catron said the city receives roughly 5,500 FOIA requests annually and described administrative estimates that implementing a full public archive, as written in the ordinance, could require staffing support and review capacity beyond current departmental FOIA workflows.
Committee members and administration agreed more detail and legal review were needed. The committee voted to continue the FOIA library ordinance (Ordinance 2025‑210) to the Government Operations Committee meeting on Oct. 22, 2025, so sponsors, legal counsel and administration could coordinate on the scope, use of the JustFOIA tool, redaction rules and staffing. A related ordinance to codify open‑data definitions (Ordinance 2025‑211) was also continued to Oct. 22. The committee recorded the continuance votes on the record.
Ending: Committee staff said they would schedule a demonstration of the FOIA software and collect follow‑up data about FOIA volumes and request types; sponsors said they want a public, durable FOIA library and the administration said it will work with councilors to craft clearer implementation language.
