Marquette County board denies FOIA appeal for GIS parcel data, cites enhanced-access statute

The Marquette County Board of Commissioners voted 5-0 to deny a Freedom of Information Act appeal filed by Justin Myers seeking the countys current parcel layer with associated tax attributes.

Civil counsel Christina told the board that Myers submitted a FOIA request on 05/19/2026 for parcel-layer data, zoning-district boundaries and address points and that the countys FOIA coordinator denied the parcel-plus-tax-attribute portion of the request under Michigans Enhanced Access to Public Records Act. "There is a FOIA statute that provides this mechanism for the board to look to a different statute, which would be the enhanced access to public records act to get the fees that are required for Mr. Myers to obtain the records," Christina said.

The board debated briefly and then moved to deny the appeal. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Newman; Clerk Linda conducted a roll-call vote in which Commissioners Nordine, Elholm, Newman and Benzie and Chairperson DiRocia recorded "yes." The chair announced the board had voted to deny the appeal.

Nut graf: The decision affirms the countys position that certain GIS products are governed by a statute that provides distinct fees and access procedures outside of the FOIA fee schedule, meaning requesters must use the enhanced-access process rather than FOIA to obtain the parcel-and-attribute extract the appellant sought.

Board members and civil counsel emphasized the county is not refusing access to the data but requiring requesters to follow the enhanced-access process and pay the statutory fees. Christina summarized the records sought and the denial rationale: "On 05/19/2026, Justin Myers sent a FOIA request requesting current parcel layer with associated tax attributes, zoning district boundaries, and address points."

The board recorded no formal dissent; the vote tally was 5 yes, 0 no. The clerk announced the outcome, and the meeting proceeded to a second public-comment period. The county did not adopt any additional direction on the appeal beyond denying it and directing the requester to the enhanced-access process.

The board also approved the meeting agenda earlier in the session and heard public comments raising unrelated procedural concerns and calls for restoration of a countywide suicide-prevention plan.

The record shows the board relied on civil counsel's interpretation of the enhanced-access statute in reaching its decision; the county did not provide a staff-directed follow-up or deadline on whether it would produce additional guidance to the public about obtaining GIS products under the alternative statute.