Public Information Act Compliance Board Decisions

In August 2025, complainant Margaret Litz Domanowski sent a Public Information Act (“PIA”) request Baltimore County Public Schools (“BCPS”) asking for records of email communication between the BCPS superintendent and certain current and former members of the Baltimore County Board of Education. The complainant asked for email records that contained the word “censure” and various permutations of the complainant’s name. BCPS produced email records in response, but applied redactions and withheld records under § 4-301(a)(1)1 (attorney-client privilege) and § 4-344 (deliberative process privilege) of the PIA. BCPS also redacted portions of records it advised were not responsive to the complainant’s PIA request. In this complaint, the complainant alleges that BCPS improperly denied inspection of records and improperly applied redactions to the records it produced. In response to the complaint, counsel for BCPS maintains that BCPS has complied with the PIA.

Last June, complainant Rachel Doyle sent a Public Information Act (“PIA”) request to the Maryland Board of Social Work Examiners (“BSWE”) asking for certain email records concerning a survey and BSWE candidates, as well as certain responses to the survey. The BSWE produced records in several batches. In this complaint, the complainant challenges the BSWE’s response with regard to her request for email records related to the development and implementation of the survey, taking the position that the BSWE has not produced all responsive records. In response to the complaint, the BSWE maintains that it has conducted thorough searches and provided all responsive records to the complainant. After review of the submissions, we find that the BSWE’s initial search for records was insufficient and unreasonable.

Complainant Nicole Dvorak alleges that the Baltimore County Public Library (“BCPL”) improperly denied a Public Information Act (“PIA”) request for a library system CEO’s employment contract. In response to the complaint, BCPL maintains that it properly denied inspection of the contract under § 4-3111 of the PIA. After review, we conclude that BCPL improperly applied § 4-311 and explain further below.