Download to read offline
IPRATransparencyAndPublicRecords.pdf
- 1. IPRA, Transparency, PublicRecords
- 2. New Mexico Inspectionof Public Records Act • State law that allows people to request records from public bodies. • Although public bodies can withhold records that are exempt by law, the person requesting records can challenge the withholdings by filing suit. • Individuals requesting records can also file suit if a request takes too long to fulfill. • The City of Albuquerque appears to receive more requests than any other public body in New Mexico – 10K Plus in 2021
- 3. WHAT ARE PEOPLE REQUESTING? 0500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 APD APD - Traffic Planning AFR AWD Envioronmental Health DMD City Clerk DTI Transit Human Resources Purchasing DFAS Aviation Mayor/CAO FCS Legal Cultural Services Parks & Rec City Council Risk Solid Waste Economic Development CPOA Inspector General Senior Affairs Internal Audit Requests by Department 2021 Common themes: • APD Cases • Land/Site Assessments • City Surveillance • Personnel issues • Procurement issues • Department activity in Neighborhoods
- 4. WHAT DO YOUDO WITH THAT VOLUME?
- 5. HISTORY OF IPRAATCABQ • In the City of Albuquerque, the City Clerk is the designated Chief Records Custodian, responsible for ensuring compliance with IPRA. • In 2013 and 2014, CABQ received around 1,500 IPRA requests a year. • A 2014 audit of the IPRA program found: • A need for a citywide system to track requests • A need to standardize the response to IPRA across city departments • A need to train records custodians on IPRA regulations • In 2015, the City Clerk’s Office procured NextRequest and introduced it to requesters and records custodians. • In 2015, CABQ NextRequest received 850 requests but the City was still accepting requests that were not being entered into NextRequest. • Immediately following the implementation of NextRequest, CABQ experienced increases in requests until 2019 or 2020 when requests started leveling off (hopefully). 3278 5705 7398 8622 9474 10201 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
- 6. • 2018: Through2018, there had been one IPRA Specialist in the Clerk’s Office to coordinate multi-department request. • Changes between 2015-2018 were working well but there were some limitations. • NextRequest does allow standardization • Each department using its own records custodian had limitations. • Lack of consistency in approach • Turnover in the role of records custodian • Ongoing issues with growing volume of lapel camera requests at APD (temps help but were not staying long)
- 7. • 2019 • Centralizedprocessing of IPRA requests in the Clerk’s Office • In addition to existing Specialist (paralegal) position, created and moved around several additional positions: • 3 additional specialist positions in the Clerks Office • 2 permanent “tech” positions moved from APD. • 4 additional “tech” positions created to replace temporary positions. • 1 additional “tech” position created in late 2019 • Prioritize identification of scanning projects • Benefits • Greater consistency • Greater longevity in employees • Better data collection which has been used to identify scanning projects.
- 8. 2021 • Challenge: Requestvolume has continued to grow. COVID Backlog remains. • In 2021 we experienced our first year of over 10,000 requests. We fully expect in 2022 to reach 11,000. • Current Structure • IPRAAttorney • Program Manager • 4 Specialists (Paralegals) • 7 IPRA Techs (Handle Redaction and APD Records) • 2-3 Temps – (Assist with APD Requests) • Pending requests for two additional tech positions.
- 9. What else canyou do besides staffing up?
- 10. More litigation, Morerequest volume
- 11.