Chicago Tribune Co. v. Cook County Assessor's Office
109 N.E.3d 872
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- The Chicago Tribune filed a FOIA request seeking Cook County Assessor spreadsheets and valuation reports (65D parcel-level reports and 65A township summaries) showing property valuations for tax years 2002–2015.
- The Assessor’s Office denied the request under FOIA’s deliberative process (preliminary records) exemption, characterizing the records as analysts’ opinions, thought processes, and predecisional materials.
- The Assessor described a multi-step valuation process: regression models merging sales and characteristic data, removal of outliers, rerunning analyses, and analyst edits; finalized values are placed in 65D reports and 65A summaries.
- The Tribune sued to compel production; parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and the trial court ordered disclosure and awarded attorney fees to the Tribune; certain trial records were sealed pending appeal.
- On appeal the trial court’s ruling was affirmed: the court held the requested records were final, factual assessment results not protected by the deliberative process exemption; sealing orders were vacated and attorney fees upheld.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether spreadsheets, 65D and 65A reports are exempt under FOIA’s deliberative process exemption | The records are factual, final valuations and must be disclosed | Records reflect analysts’ predecisional opinions, thoughts, and deliberations and are therefore exempt | Not exempt; records are final factual determinations, not predecisional/deliberative, and must be produced |
| Whether 65A reports were within scope though not originally requested | Tribune argued production is proper and parties litigated the issue below | Assessor argued Tribune didn’t specifically request 65A reports so they need not be produced | Waiver: Assessor litigated the issue in trial court and cannot raise lack-of-request on appeal; 65A must be produced |
| Whether trial court properly awarded attorney fees and costs under FOIA | Fees requested were reasonable for time spent and relief obtained | Assessor claimed fee petition lacked evidentiary support and fees exceeded prevailing rates | Fee award affirmed; trial court did not abuse discretion and FOIA mandates awarding reasonable fees to prevailing requester |
| Whether court records should remain sealed on appeal | Tribune: records should be unsealed because documents are not exempt and judicial proceedings are presumptively open | Assessor: sought sealing to protect withheld information | Sealing vacated; no compelling statutory basis to keep records sealed once disclosure is required |
Key Cases Cited
- Harwood v. McDonough, 344 Ill. App. 3d 242 (Ill. App. Ct.) (discussing preliminary records/deliberative process exemption)
- Day v. City of Chicago, 388 Ill. App. 3d 70 (Ill. App. Ct.) (FOIA’s purpose and narrow reading of exemptions)
- N.L.R.B. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132 (U.S. Sup. Ct.) (deliberative process exemption protects predecisional intra-agency communications)
- Enviro Tech Int’l, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., 371 F.3d 370 (7th Cir.) (document must be both predecisional and deliberative to qualify for exemption)
- Stern v. Wheaton-Warrenville Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. 200, 233 Ill. 2d 396 (Ill. 2009) (public body bears burden to prove FOIA exemption applies)
- Reilly v. U.S. E.P.A., 429 F. Supp. 2d 335 (D. Mass.) (final model results not protected merely because they reflect inputs or could illuminate agency thought processes)