Kaplin v. Lower Merion Township
2011 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 225
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2011Background
- Requester seeks RTKL records related to a 600-unit Righters Ferry development before a township board decision.
- Township initially disclosed some records but with exemptions: internal predecisional deliberations, attorney-client privilege, and draft zoning amendments.
- OOR and trial court differed on whether certain Board-Staff communications were internal and deliberative under RTKL §708(b)(10)(i).
- Second RTKL request narrowed time to November 17, 2009–December 9, 2009; Township again withheld some records as deliberative or privileged.
- Court addresses whether Board communications can be deliberative pre-decision, and whether staff-board communications can be internal under RTKL.
- Court affirms trial court, holding certain Board–staff communications fall within the RTKL predecisional deliberation exemption.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Board communications before MPC-deliberation period are exempt | Kaplin argues predeliberation communications cannot be deliberative. | Lower Merion argues predecisional deliberations can occur prior to MPC-deliberation window. | Board communications may be deliberative even before the MPC period. |
| Whether Board–Township staff communications can be internal for RTKL purposes | Requests imply such communications are not internal due to staff opposing the Application. | Communications can be internal or between agency members/employees of another agency under RTKL. | These communications can be internal or considered predecisional deliberations between agencies. |
| Whether attorney-client privilege applies to emails involving Township solicitor and special counsel | Township failed to prove privilege; some emails not privileged. | Privilege applies to confidential communications between solicitor, staff, and counsel regarding the Application. | Privilege applied to certain emails; disclosure limited accordingly. |
| Whether the RTKL exemptions override due process concerns under MPC/ Sunshine Act | Records involving ex parte or improper deliberations should be non-exempt. | RTKL exemptions address internal deliberations; due process concerns are separate avenues for challenge. | RTKL exemptions govern; remedies lie in the Board’s adverse decision appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Vartan, 557 Pa. 390, 733 A.2d 1258 (Pa. 1999) (predecisional deliberations scope includes internal/external agency communications)
- Stein v. Plymouth Township, 994 A.2d 1179 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2010) (RTKL disclosures and procedural remedies; discovery not applicable)
- Wistuk v. Lower Mount Bethel Township Zoning Hearing Bd., 592 Pa. 419, 925 A.2d 768 (Pa. 2007) (deliberations vs. hearings; tolling 45-day period clarified)
- Allegheny County Dept. of Administrative Services v. A Second Chance, Inc., 13 A.3d 1025 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2011) (scope of RTKL review for factual findings and law)
- Piasecki v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 6 A.3d 1067 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2010) (scope of RTKL and administrative record standards)