Public Records: deliberations of agency acting in quasi-judicial role are exempt from disclosure

Rueger v. Natural Resources Board, 2012 VT 33 (Reiber, C.J.)

Plaintiffs appeal from the trial court’s summary judgment order in favor of defendants in this  Public Records Act case. The court concluded that certain records held by defendants reflected the deliberations of an agency acting in a quasi-judicial role and thus were exempt from disclosure under 1 V.S.A. § 317(c)(24). We affirm.

This case involves a specific and plainly stated statutory exemption under the PRA.  That exemption protects “records of, or internal materials prepared for, the deliberations of any public agency acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity.” The documents at issue were emails between Committee members and the Committee’s counsel, all of which concerned the basis for District #9’s decision to disqualify itself from hearing an application. In enacting § 317(c)(24) our Legislature has determined that all judicial or quasi-judicial “deliberations” are exempt from disclosure. It does not purport to incorporate a “deliberative process privilege”. The trial court was not obligated to weigh the public interest in disclosure against the defendants’ legitimate expectation of privacy. Simply because an agency member speaks with a newspaper reporter or other individual, the agency did not open the deliberative process to scrutiny. The Legislature evaluated the competing interests and concluded that a blanket exemption on quasi-judicial deliberations was appropriate.