UGH. So much nonsense. Here's a response, post law suit, for the Chicago's mayor's office's phone records. Additionally, the Illinois Attorney General's Offic

UGH. So much nonsense. Here's a response, post law suit, for the Chicago's mayor's office's phone records. Additionally, the Illinois Attorney General's Office Public Access Counselor ("PAC") has established that City-issued cell phone numbers are exempt from disclosure pursuant to 5 ILLS 140/7(1)(c), because the disclosure of these numbers would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. As the PAC reasoned, certain City employees are issued cell phones so they may be on call during non-work hours or while away from their offices. Disclosure of these numbers could subject staff to excessive phone calls from the public at all times of day. Further, if staff were forced to turn off their cell phones to reduce such intrusion, they may not be readily available to attend to the business of the public body, defeating the purpose of issuing them cell phones. (See 2010 PAC 8685, issued September 30, 2010, attached hereto as Ex. B.) Thus, the only phone numbers which are not exempt under FOIA are those that are publically listed and are not home telephone numbers, personal telephone numbers, or work-issued cell phone numbers. In other words, FOIA only compels the production of listed numbers belonging to businesses, governmental agencies and other entities, and only those numbers which are not work-issued cell phones. Yet.. per FOIA: The disclosure of information that bears on the public duties of public employees and officials shall not be considered an invasion of personal privacy. In any case, I still got enough to make this (two tabs): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTRN8n876KL8aXYYu5it8Lg0g8/ https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTR...