W.D. 1989) A county sheriff is a “public governmental body” within the meaning of § 610.010(4), RSMo, because the office of sheriff is an administrative entity created by state statute. Court Decisions and Attorney General Opinions Missouri Sunshine Law 22 KANSAS CITY STAR COMPANY v. SHIELDS, 771 S.W.2d 101 (Mo. App. W.D. 1989) A violation of the Sunshine Law occurred when three members of a four- person budget committee of the city council met with the city budget officer and city manager and discussed the city budget in a luncheon meeting that was not announced as required by § 610.020, RSMo. COLOMBO v. BUFORD, 935 S.W.2d 690 (Mo.App. W.D. 1996) A “social” gathering is one where persons gather in pleasant companionship with friends and associates. The standard dictionary definition of “informal” is “not formal; conducted or carried out without formal, regularly prescribed or ceremonious procedure; unofficial.” “Unofficial” is defined as “not belonging to, emanating from, or sanctioned or acknowledged by a governing body.” RECORDS REQUESTS JONES v. JACKSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 162 S.W.3d 53 (Mo.App. W.D. 2005) The Sunshine Law does not require a government body to create a new record upon request, but only to provide access to existing records held or maintained by the public governmental body. STATE ex rel. GRAY v. BINGHAM, 622 S.W.2d 734 (Mo.App. E.D., 1981) Occupancy permits issued by a city are “public records.” Citizens have a right to inspect and copy public records even if there is no apparent legal interest to be subserved, during business hours and subject to reasonable conditions. ANDERSON v. VILLAGE OF JACKSONVILLE, 103 S.W.3d 190 (Mo. App. W.D. 2003) Anyone seeking access to public records must communicate a request in language that a reasonably competent custodian of the records would understand. The custodian must be able to identify records with reasonable specificity in order to be able to provide access to them.

W.D. 2003) Anyone seeking access to public records must communicate a request in language that a reasonably competent custodian of the records would understand. The custodian must be able to identify records with reasonable specificity in order to be able to provide access to them. CHASNOFF v. MOKWA, 466 S.W.3D 571 (Mo.App. E.D., 2015) The Sunshine Law does not provide for a cause of action against a governmental entity requiring it to close its records. Such a claim must be asserted under a different statute or constitutional provision. The purpose of the Sunshine Law is to open official conduct to the public.

Such a claim must be asserted under a different statute or constitutional provision. The purpose of the Sunshine Law is to open official conduct to the public. Missouri Sunshine Law 23 OPEN RECORDS AND MEETINGS HEMEYER v. KRCG-TV, 6 S.W.3d 880 (Mo. 1999) A security videotape of a booking at a county jail is a public record even though the videotape is retained for only days. Also, a public body that brings an action under § 610.027.5, RSMo, to determine its responsibility under the Sunshine Law is liable for reasonable attorney fees because the body brings suit at its own expense under that section. SPRADLIN v. CITY OF FULTON, 982 S.W.2d 255 (Mo. 1998) A city’s closed-meeting discussions of a proposed golf course violate the Sunshine Law when the discussions do not involve the city’s proposed lease of that golf course pursuant to § 610.021(2), RSMo. DEATON v. KIDD, 932 S.W.2d 804 (Mo. App. W.D. 1996) A public governmental body may not restrict public access to records by selling exclusive rights to computer tapes of public records to a bidder who then provides the records at a cost to the public. PULITZER PUBLISHING CO. v. MISSOURI STATE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM (MOSERS), 927 S.W.2d 477 (Mo. App. W.D. 1996) A public governmental body may not promulgate a rule to close public records where there is no statutory authority for that rule and the records appear to be public pursuant to § 610.021(13), RSMo. MISSOURI PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SERVICES v. ALLAN, 787 S.W.2d 291 (Mo. App. W.D. 1990) A preliminary draft of a report prepared by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs and in the possession of the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is a public record because it is a record retained by a public governmental body. Section 610.010(6), RSMo, does not require a record to be in final form. LIBRACH v. COOPER, 778 S.W.2d 351 (Mo. App. E.D. 1989) A severance agreement reached between a school district and superintendent is a public record to be made available for inspection and copying. PROGRESS MISSOURI, INC.,v. MISSOURI SENATE, 494 S.W.3d 1 (Mo.App. W.D., 2016) The right to record a meeting is satisfied if the public body is creating its own recording. It is not a right for all to record, but a right for a recording to exist and for access to that end product based upon the rules created by the body to minimize disruption of the body’s proceedings.

W.D., 2016) The right to record a meeting is satisfied if the public body is creating its own recording. It is not a right for all to record, but a right for a recording to exist and for access to that end product based upon the rules created by the body to minimize disruption of the body’s proceedings. Missouri Sunshine Law 24 CLOSURE PERMITTED AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. v. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, 169 S.W.3d 905 (Mo. App. W.D. 2005) Under § 610.021(14), RSMo, a public body may rely on another statute, in this case a trade secrets provision under §§ 417.450 through 417.467, RSMo, to properly close certain insurance company records. JONES v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF KANSAS CITY, 174 S.W.3d 594 (Mo. App. W.D. 2005) Identifying information of public housing tenants may be closed under the Sunshine Law because those records fall within the exception relating to “welfare cases of identifiable individuals” under § 610.021(8), RSMo. STATE EX REL. MOORE v. BREWSTER, 116 S.W.3d 630 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003) An attorney report on alleged misconduct by two school board members is a closed record as legal work product, but must be shared with all board members. CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. CITY OF BRIDGETON, 806 S.W.2d 717 (Mo. App. E.D. 1991) A public governmental body purchasing a number of contiguous parcels in a single subdivision is authorized to close records relating to the price paid for one parcel until all the parcels have been acquired.

App. E.D. 1991) A public governmental body purchasing a number of contiguous parcels in a single subdivision is authorized to close records relating to the price paid for one parcel until all the parcels have been acquired. FEES R.L. POLK & CO. v. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 309 S.W.3d 881 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010) Department of Revenue established a $3.82 charge per electronic copy for Missouri vehicle or driver’s license records, based on analysis of its costs to maintain and provide electronic copies or records. Court ruled that DOR’s uniform per electronic record fee was not authorized by § 610.026.1(2), RSMo, in that it did not include only the costs of copies, staff time, and the cost of the medium used for duplication. The court recognized that such costs do not necessarily vary on a per record basis. WEBSTER COUNTY ABSTRACT CO., INC. v. ATKISON, 328 S.W.3d 434 (Mo. App. S.D. 2010) Recorder of Deeds charged a flat fee (per record charge) for all copies of records as authorized by § 59.130, RSMo, which allows up to $2.00 for the first page and up to $1.00 for each additional page. Charge bore no relationship to actual costs. Abstract company filed suit claiming charges violated the Sunshine Law, specifically § 610.026, RSMo. The court held the language at the beginning of § 610.026, RSMo, “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by law” permitted the per record charges authorized by § 59.310, RSMo.