
FOIA and Accountability: A Fight for Transparency in South Carolina
by CC News Network
COLUMBIA. S.C., — Wendy Brawley’s years-long FOIA legal battle with Richland County over the Lower Richland Sewer Project sheds light on the challenges citizens face in holding public bodies accountable. A recent South Carolina Supreme Court ruling affirmed the county’s violation of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), highlighting gaps in transparency and the high cost of seeking justice.
What is FOIA?
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a law designed to ensure public access to government records. In South Carolina, FOIA guarantees citizens the right to request and receive information about public bodies’ activities, fostering transparency and accountability.
For journalists, it’s an absolute critical tool when digging for the truth. But as a citizen, it can also seem overwhelming. When Erika Moses from Clinton, SC was trying to FOIA documents pertaining to her son’s homicide investigation, the Lauren’s County Sheriff’s office did respond to her FOIA request, but the cost of the information was nearly $1,500.00 for her to get from them. “It makes people just want to give up and stop fighting,” Moses said.
State and local governments may charge for their time and resources for FOIA requests. The S.C. Law Enforcement Division complies with requirements of the S.C. Freedom of Information Act. Under provisions of the FOIA, SLED has 10 business days (or 20 business days for requests for records over two years old) in which to inform you of the availability of non-exempt publically available documents specific to your request and to arrange a mutually suitable date and time for document review and/or providing publically available documents.
SLED charges reasonable costs for providing documents. Fees will be assessed uniformly. Any reduction or waiver in fees must be approved in advance by the Chief of SLED or the Freedom of Information Coordinator. A deposit of up to 25 percent of the anticipated cost may be assessed prior to processing a request.
Archival Retrieval Fee……………$25 per box
CD/DVD Fee………………………$5 per disk
Printed Copies…………………..$0.15 per page
The Case’s Impact on Public Accountability
In 2014, Wendy Brawley submitted several FOIA requests to Richland County seeking documents related to the Lower Richland Sewer Project, a multimillion-dollar initiative. Dissatisfied with the county’s incomplete response, she filed a lawsuit that ultimately revealed significant lapses in the county’s handling of public records.
The appellate court upheld that the county violated FOIA by failing to conduct a diligent search for responsive documents. This decision underscores the importance of public accountability, as the requested documents were essential for evaluating the project’s costs and impacts on local residents.
The Supreme Court’s Opinion stated, “There is sufficient evidence in the record to affirm the circuit court’s finding that the County violated FOIA. Though we agree with the circuit court that Brawley partially prevailed and is entitled to an award of reasonable fees, there are material errors affecting Brawley’s award.”
FOIA as a Tool for Transparency
The Supreme Court’s findings emphasized that FOIA exists to protect the public by ensuring access to government records. However, the case also highlights systemic barriers, such as incomplete initial responses and lengthy legal proceedings, that can undermine the effectiveness of FOIA.
Brawley’s persistence led to the eventual release of critical documents, but not without significant delays and costs. Her case demonstrates both the potential and the limitations of FOIA as a mechanism for transparency.
The Cost of Justice
The financial toll of seeking transparency was a significant aspect of this case. Brawley was initially awarded $81,000 in attorney’s fees, later revised to $80,845. Despite partially prevailing, questions arose about whether these costs were proportional to the degree of success achieved.
The court’s scrutiny of the fee award highlighted the broader issue of access to justice. For many citizens, the prospect of high legal fees can deter efforts to hold public bodies accountable, effectively limiting FOIA’s reach.
“For the reasons described below, there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the circuit court’s finding that the County violated FOIA. See Campbell, 354 S.C. at 280, 580 S.E.2d at 166 (“[T]he trial court’s factual findings will not be disturbed on appeal [of a declaratory judgment action under FOIA] unless a review of the record discloses that there is no evidence which reasonably supports the judge’s findings.”),” the Supreme Court stated in their Opinion.
Precedents and Lessons for South Carolina
This case sets an important precedent for FOIA enforcement in South Carolina. The court’s decision to affirm Brawley’s status as a prevailing party—while also remanding the fee award for further consideration—demonstrates a commitment to fairness and transparency.
The court’s handling of attorney’s fees also clarified the inclusion of paralegal work in reasonable fee calculations. This decision reinforces the value of support staff in reducing overall legal costs.
This Opinion puts all state, county and municipalities in the state of South Carolina on notice, they must follow the law.Â
“The purpose of FOIA is to protect the public by providing a mechanism for the disclosure of information by public bodies.” Sloan v. Friends of Hunley, Inc. (Friends I), 369 S.C. 20, 26, 630 S.E.2d 474, 478 (2006). “[FOIA] must be construed so as to make it possible for citizens, or their representatives, to learn and report fully the activities of their public officials at a minimum cost or delay to the persons seeking access to public documents or meetings.” S.C. Code Ann. § 30-4-15 (2007). There have been significant amendments to FOIA in the time since Brawley’s FOIA requests. See Act 67, 2017 S.C. Acts 311. Throughout this opinion, we rely on the 2014 version of the act, which controls this litigation,” the Supreme Court further stated.
Wider Implications for FOIA Enforcement
Brawley’s case underscores the ongoing challenges of enforcing FOIA compliance. Public bodies must ensure thorough and timely responses to requests, while citizens need to feel empowered to challenge inadequate disclosures without fear of financial repercussions.
The case also raises broader questions about government accountability and the resources available to citizens seeking transparency. As South Carolina continues to refine its FOIA processes, this case serves as a reminder of the law’s critical role in safeguarding public trust.
Conclusion
Wendy Brawley’s case serves as a powerful example of the critical role citizens play in holding public officials accountable. As South Carolina grapples with balancing transparency and administrative efficiency, this case underscores the importance of a robust FOIA system that empowers citizens like Brawley, and Erika Moses, and enforces public accountability.
Call to Action
Citizens are encouraged to use FOIA as a tool for transparency and to advocate for stronger compliance mechanisms. Holding public bodies accountable is essential for maintaining trust and integrity in government operations.
Connect with CC News Network
Over 1,400,000 Million likes of Tiktok alone!
Join Our Close to 100,000 Social Media Fans:
- X:Â @CCNewsNetwork
- TikTok:Â @CCNewsNetwork
- Facebook:Â CC News Network
- Talk Radio: 97.7FM WVFF – airs in the Low Country
- Amazon Books:Â Click here to follow
- Cameo:Â @CC News Network
- Spotify:Â @CC Records
- Bluesky:Â @ccnewsnetwork.bsky.social
- Unnamed Network: New True Crime Drama Series