Right-to-Know Requests
Click on previous requests for request details and results.
Submit a Request for Information
Right-to-Know FAQs
Every agency, whether local or Commonwealth, is required by the Right-to-Know Law (RTKL) to appoint an Agency Open Records Officer (AORO).
Some agencies refer to this person as a Right-to-Know Officer, but the function is the same. This is the person you should address your request to.
Often, the best way to find the AORO’s contact information is on the agency’s website. If you can’t find it there, or the agency doesn’t maintain a website, search the Office of Open Records’ (OOR) database of AOROs. If you still can’t find the AORO’s contact information, simply address it to “Agency Open Records Officer” and send it to the agency’s main address.
The Seven Valleys Borough Right-to-Know-Officer is Todd A. Zeigler.
Click here to email.
Or call 717-309-8033
An Agency has five business days to respond in writing to: (1) grant the request; (2) deny the request, citing the legal basis for the denial or partial denial; or (3) invoke a 30-calendar day extension for certain reasons.
The clock starts the day after the RTK request is received during regular business hours. In other words, an agency has five business days to respond to a request, whether you place the request in person or by mail.
Acceptable grounds for a 30-calendar day extension include: off-site location of records, staffing limitations, need for legal review or redaction, complex request, or the requester did not pay applicable fees as required or failed to follow agency policy.
If an agency does not respond to a request in the allotted time, the request is deemed denied, and you have the right to file an appeal with the Office of Open Records.
If an Agency denies a record, or a portion of a record, the requester has a right to file an appeal with the Office of Open Records.
The appeal must be submitted to the Office of Open Records within 15 business days of the mailing date of the Agency’s response. Appeals should be sent to the Office of Open Records, 333 Market Street, 16th Floor, Harrisburg, PA 17101-2234. They may also be submitted via facsimile to 717-425-5343 or via email as a Microsoft Word or PDF attachment.
All appeals must be in writing and shall include the following information that may be submitted using the OOR’s Appeal Form:
- A copy of the original Right-to-Know Request.
- A copy of the denial letter submitted by the Agency. (If the agency does not respond in writing within five business days, the request is “deemed denied” [i.e., automatically denied] and can be appealed.)
- State the grounds you believe the record is a public record – you must state why you believe the requested record is a public record – a general statement that the record is public under the Right-to-Know Law is insufficient.
- Address all grounds that the Agency raised in its denial – you must state why you believe each of the agency’s denial, arguments, and exemptions are incorrect – a general statement that the agency is incorrect is insufficient.
The Office of Open Records is required to dismiss any appeal that does not include this information.
If an Agency denies a record, or a portion of a record, the requester has a right to file an appeal with the Office of Open Records.
The appeal must be submitted to the Office of Open Records within 15 business days of the mailing date of the Agency’s response. Appeals should be sent to the Office of Open Records, 333 Market Street, 16th Floor, Harrisburg, PA 17101-2234. They may also be submitted via facsimile to 717-425-5343 or via email as a Microsoft Word or PDF attachment.
All appeals must be in writing and shall include the following information that may be submitted using the OOR’s Appeal Form:
- A copy of the original Right-to-Know Request.
- A copy of the denial letter submitted by the Agency. (If the agency does not respond in writing within five business days, the request is “deemed denied” [i.e., automatically denied] and can be appealed.)
- State the grounds you believe the record is a public record – you must state why you believe the requested record is a public record – a general statement that the record is public under the Right-to-Know Law is insufficient.
- Address all grounds that the Agency raised in its denial – you must state why you believe each of the agency’s denial, arguments, and exemptions are incorrect – a general statement that the agency is incorrect is insufficient.
The Office of Open Records is required to dismiss any appeal that does not include this information.
Sunshine Act FAQs
Yes. The Sunshine Act gives the public the right to comment on issues “that are or may be before the board.” Agencies must provide a reasonable opportunity for residents and/or taxpayers to comment on an issue before a decision takes place.
Agencies are permitted to establish rules to oversee public comment by, for example, limiting the time for each commenter. The OOR encourages agencies to take care when imposing time limits on public comment. Three minutes is a common limit and may be more than enough at most public meetings. However, it may not be adequate at certain meetings, such as when a complex draft budget is being discussed. It can be a good practice to allow for flexibility in any policy imposing time limits on public comment, taking care to ensure that the agency does not show partiality to some commenters over others.
Agencies are also permitted to limit comment to residents and taxpayers of the area served by the agency.
Yes. The Sunshine Act allows meetings to be recorded with an audio recorder or a video recorder. It also allows agencies to issue reasonable rules concerning the use of recording devices in order to avoid any disruptions. However, such rules cannot be an attempt to prevent a member of the public from recording a meeting.
The law does not require the recording of a public meeting to be announced in advance; however, it may be helpful for the chairperson in the opening statements to alert the public that the meeting might be recorded.
It’s important to draw a distinction between an individual agency member discussing agency business with members of the public and multiple agency members discussing agency business among themselves.
An agency member is permitted to discuss agency business with members of the public, whether by email or social media (or in person, on the telephone, via postal mail, etc.). In many cases, such communications are public records available under the Right-to-Know Law.
However, voting members of an agency are not permitted to deliberate except at a public meeting. In other words, agency members exchanging opinions about an upcoming vote or encouraging other agency members to vote a particular way in an email discussion or a discussion held via social media would violate the Sunshine Act.
An agency may discuss certain matters in Executive Session, which is not held in public. Section 708 of the Sunshine Act enumerates seven reasons an agency may hold an Executive Session:
- Discussing personnel matters;
- Holding an information, strategy and negotiation session related to the negotiation of a collective bargaining agreement;
- Considering the purchase or lease of real property;
- Consulting with an attorney about active or pending litigation;
- Discussing agency business which, if conducted in public, would violate a lawful privilege or lead to the disclosure of information or confidentiality protected by law;
- Discussing certain academic matters (this reason is specifically limited to certain institutions of higher education); and
- Discussing certain public safety issues if disclosure of the information discussed would be reasonably likely to jeopardize or threaten public safety or preparedness or public protection.
The specific reason for an Executive Session must be announced in the public meeting either before or directly after the Executive Session. See Reading Eagle Co. v. Council of City of Reading, 627 A.2d 305 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993), (“[T]he reasons stated by the public agency must be specific, indicating a real, discrete matter”).
Closed gatherings may also beheld “solely for the purpose of collecting information or educating agency members about an issue.” See Smith v. Township of Richmond, 623 Pa. 209, 223 (Pa. 2013) (“[T]he Supervisors’ four closed-door gatherings did not violate the [Sunshine] Act because they were held for informational purposes only and did not involve deliberations”).