City of Colorado Springs v. David White November 1998

Home Browse Search

967 P.2d 1042, City of Colorado Springs v. White, (Colo. 1998) been reached and designed to explain it, are not protected by the governmental deliberative process privilege. [6] Witnesses X216(1) 410 - - -- 410II Competency 410II(D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications 410k216 Communications to or Information Acquired by Public Officers 410k216(1) In General; Official or Governmental Privilege. The predecisional requirement of the governmental deliberative process privilege does not turn on the ability of an agency to identify a specific decision in connection with which the material was prepared; however, the existence of a specific decision to which a requested document contributed is not entirely irrelevant, and will be one factor to which courts should look to determine if a document is predecisional. [7] Witnesses X216(1) 410 - - -- 410II Competency 410II(D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications 410k216 Communications to or Information Acquired by Public Officers 410k216(1) In General; Official or Governmental Privilege. - Material that is predecisional in nature normally retains its protection under the governmental deliberative process privilege even after the decision is made; however, predecisional material can lose its protected status if the decisionmaker incorporates the material by reference, or expressly adopts it, in the final decision. [8] Witnesses X216(1) 410 - - -- 410II Competency 410II(D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications 410k216 Communications to or Information Acquired by Public Officers 410k216(1) In General; Official or Governmental Privilege. In order to be protected under the governmental deliberative process privilege, a document must be "deliberative "; advisory materials which truly reflect the deliberative or policymaking processes of an agency are protected, while purely factual, investigative material is not. Page 2 [9] Witnesses «216(1) 410 - - -- 410II Competency 410II(D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications 410k216 Communications to or Information Acquired by Public Officers 410k216(1) In General; Official or Governmental Privilege. In determining whether material is "deliberative," and thus protected under the governmental deliberative process privilege, courts should not mechanically apply the fact /opinion test in every case, as the privilege also protects factual material that is so inextricably intertwined with the deliberative sections of the documents that its disclosure would inevitably reveal the government's deliberations. [10]Witnesses G�216(1) 410 - - -- 410II Competency 410II(D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications 410k216 Communications to or Information Acquired by Public Officers 410k216(1) In General; Official or Governmental Privilege. The function and significance of the document in the agency's decisionmaking process are relevant in determining whether it is protected under the governmental deliberative process privilege; documents representing the ideas and theories that go into the making of policy, which are privileged, should be distinguished from binding agency opinions and interpretations that are retained and referred to as precedent and constitute the policy itself. [11]Witnesses 2` 216(1) 410 - - -- 410II Competency 410II(D) Confidential Relations and Privileged Communications 410k216 Communications to or Information Acquired by Public Officers 410k216(1) In General; Official or Governmental Privilege. In determining whether material is protected under the governmental deliberative process privilege, the identity and decisionmaking authority of the office or person issuing the material is relevant; a Copyright (c) West Group 2001 No claim to original U.S. Govt. works