Follow-up email request

August 14, 2006


We have faxed the following request to the City of Pensacola and Marty Donovan today:

There appears to be several items missing from the public records given us to satisfy our 7/14/06 records request:

“All emails to or from Pensacola City Councilman Marty Donovan regarding the property commonly known as the “Trillium Property” and the Community Maritime Park proposal for the period November 1, 2004 through July 12, 2006.

This record request includes any official City of Pensacola email accounts, private business email accounts and personal email accounts.”

What need the following:

1. A letter certifying that  all emails from Councilman Donovan on the Trillium property and the Community Maritime Park were included. There are less than a dozen emails from Mr. Donovan in the packet that we were given.

2. All the attachments that are identified in the emails.

3. There are three emails that have no content. We need the information that was in those emails. I’ve attached the headers we received.

4. Councilman Donovan has his wife send out information from her email account – – according to emails we were given. It appears he is using her as conduit for city business. We are requesting all emails received and sent on that email account regarding the Trillium property and the Community Maritime Park.

We request all the above-referenced information be made available for pick up by August 18, 2006.


8 Responses to “Follow-up email request”

  1. Tom Garner Says:

    Hey Rick,

    You may not be aware of this, but it is bad, bad form to put someone’s private information (address, phone number, e-mail address) on a public forum. This provides a venue for the crackpots of the world to lash out. You can make your point without listing the actual e-mail address.


    Public e-mail address: okay.

    Private e-mail address: not so good.


    Tom Garner

  2. Rick Outzen Says:

    It’s our position that it’s public record. But I will work harder on my other manners.

  3. Tom Garner Says:


    It may be in a public record, but it, in and of itself, is not a public record, unless and until you receive a ruling otherwise. Until then, it is your speculation that her e-mail is a public record.

    This is bad form, my friend.

    Tom Garner

  4. Rick Outzen Says:

    Either they will comply with the request or the courts will decide.

  5. Tom Garner Says:


    In the meantime, you’ve published a private citizen’s private e-mail address. This is not right.


  6. Anonymous Says:


    Recall the emails that SOC obtained from City officials. They also left all addresses in there, if I remember correctly.

  7. Tom Garner Says:


    If they did, they shouldn’t have, but if I recall correctly, these would have been in pdf format and not immediately visible on the main page of the site.

    Rick also has additional private e-mails in his pdf’s, which should be redacted, but the real problem is the private e-mail address on the front page. It’s just not done.

    Tom Garner

  8. Anonymous Says:

    A new Florida Law went into effect July 1st regarding all municipal and state websites. They are now required to post the following statement: “Legal Notice- effective July 1, 2006
    Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.” This statement is on the City and the County websites.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s