Under FOIA, all persons are entitled to full and complete information about the official acts of public employees. The FOIA does not stand for the proposition that some persons or entities are entitled to document disclosure and some are not, or that the documents may be disclosed in full to particular persons and redacted to others. Therefore, what was disclosed to the Booth plaintiffs must be disclosed to this Plaintiff. Defendant's argument that the Booth holding does not require document disclosure to anyone requesting it is incorrect in that the Act itself requires disclosure to all. Having determined that disclosure of the redacted portions of documents sought by Plaintiff is proper, the Court will address Defendant's remaining arguments only briefly.
Defendant claims that the Michigan Constitution prevents disclosure.
In support, Defendant turns to Justice Riley's dissenting opinion in Booth, supra. This Court respectfully disagrees with that conclusion. The OMA provides for public meetings of public bodies to be open to members of the public. The FOIA provides for the dissemination of information from persons representing members of the public. The OMA specifically provides for inapplicability of the Act to some boards and panels, as well as some committee actions.