Request rejected

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CENTRE COUNTY, CIVIL ACTION - LAW COUNTY OF CENTRE, Petitioner No. 2017-0664 v. . RICH JONES, Respondent - :1 Attorney for Petitioner: Elizabeth A. Dupuis, Esq; . if Attorney for RespondentOpinion and Order *3255 . Ruest, J. Presently before the Court is County of Centre?s (Petitioner) appeal of the Office of Open Records (OOR) determination Petitioner must provide further responsive documents to a Right-_ to-Know Law (RTKL) request made by Rich Jones (Respondent). The RTKL request sought from Petitioner all documentation relating to an executive session of the County?s Prison Board; Petitioner provided responsive documents. Respondent appealed the request to the OOR claiming documents were not turned over. OOR issued its Final Determination dated January 20, 2017. OOR agreed in part with Respondent, granted his request and ordered Petitioner to provide all responsive records within 30 days. For the following reasons, this Court overrules the decision of the OOR. Findings of Fact 1. Centre County?s Prison Board held an executive session on August 31, 2016 to discuss personnel matters. 2. A Prison Board meeting was held September 1, 2016. 3. Respondent filed a RTKL request December 27, 2016. The Request sought ?Any and all documents created during, mentioning, after or othentvise relating to the prison board .0 executive session held on August 31, 2016, including searches for all minutes, event proceedings, notes, presentations, memoranda, emails, faxes, instant messages, press releases and any other analog or digital communications." . On December 28, 2016 Petitioner granted the request and supplied Respondent with the minutes from the Prison Board meeting of September 1, 2016 and agenda and minutes from September 8, 2016. . Respondent appealed to the OCR on December 30, 2016 on the grounds Petitioner did not provide the information sought. . OOR received the appeal on January 3, 2017. . Natalie Corman submitted an affidavit on January 17, 2017 stating no minutes were taken at the executive session, only personnel matters were discussed, and such matters are excluded from the RTKL. . OOR issued its Final Determination January 20, 2017 finding meeting minutes do not exist and therefore do not need to be turned over, but any documents created during, mentioning, or relating to the executive session must be turned over. . Petitioner filed this appeal February 17, 2017. Conclusions of Law . This Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the OCR when the government entity involved is a local agency, including the county government. 65 PS. ?67.1302. . This Court is the fact-finder and entitled to make a de novo review of the record. Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 621 Pa. 133, 75 A.3d 453, 469-70 (2013). . This Court has a broad scope of review. Id. at 476 . Pursuant to the Sunshine Act, executive sessions may be used to discuss the termination of an employee but any official action must be taken at an open meeting. 65 ?7os 5. Records relating to agency employees regarding their discipline, demotion, or discharge are exempt from RTKL requests. 65 PS. 6. An affidavit is sufficient evidence that a record does not exist. Department of Labor and Industry v. Earley, 126 A.3d 355, 357 (Pa.Commw.Ct. 2015) Discussion This Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the OCR when the government entity involved is a local agency, including the county government. 65 PS. ?67.1302. As such, the Court is empowered to make a de novo review of the record and is the fact?finder. Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 621 Pa. 133, 75 A.3d 453, 469-70 (2013). The Court is also empowered with a broad scope of review, and is not limited to the record presented from the OOR on appeal. Id. at 474-76. The Court reviewed the record presented from the OCR, and allowed Petitioner the opportunity to supplement the record; Petitioner did not do so, and this Court relies on the record from the OCR in making its determination. Respondent seeks "any and all documents created during, mentioning, after or othenrvise relating to" the Prison Board's executive session held August 31, 2016. This request was granted by Petitioner in a letter and affidavit dated December 28, 2016 and the minutes from the September 1, 2016 Prison Board meeting and agenda and minutes from the September 8, 2016 meeting were provided to Respondent. After Respondent?s appeal, a sworn affidavit by Natalie Corman on January 17, 2017 stated the executive session was for personnel matters. Pursuant to the Sunshine Act, executive sessions may be used to discuss the termination of an employee but any official action must be taken at an open meeting. 65 ?708. Information regarding discipline, demotion or discharge relating to an agency employee is exempt from RTKL requests. 65 PS. As such, any documentation from the executive session would be discussing termination, and would therefore be exempt from this RTKL request. Additionally, the affidavit filed by Natalie Corman on January 17, 2017 stated no minutes exist from the executive session. An affidavit is sufficient evidence that a record does not exist. Department of Labor and Industry v. Earley, 126 A.3d 355, 357 (Pa.Commw.Ct. 2015). As such, there is sufficient evidence to find the records do not exist and are exempt from a RTKL request. The Court finds that the agenda and minutes produced by the Petitioner from the September 1, 2016 and September 8, 2016 Prison Board meetings satisfy Respondent?s request. The following order is hereby entered: ORDER AND NOW, this 13th day of April, 2017, the Petition for Review of Final Determination Issued by Of?ce of Open Records is GRANTED. The Final Determination by the Office of Open Records is overturned, and Petitioner does not need to provide any further documentation to Respondent. BY THE COURT: Pamela A. Ruest, Judge