SHADYSIDE — Shadyside Village Council plans to refine or clarify a recent controversial change to its Freedom of Information Act policy.

Councilman Mike Meintel made a motion earlier this month to post a log of residents who make Freedom of Information Act requests on the village’s Facebook page. At the March 10 meeting, all members voted in favor of the motion and established the new policy.

While discussing the proposed change, Meintel said the village had recently been “inundated” with FOIA requests. He said responding to those requests was taking time away from Chief Records Clerk Jerry Elliott’s daily responsibilities.

He also read aloud the names of residents who had submitted FOIA requests since December, terming it as “the record of what Jerry’s been having to put up with here for the last few months …”

When voting on the motion, Councilwoman Melanie Haswell said she believed the policy would help instill trust in council’s ability to be more transparent.

Village Solicitor Kelly Kotur on Wednesday said the decision stemmed from council’s desire to provide transparency about the work responsibilities of village employees and the use of village resources. She said council wants to inform residents how employees’ time is being spent and desires to inform taxpayers about how and where the village’s resources are being used.

As of Wednesday, no list of FOIA requests was found on The Village of Shadyside Facebook page.

Since 1967, the Freedom of Information Act has provided the public the right to request access to records from any federal agency. It is often described as the law that keeps citizens in the know about their government.

Federal agencies are required to disclose any information requested under the FOIA unless it falls under one of nine exemptions which protect interests such as personal privacy, national security, and law enforcement, according to the Freedom of Information Act’s government website.

In Ohio, the FOIA is implemented through the Public Records Act, or “Sunshine Laws,” that grant citizens access to state and local government records, including municipalities and schools.

When council voted to approve Meintel’s motion, it caused an uproar from residents, some of whom took to social media stating that they believed the new policy was a scare tactic to try to “publicly shame residents into not filing a FOIA.”

“I’d be more concerned as to why the requests have increased instead of trying to shame the residents for asking,” Sherri Brown Jobe commented on Facebook.

“People want accountability, shady behavior like this only proves why some people don’t trust the government. If you or anyone else don’t have anything to worry about, why try to shame those who ask for records,” Brock Williams also commented.

As of Wednesday, the village’s Facebook page does not allow any comments on any of its posts, but it is not clear when or why comments were limited.

In response to the residents’ outcry, Kotur said she doesn’t want residents to feel that they can’t make a FOIA request.

“I want to emphasize that residents, media, or anyone in the public are free and welcome to make public records requests. We don’t want there to be discouragement among residents as an unintended side effect,” she said.

She added that council will be discussing the topic again at its next meeting at 6 p.m. April 14 in the Community Room of the municipal building to potentially refine and/or clarify the policy. She said the goal is to balance transparency regarding the use of village resources with being sensitive to residents’ concerns.