Fees & Burdensome Requests

54 Illinois PAC opinions and determination letters about fees & burdensome requests.

Practical next steps: Guide to unduly burdensome FOIA requests · Guide to electronic-record fees

Fees & Burdensome Requests: what the decisions show

This topic covers disputes over FOIA fees and claims that requests are unduly burdensome or commercial. Fee disputes include charges for emailed electronic records, video redaction time, staff search time, extra file copies, and amounts set by rule rather than statute. Burdensome-request disputes include full denials based on broad email searches, repeat requests, and whether requesters were asked to narrow their requests.

Across these decisions, the Public Access Counselor generally found violations where bodies assessed unauthorized fees, treated noncommercial requests as commercial, refused to furnish copies, or denied requests as unduly burdensome without first offering to confer. In several commercial-purpose matters, the office closed the file without further action because it lacked authority to review the denial.

At a glance: 54 documents from 2013 to 2025(13 binding opinions, 41 determination letters). Outcome: 23 found a violation (in whole or part), 15 found none. Most often cited alongside: 7(1)(m) (Attorney/auditor communications and litigation-preparation materials) (5); 7(1)(b) (Private information) (3); 7(1)(c) (Personal privacy) (3); 7(1)(f) (Preliminary drafts, notes, and deliberative materials) (3); 7(1)(d)(vi) (Would endanger the life or safety of law enforcement or others) (2).

Recurring issues

Public bodies charged fees for electronic copies sent by email or for redacting electronic video records. (Fees for electronic delivery of police reports, Police fee assessment for redacting camera footage, In-car traffic stop video footage on DVD)
Public bodies treated noncommercial requests as commercial and charged search and review fees or staff-time fees. (Records of flood-related home buyout programs, A fire department's fee for search and retrieval of a fire report)
Public bodies refused to furnish copies, charged for duplicate file copies, or demanded unauthorized fees for contractor-held records. (A village's water meter records, A city's charge for duplicate copies for its own retention, A contractor's records of a governmental function)
Public bodies denied broad or repeat requests as unduly burdensome without offering the requester a chance to confer and narrow the request. (Subpoenas received by a police department, Emails between a city official and planning consultants, Emails about a former library branch property)
Requesters sought PAC review of denials where the underlying request was made for a commercial purpose. (PTAX-203 real estate transfer declaration forms, Training materials for the Illinois Health Insurance Marketplace)

Practical points

A requester seeking an electronic copy of a record maintained electronically was not to be charged a per-report or media fee for email delivery.
A public body denying a request as unduly burdensome is expected to first offer the requester an opportunity to confer and narrow the request.
A public body should not treat a noncommercial request as commercial to support search-time or review fees.
A requester seeking records for a commercial purpose cannot obtain PAC review of the denial.

Summary drafted from the linked decisions and checked against them; read the decisions themselves before relying on it. Not legal advice.