Transparency and open access to records is essential for the public’s trust and confidence in law enforcement. When people have access to information about police activities, policies, and procedures, they can see for themselves whether the department is operating fairly and in their best interest.
It’s for these reasons that the Virginia Freedom of Information Act guarantees citizens of Virginia access to records held by “public bodies.” That mostly means government entities—agencies, boards, and bureaus of the Commonwealth itself or of its political subdivisions, like cities, counties, and towns. Public bodies must respond to citizens who request records, either by producing the records or by invoking an appropriate exemption from mandatory disclosure.
Police departments in Virginia are usually government entities. But a few are private organizations. The Virginia Department of Criminal Justice recognizes 17 private police departments. Nine of these departments are operated by private colleges and universities, while another eight are associated with other entities, such as corporations and neighborhoods.
VFOIA defines “public body” in a way that includes Virginia’s private police departments.
For the purposes of the provisions of this chapter applicable to access to public records, constitutional officers and private police departments as defined in § 9.1-101 shall be considered public bodies and, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, shall have the same obligations to disclose public records as other custodians of public records.
The law requires transparency from Virginia’s private police departments, but I decided to find out how transparent they really are. I asked each one for a copy of its policy manual, citing the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. For those few departments that published an e-mail address for public information requests, I sent my inquiry there. For the rest, I used the contact listed in the DCJS directory.
A policy manual is one of the most elementary ways a police department can be transparent—it’s the set of rules the department has established for itself. Access to the policy manual allows the public to gain insight into what it should expect from the department’s officers. It also enables citizens to review the policies and provide feedback, suggestions, or concerns about specific practices or procedures.
Fewer than half of the private police departments met their obligations under VFOIA:
- Five departments supplied the requested policy manual at no cost.
- Two departments offered their policy manual after payment of a fee.
- One department assessed its actual costs of production at $2.00.
- Another department asserted that it would cost $450.00 to produce a copy of the policy manual.
- One department declared that it has no policy manual and invoked exemptions to withhold its security plans.
More than half of the departments failed to comply with the statutory requirements concerning a request for public records:
- Four departments affirmatively refused to provide their policy manuals.
- Five departments simply failed to respond to the request, even after a follow-up inquiry.
Details about each department’s response (or lack thereof) including all correspondence are available under the link for that department in the table below.
| Police department | Type | Response |
|---|---|---|
| Aquia Harbour Police Department | Private | Supplied policy manual at no cost |
| Bridgewater Airpark Police Department | Private | Did not respond |
| BWXT Police Department | Private | Manual does not exist or is withheld |
| Carilion Police Department | Private | Estimated cost at $450.00 |
| Kings Dominion Police Department | Private | Did not respond |
| Kingsmill Police Department | Private | Supplied policy manual at no cost |
| Lake Monticello Police Department | Private | Estimated cost at $2.00 |
| Wintergreen Police Department | Private | Supplied policy manual at no cost |
| Bridgewater College Police and Safety Department | Private College/University | Refused to supply policy manual |
| Emory and Henry College Campus Police and Security Department | Private College/University | Supplied policy manual at no cost |
| Ferrum College Police Department | Private College/University | Did not respond |
| Hampden-Sydney College Department of Security and Police | Private College/University | Supplied policy manual at no cost |
| Hampton University Police Department | Private College/University | Did not respond |
| Liberty University Police Department | Private College/University | Refused to supply policy manual |
| Regent University Police Department | Private College/University | Refused to supply policy manual |
| University of Richmond Police Department | Private College/University | Refused to supply policy manual |
| Virginia Union University Police Department | Private College/University | Did not respond |
As a group, the departments of private colleges and universities had a lower response rate than their non-education counterparts: Only two of those nine departments supplied their policy manuals.
Each department that refused the request for a policy manual argued that because it’s a private institution, it’s not bound by the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. We can’t know with certainty why other departments failed to respond, but it seems likely that at least some of them had the same reasoning.
Among departments that responded, costs were mostly reasonable. Only one department assessed a substantial fee ($450) for its policy manual.
Campus police departments
The University of Richmond Police Department offered a seemingly novel argument in support of its refusal to respond: It’s not actually a “private police department” subject to the requirements of VFOIA. Instead, it’s a “campus police department” to which VFOIA supposedly doesn’t apply.
I’ve requested an advisory opinion from the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council on the question of whether the police departments of private colleges and universities are public bodies. I believe they are, for the reasons set forth in my request. At the time of this writing, the advisory opinion is still pending.
URPD’s position is certainly not an intuitive reading of the law. An article by FIRE’s Student Press Freedom Initiative counts Virginia among the states that require open records from the police departments of private universities, relying on the plain wording of §2.2-3701 that imposes requirements on “private police departments.”
Virginia’s General Assembly has taken steps to ensure that both public and private police departments are open and transparent to the public. That’s a sound policy—law enforcement is a traditional government function that has enormous potential impact on the lives of the public it’s intended to serve. It would be odd indeed if the legislature enacted mechanisms for oversight only to leave out the departments of private universities.