MEMORANDUM
From: Michael J. Merritt, USN Retired/Writer
PO BOX 187
Newton, IA 50208
cipher.hunter@cipherphoenix.com
To: City of Newton, IA
101 W. 4th Street S.
Newton, IA 50208
(641) 792-2787
Subj: FINAL DECLARATION – IOWA PUBLIC INFORMATION BOARD CASE – 22FC:0116
Ref: 1. Iowa Code Title I State Sovereignty and Management, Chapter 22 Examination of Public Records (Open Records)
2. Hawk Eye v. Jackson 521 N.W.2d 750 (1994)
Enc: 1. Iowa Open Records Request – Michael J. Merritt – 25 AUG 2022
2. Memorandum – Matthew Brick, Brick Gentry, P.C. – 07 SEP 2022
3. Electronic Mail – Matthew Brick, Brick Gentry, P.C. – 08 SEP 2022
4. Chest Cam Footage – Officer Zylstra – 22-24438
5. City of Newton, IA Security Camera A Location and evidence of physical space captured.
6. City of Newton, IA Security Camera B Location and evidence of physical space captured.
7. City of Newton, IA Security Camera C Location and evidence of physical space captured.
8. City of Newton, IA Security Camera D Location and evidence of physical space captured.
1. Introduction
City Attorney Matthew Brick references Iowa Code Section 22.7(5), Iowa Code Section 22.7(50), and Hawk Eye v. Jackson 521 N.W.2d 750 (1994) in his response to Iowa Public Information Board case: 22FC:0116.
2. Iowa Code Section 22.7(5)
Iowa Code Section 22.7(5) is not relevant in this case, because the City of Newton, IA, Police Department failed to provide evidence that the City of Newton, IA requested security footage is part of an investigation they conducted. That is unless Iowa government bodies are allowed to rubber stamp law enforcement investigative reports on anything they do not desire to release to the public.
3. Iowa Code Section 22.7(50)
For Iowa Code Section 22.7(50) to be relevant in this case, the City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew Brick must justify how footage captured, stored, and preserved by two exterior fixed security cameras capturing citizen-owned and City of Newton, IA municipal exterior physical space (accessible and viewable by the public at all times) is confidential. That is unless Iowa government bodies are allowed to rubber stamp confidential on anything they do not desire to release to the public.
At the same time, the City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew Brick must justify how the release of footage captured, stored, and preserved by at least one interior fixed security camera capturing the City of Newton, IA City Hall public lobby/passageway (accessible and viewable by the public during the City of Newton, IA City Hall business hours) “could reasonably be expected to jeopardize such life or property”.
Additionally, the City of Newton, IA must provide evidence articulating how the release of footage captured, stored, and preserved by these fixed security cameras (capturing citizen-owned physical space, City of Newton, IA City Hall exterior space accessible and viewable by the public at all times, and the City of Newton, IA City Hall public lobby/passageway municipal internal physical space that is accessible and viewable during business hours) could damage the integrity of the City of Newton, IA’s Physical security planning and threat assessments, Cybersecurity planning and threat assessments, records that provides Physical or Cybersecurity authentication, or any records that are relevant to what Iowa Code Section 22.7(50) insinuates may be withheld regarding Physical and Cybersecurity planning and threat assessments.
4. Hawk Eye v. Jackson 521 N.W.2d 750 (1994)
“In State ex rel. Shanahan v. Iowa District Court, 356 N.W.2d 523, 528 (Iowa 1984), we observed that these two statutory provisions express essentially the same legislative purpose with respect to DCI files: assurance to all persons upon whom law enforcement officials rely that “official confidentiality attends their conversations and may protect from public access the officers’ reports of what they have said.” Id. The privilege cloaking these communications, however, is qualified, not absolute. Id. at 527. An official claiming the privilege must satisfy a three-part test: (1) a public officer is being examined, (2) the communication was made in official confidence, and (3) the public interest would suffer by disclosure. Id. at 527; accord Shannon v. Hansen, 469 N.W.2d 412, 414 (Iowa 1991).”
(1) a public officer is being examined – A public officer is not being examined. The City of Newton, IA was requested to provide footage captured, stored, and preserved by three fixed security camera’s capturing publicly accessible and viewable physical space.
(2) the communication was made in official confidence – It is unreasonable for the City of Newton, IA, or City Attorney Matthew Brick to expect that anything captured, stored, or preserved by these three fixed security cameras (capturing publicly accessible and viewable physical space) are entitled to official confidence. At the same time, non-official parties frequent, access, and view these spaces at all times (Note: interior space during City of Newton, IA City Hall business hours).
(3) the public interest would suffer by disclosure – The City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew Brick need to articulate how the release of security footage capturing non-restricted, publicly accessible, and viewable physical space would cause the public interest to suffer if disclosed. At the same time, every citizen of the City of Newton, IA, can access and view the events and use of this publicly accessible and viewable physical space these exterior and interior cameras capture, store, and preserve footage.
The only reasonable claim the City of Newton, IA, has to a confidentiality status for security footage involving exterior or interior space are regarding a restricted status or space not open to the public. Further, the City of Newton, IA, has no claim to its determination that the requested security footage is confidential because the Complainant has filmed footage within this exterior and interior space on numerous occasions at the same time notifying the City of Newton, IA of this photography prior to executing. Evidence available online shows the City of Newton, IA has allowed other citizens to capture, store, and preserve images and film on personal devices of the physical space these City of Newton, IA security cameras capture, store, and preserve footage.
5. Commercial and Public Record Sources
Sources showing static imagery of the same physical space captured by three fixed security cameras (cameras A, B, and C) producing footage requested in this case the City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew have determined are confidential. At the same time, these organizations publish imagery of the same physical space captured, stored, and preserved by these three City of Newton, IA security cameras that captured, stored, and preserved the requested footage showing a specific space-time of events that occurred on publicly accessible and viewable physical space.
2. Microsoft Bing Maps – https://www.bing.com/maps/
3. City of Newton, IA – Official Website – https://www.newtongov.org/gallery.aspx?PID=205
6. Conclusion
The requested security camera footage involves one variable and one control. The control aspect relates to the fact the security camera footage requested involves three fixed security cameras that are constantly capturing video of non-restricted three-dimensional physical space accessible and viewable by the public.
Camera A: Exterior Front – Monitoring and capturing three-dimensional physical public space predominantly not owned or managed by the City of Newton, IA, and publicly accessible and viewable by City of Newton, IA, citizens at all times.
Camera B: Exterior Front – Monitoring and capturing three-dimensional physical public space predominantly not owned or managed by the City of Newton, IA, and publicly accessible and viewable by City of Newton, IA, citizens at all times.
Camera C: Interior Citizen Lobby/Passageway – Monitoring and capturing three-dimensional physical space publicly accessible and viewable to the public during the City of Newton, IA City Hall business hours.
Camera D: A City of Newton, IA employee communicated the existence of a security camera filming the City of Newton, IA Citizen Service Desk within the City of Newton, IA Citizen Service Desk office area viewable by the public.
The variable aspect of these City of Newton, IA security cameras involves the forward progression of time involving specific events captured at different points in space-time.
Based on these factors, it would be reasonable to conclude that the City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew Brick’s determination that the requested security footage is confidential is not based on the control aspect of the three-dimensional physical space being captured that is publicly accessible and viewable. It is the fourth dimension regarding the time and specific events the City of Newton, IA security cameras captured the City of Newton, IA and City Attorney Matthew Brick do not wish to disclose to the public. This conclusion is supported by the fact visual imagery of this three-dimensional public space is published all over the internet by the City of Newton, IA, Google Maps, Microsoft Bing Maps, and other private parties. Instead, it is reasonable to conclude it is the variable aspect being specific events in a specific point in space-time being captured in the requested security camera footage is what the City of Newton, IA and City Attorney Matthew Brick desire to withhold.
As these cameras capture the Complainant personally serving correspondence to the City of Newton, IA, on 24 AUG 2022 during the requested time frame after the City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew Brick blocked the Complainant’s access to public accommodations (electronic mail with elected and appointed officials of the City of Newton, IA) on 08 AUG 2022 based on a false allegation alleging the Complainant had violated Iowa Code Section 708.7. A false allegation spoken and perpetuated by City Attorney Matthew Brick on 08 AUG 2022 regarding the Complainant’s electronic communications with the City of Newton, IA. Iowa Court records show this false allegation the Complainant violated Iowa Code Section 708.7 perpetuated by City Attorney Matthew Brick (utilized to block the Complainant’s access to electronic communication with the City of Newton, IA) has never seen the light of day in an Iowa Court. Evidence indicating the City of Newton, IA, and City Attorney Matthew Brick are currently violating the Complainant’s rights as protected by Sections 2, 6, 9, and 10 of the Constitution of the State of Iowa and the 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America are represented by the non-existence of an Iowa Court case documenting the Complainant was provided due process regarding the alleged crime the City of Newton, IA and City Attorney Matthew Brick are currently utilizing to block the Complainant’s access to public accommodation provided by the City of Newton, IA. Forcing the Complainant to personally serve correspondence to the City of Newton, IA, as captured by these City of Newton, IA fixed security camera’s immediately before being hit by a car while walking in a crosswalk as documented in Enclosure (4.) while returning home from delivering correspondence to the City of Newton, IA City Hall.
Evidence indicates the City of Newton, IA and City Attorney Matthew Brick’s use of Iowa Code Chapter 22.7 is inconsistent based upon the record requester and their connection with the requested records. At the same time, whether that corelation could lead to any exposure of evidence showing illegal, unethical, or negligent acts executed by The City of Newton, IA or City Attorney Matthew Brick. The City of Newton, IA has produced a multi-year long historical record supported by evidence showing no desire to adhere to our laws or what the Iowa Supreme Court has communicated is the spirit of Iowa Code Chapter 22. Evidence indicates the survivability of the careers and political power of those elected and appointed to the City of Newton, IA outweighs their responsibility to the lives of those they serve.
The Complainant has managed over four hundred requests for records in accordance with the laws of the United States of America, the State of Iowa, the State of California, the State of Illinois, and the State of Montana. Upon the commencement of this complaint with the Iowa Public Information Board against the City of Newton, IA, City Attorney Matthew Brick and his client are the only licensed lawyer and government body that has provided evidence of a level of despair while falsely accusing and presenting zero evidence supporting the Complainant violated Iowa Code Section 708.7 (Harassment), Iowa Code Chapter 659 (Libel and Slander), at the same time communicating the Complainant has no merit after the United States Navy honorably discharged the Complainant in 2017 while wearing 20 years of United States Navy Good Conduct Medals. At the same time, entrusted with a TOP SECRET SCI clearance during his career; working as a Navy Cryptographic Technician Communications during his first deployment onboard the USS Princeton (CG-59) during the events that occurred on September 11, 2001. The Complainant finds irony and humor in these claims given the evidence that supports the Complainant is built with more Merit than Brick Gentry, P.C. is built on a foundation of solid bricks. This is possibly why these false allegations supported by zero evidence of criminal and civil misconduct were never previously communicated by the City of Newton, IA or City Attorney Matthew Brick until after a complaint had been filed against the City of Newton, IA with the Iowa Public Information Board.
What is defamation in the State of Iowa? Evidence indicates it is at times the truth the wealthy and politically affluent do not want others to believe.
What is harassment in the State of Iowa? Evidence indicates at times it is nothing more than a device deployed by the wicked and assailants of the innocent. At the same time, executing cowardice behavior to criminalize their victims speaking the truth they do not
want to be known.
Respectfully,
Michael J. Merritt, USN Retired/Writer
Founder: cipherphoenix.com
Creative Writer/Musician
Information Warfare Specialist
Information Systems Manager
PO BOX 187
Newton, IA 50208
cipher.hunter@cipherphoenix.com
