7(1)(v)

How the Public Access Counselor has treated 7(1)(v)

Section 7(1)(v) exempts vulnerability assessments, security measures, and response plans designed to identify, prevent, or respond to potential attacks or security threats. The protection applies only where disclosure could reasonably be expected to jeopardize the effectiveness of the measures or the safety of personnel or the public.

In these decisions, the PAC has applied the exemption narrowly and required proof by clear and convincing evidence. It found violations where public bodies relied on general fears that criminals could use routine operational information, such as addresses, response times, staffing numbers, camera locations, activity logs, or use-of-force reports. It found no violation or closed matters where records were specific risk assessments, jail security records, or facility vulnerability reports, and allowed only limited redactions where discrete security details were shown.

At a glance: 13 documents from 2021 to 2026(4 binding opinions, 9 determination letters). Most often cited alongside: 7(1)(c) (Personal privacy) (3); 7(1)(f) (Preliminary drafts, notes, and deliberative materials) (3); 7(1)(b) (Private information) (2); 7(1)(d) (Law-enforcement/administrative-proceeding records) (2); 7(1)(a) (Federal/State-law confidentiality — or public defender case files, for documents issued under the other amendment version) (1).

Recurring issues

• Public bodies withheld law enforcement operational data such as 911 response times, district staffing numbers, and ALPR camera locations on the theory criminals could exploit them. (911 call response time data from an emergency management office, Number of sworn officers per police district, ALPR camera cost, lease period, and locations)
• Public bodies claimed housing addresses, police activity logs, and use-of-force reports were vulnerability assessments or security measures. (Excel file of scattered-site unit addresses and occupancy status, Police use-of-force reports for 2017, Police activity logs for a park)
• Public bodies claimed security camera or platform video would reveal security capabilities or jeopardize security measures. (Police security camera footage of a building entrance during a protest, Train platform video of a fall onto the tracks)
• Public bodies withheld specific risk assessments, jail inspection and security-round records, and civil-unrest response slides as vulnerability or security planning material. (Jail inspection reports and security-round logs, A risk management report on building safety, A slide deck on civil unrest emergency response strategies)

Practical points

• A public body invoking 7(1)(v) must show by clear and convincing evidence how the record is a vulnerability assessment, security measure, or response plan and how disclosure could reasonably jeopardize its effectiveness or safety.
• Do not withhold routine reports, logs, or datasets in full under 7(1)(v); review for discrete sensitive details that may support only limited redaction.
• A requester can challenge a broad claim that operational numbers, locations, or incident reports must stay secret to prevent crime, as the PAC has often found such claims insufficient.

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