ST. LOUIS — Draft resolutions in the Sept. 15 City Council packet describe two standardized electronic data products and the fees that would apply to them.
Finance Director Bobbie Marr submitted the two items. The first, Resolution 2026-18, would adopt an Enhanced Access to Public Records Policy under a 1996 Michigan law, Public Act 462, which lets a public body offer bulk digital access to non-confidential records and charge reasonable fees meant to recover, over time, the operating costs of providing it. The law requires such a policy to be adopted first. The second, Resolution 2026-19, names the data products and sets the prices.
Marr's memo says the city periodically receives requests for large electronic exports of assessment, cemetery and financial-transaction information, and that recent requests showed the need for a consistent policy. It describes the policy as meant mainly for cases in which all of a database is requested, not specific records.
The proposal lists $1,000 for a complete Assessment/CAMA public-data export, $250 for another update during the same assessment year and $1,000 for a complete cemetery public-data export.
The packet distinguishes those bulk products from ordinary requests for individual assessment or cemetery records, which would continue to be handled under the Freedom of Information Act or other applicable law. Financial-management data would not yet be designated because the city's current export includes transactions processed for multiple entities.
The memo says the city receives requests for bulk accounts-payable data, generally every quarter. Staff would review whether an export limited to St. Louis transactions can be built and return to the council with any proposed fee.
Under the drafts, no database could carry an enhanced-access fee unless the council specifically designates it. Confidential or exempt information would be left out of any export, the city would supply data only in the format its systems produce, and it would not be required to build custom reports. The memo calls the prices consistent with those of other Michigan governments but names none, and it includes no calculation of the city's costs. The fee resolution would take effect on adoption.