to text messages. Rather, the order indicated that the documents setting forth the settlement agreement were subject to FOIA. Id. Having determined that the personal e-mails are not “public records” subject to FOIA, the next question is whether e-mails involving “internal union communications” are personal e-mails. We conclude that they are. Such communications do not involve teachers acting in their official capacity as public employees, but in their personal capacity as HEA members or leadership. Thus, any e-mail sent in that capacity is personal. This holding is consistent with the underlying policy of FOIA, which is to inform the public “regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of. . . public employees . . . .” MCL 15.231(2). See Walloon, 163 Mich App at 730 (<HOLDING>). The release of e-mail involving internal
holding that foia exemptions are not mandatory bars to disclosure because the purpose of foia is to provide broad disclosure of government documents holding that the only relevant public interest in disclosure is the extent to which disclosure would serve the core purpose of the foia which is contributing significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government  holding that the definition of operating deficits is not ambiguous despite the absence of a definition of the phrase in the contract holding that purpose of the amendment was to clarify the definition of the word maintain holding that the purpose of foia must be considered in resolving ambiguities in the definition of public record