Response on redactions from City of Greensboro attorney

I received this reply from the City of Greensboro attorney Terry Wood regarding my request for the legal justification for the redactions made to the public comments about the search for a new police chief.

Those were redacted from comments solicited from employees.  The portions redacted were employee opinions of other employees' performance; therefore their names were deleted to comply with NCGS 160A-168.  That statute prohibits the release of any comments or opinions (good or bad) related to an employee's, or past employee's, performance from being released by the City without that employee's permission.

Those explanations seemed to ignore the context of the redactions, so I asked him to look again, to which he replied with the following:

Only names were redacted. "Bring Back _______!" was the name of an employee such as "Bring Back "Charlie Brown."  If I say some one is doing an excellent job or a terrible job it's an opinion and once that opinion is 'gathered' by the City it cannot be released except with the permission of the employee or otherwise as allowed by the Statute.  If I say "Bring Back Charlie Brown" that could mean I thought Charlie Brown was great and did an excellent job or it could be a facetious statement meaning Charlie Brown was not a fan favorite, either way it's expresses an opinion of performance.

[Update: These responses prompted me to send an email to the mayor and city council asking them to look at the document without the redactions and determine if, as the City Attorney maintains, "only names," were redacted.]