This states withholding the information would be necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs, through the "free and frank expression" of opinions by, or between, members of a local authority in the course of their duty.
Council chairman Rex Graham echoed this - he, and many other councillors included in Hawke's Bay Today's request have previously spoken out against council secrecy, and been open advocates for transparency.
Yesterday he said he would resist releasing the information because it would be a "slippery road" that could affect his ability to speak with the public.
"My style is that I talk to everybody," he said.
"I regard those conversations as confidential and private, now if they weren't half those people wouldn't send me an email."
Hawke's Bay Today's request only included communications of elected officials.
Despite this, Mr Graham said he thought the LGOIMA request set "a very dangerous precedent".
"If the community thinks every time they have a chat to me or every time they send me an email someone else is going to get hold of it, I think it's a slippery road to a place that I don't want to go, and a place I don't want our society to go.
"I've got bigger things to worry about than going through my emails. It's a distraction from the really important issues I have before me, and I won't be distracted, I'm just going to say no."
When asked how councillors were held accountable if they could refuse to comply with LGOIMA, Mr Graham said they were accountable through decisions they made in public council meetings.
"We make no decisions through having chit-chats on emails and so we're totally accountable."
On the refusal, Hawke's Bay Today editor Andrew Austin stated the paper "firmly believes ratepayers have a right to know what our elected representatives have been saying about important issues".
"We are disappointed at the council's refusal to comply and are concerned that this is a slippery slope. Our democracy has checks and balances for a reason and because of this we will be taking this matter to the Ombudsman for a decision."
The Ombudsman - official information watchdog - can be asked to investigate if the requester is not happy with the reason provided for withholding the information.
Yesterday they advised it appeared Hawke's Bay Today's request would be covered by LGOIMA, as any information communicated by a councillor acting in their official capacity is official information.
On his correspondence fitting under LGOIMA, Mr Graham said: "I can't help it if somebody else makes a rule that's against my sense of honour.
"I have deep respect for the role of law in our society but they're not always right," he said.
"It [the law] is an evolving set of principles and the law needs to reflect our society."
Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) president Lawrence Yule stated while any elected member's correspondence was classed as official information, he did not always think that was right.
The mayor of Hastings said LGNZ would be looking at this issue on a national scale - particularly at the balance between elected officials' role in communicating with the public, and this technically being classed as official information.
"We have said actually there is a fair point of balance here and we need to have that checked."
A spokesperson for LGNZ - a lobby group for local councils - said they were not able to comment on the matter.
Hawke's Bay Today has requested the Ombudsman review the council's decision. They are currently investigating a similar LGOIMA request declined by the council late last year.
In August, then Central Hawke's Bay mayor Peter Butler requested communications of regional councillor Tom Belford during a period relating to certain events and parties - including Hawke's Bay Today.
Mr Belford denied responding to the request, and received council support for his refusal in December.
Yesterday Mr Butler said he had laid a complaint with the Ombudsman, who was still investigating the matter.