My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-08-15-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2010-2019
>
PC Packets 2015
>
04-08-15-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/3/2015 1:28:35 PM
Creation date
6/3/2015 1:28:00 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RELEVANT LINKS: <br /> It is important to remember that the use of social media by <br />councilmembers could still be used to support other claims such as claims <br />of defamation or of conflict of interest or bias in decision-making. As a <br />result, councilmembers should make sure that any comments they make on <br />social media are factually correct and should not comment on issues that <br />will come before the council in the future for a quasi-judicial hearing and <br />decision, such as the consideration of whether to grant an application for a <br />conditional use permit. <br />See II G 4 - Serial meetings. It is also important to remember that serial discussions between less than a <br />quorum of the council could violate the open meeting law under certain <br />circumstances. As a result, city councils and other public bodies should <br />take a conservative approach and should not use telephone calls, email, or <br />other technology to communicate back and forth with other members of <br />the public body if both of the following circumstances exist: <br /> • A quorum of the council or public body will be contacted regarding the <br />same matter. <br />• City business is being discussed. <br />Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 7. Another thing councilmembers should be careful about is which email <br />account they use to receive emails relating to city business because such <br />emails would likely be considered government data that is subject to a <br />public-records request under the Minnesota Government Data Practices <br />Act (MGDPA). The best option would be for each councilmember to have <br />an individual email account that the city provides and city staff manage. <br />However, this is not always possible for cities due to budget, size, or <br />logistics. <br /> If councilmembers don’t have a city email account, there are some things <br />to think about before using a personal email account for city business. <br />First, preferably only the councilmember should have access to the <br />personal email account. Using a shared account with other family <br />members could lead to incorrect information being communicated from <br />the account, or incoming information being inadvertently deleted. Also, <br />since city emails are government data, city officials may have to separate <br />personal emails from city emails when responding to a public-records <br />request under the MGDPA. <br /> Second, if the account a city councilmember wants to use for city business <br />is tied to a private employer, that private employer may have a policy that <br />restricts this kind of use. <br />League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 10/2/2014 <br />Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 22
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.