CC_Minutes_2012_0723 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting AND Board of Adjustments and Appeals Monday,July 23,2012 Page 18 she didn't want citizens to fail to receive public notices in the future because of this request. Councilmember Pust noted that setting up separate e-mail addresses worked both ways, and if you use a junk e-mail account for City information, and you happen to be a block captain, that creates a problem. However, Councilmember Pust recognized that the City was obligated under State law to satisfy the re- quest. Councilmember Pust stated that her only concern with this situation was that the City Council had not been alerted by staff as well allowing them to pro- vide a more informed response to citizens who were making contact with them personally over the weekend. Councilmember Pust opined that she would have appreciated staff thinking about following through in advising the City Council of the.situation. City Manager Malinen reiterated that it was not staffs intent to send out bad news over the weekend; but that Ms. Curti was leaving for vacation and at- tempting to get things caught up before she left the office. Mayor Roe stated that how the timing issue had played out was now more evi- dent and understandable. Councilmember McGehee questioned if it would have been appropriate for staff to request a Department of Administration Opinion on this specific request to clarify whether or not the data was private or public; and then notify people ahead of time what was going to occur, allowing them to unsubscribe. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Attorney Gaughan responded that, in this Department of Administration Opinion from 2001, in addition to a further Opin- ion dated 2008 discussing third parties collecting e-mail addresses and notices for subscribers through contract with the City, it had been determined that this information was classified as public data. City Attorney Gaughan advised that, when his office is contacted regarding this type of request and whether infor- mation is private or public, their response, based on their review of Opinions and their office's analysis, is the presumption that all information is public data unless specifically defined through legislative action that it is excluded. City Attorney Gaughan advised that, in order to deem something private, it requires a special legislative mandate. Therefore, City Attorney Gaughan advised that the presumption that all data collected by a government entity, unless otherwise ex- cluded, is public. Regarding any attempt to delay providing that information to the party requesting it, City Attorney Gaughan cautioned that this would not be a good idea for the City. Once it is collected by a government entity, City At- torney Gaughan advised that the government cannot purge the data; and this serves as an example of some very difficult decisions cities find themselves in