Laserfiche WebLink
HRA Meeting <br />Minutes Tuesday, April 16, 2013 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />1 <br />Motion: Member Lee moved, seconded by Member Elkins to approve the Consent <br />2 <br />Agenda as presented. <br />3 <br /> <br />4 <br />Ayes: 6 <br />5 <br />Nays: 0 <br />6 <br />Motion carried. <br />7 <br /> <br />8 <br />7. Public Hearings <br />9 <br />None. <br />10 <br /> <br />11 <br />8. Presentations <br />12 <br /> <br />13 <br />a. Mark Gaughan Open Meeting Laws, Data Practices, and Electronic Communications <br />14 <br />Mr. Trudgeon introduced City Attorney Mark Gaughan to review and provide a refresher of <br />15 <br />various legal meeting and communication issues that may affect the HRA. <br />16 <br /> <br />17 <br /> Data Privacy Act <br />18 <br />Specific to the pending rental registration program inspections, Mr. Gaughan cautioned staff <br />19 <br />and the Board on the necessity to discern and treat accordingly tenant data for private/public <br />20 <br />dissemination. Mr. Gaughan advised that the HRA should anticipate that all tenant data would <br />21 <br />be considered private, and therefore should be redacted or separated from public dissemination <br />22 <br />in public meeting agenda materials. Mr. Gaughan advised that the data collection, <br />23 <br />maintenance and retention should be done under a clear process and policy in place prior to its <br />24 <br />collection. Mr. Gaughan asked that the HRA keep this in mind as they moved forward with <br />25 <br />this program. <br />26 <br /> <br />27 <br />Specific to individual data for HRA members, Mr. Gaughan noted that, when they made <br />28 <br />application for the Board, specific provisions for appointees to public bodies were in place for <br />29 <br />public data (e.g. name, city of residence, education/employment background). However, once <br />30 <br />appointed to the body, Mr. Gaughan noted that then additional information was considered <br />31 <br />public information: residential address, and a way for the public to contact individual members <br />32 <br />(e.g. e-mail and/or phone). <br />33 <br /> <br />34 <br />Electronic Communications <br />35 <br />Mr. Gaughan spent time reviewing written communications specifically e-mail <br />36 <br />communications that should typically be considered to be public data unless specifically <br />37 <br />addressed by State Statute as being private data. Mr. Gaughan noted that there was a <br />38 <br />distinction in individual e-mails versus those done in their role as a representative of the <br />39 <br />organization, with the latter always considered public data. Mr. Gaughan reiterated that all <br />40 <br />correspondence between an individual HRA member and others should generally be <br />41 <br />considered public data. <br />42 <br /> <br />43 <br />Open Meeting Law <br />44 <br />Mr. Gaughan briefly reviewed the Open Meeting Law with all meetings of a government body, <br />45 <br />including the HRA, open to the public, with applicable notice and public access identified (e.g. <br />46 <br />who, when and topics of discussion). <br />47 <br /> <br />48 <br />Mr. Gaughan detailed when a meeting actually occurred, and defined it as anytime a quorum <br />49 <br />of the body was together and discussing HRA business. <br />50 <br /> <br />51 <br />Mr. Gaughan cautioned the body on electronic communications and avoiding any perception <br />52 <br />of serial meetings done by e-mail that could be considered a violation of the Open Meeting <br />53 <br />Law. Mr. Gaug-mail <br />54 <br />communications that may indicate such a violation. Mr. Gaughan noted that there were few <br />55 <br />exceptions statutorily identified specifically in law where any such communication could be <br /> <br />