CC_Minutes_2008_0811 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, August 11, 2008 Page 14 day's communication technologies in order to provide guidance to government bodies. City Attorney Anderson provided comment on case law and provisions that elected officials could communicate outside an open meeting forum, unless their intent or purpose was to avoid Open Meeting Laws or to forge a majority opinion outside of an open meeting. City Attorney Anderson advised that he had avail- able, with another client's permission (Kandyohi County) a thirteen (13) page opinion on communications issues; and offered to provide proposed talking points with staff for Council consideration and discussion at a future meeting. Councilmember Roe suggested two other items for discussion: polling of commit- tee and/or City Council members such as he had previously experienced with e- mail discussions between meeting and among Commissioners when serving on the Planning Commission; and to clarify which of the meeting laws apply to any group, whether elected or advisory to the City Council; and any exceptions that may need to be incorporated into a future policy as well. City Attorney Anderson concurred that such clarification needed to be considered and identification of to whom it was applicable, noting that case law was fairly specific that only groups involving a quorum of a governing body or a committee having final authority to make decisions, but open to determination by the City Council in setting their policy. City Attorney Anderson opined his preference for e-mail rather than phone conversations, since a-mail provided direct proof of the discussion, rather than claims made about phone call conversations and lack of proof of such conversations. Public Comment John Kysylyczyn 3083 N Victoria Street Mr. Kysylyczyn opined that the biggest issue was non-disclosure of information and the attempts to determine which information to provide. Discussion ensued regarding the events in Mr. Kysylyczyn's concern of a viola- tion to the State Department of Administration and their subsequent opinion of something that had already occurred based on Minnesota State Statute language. Mr. Kysylyczyn suggested a policy for retention of electronic communication and a timeframe for retention and storage. Councilmembers concurred that practical effects of such a policy needed to come into the discussion based on City versus individual City Council computer sys- tems and retention of a-mail accounts and correspondence; and the need to in- volve the Information Technology staff to provide standardized policy informa- tion if technologically possible, and which documents are public, where backups are retained, and how to respond to complaints, and when to contest such com- plaints brought before the State Department of Administration.