Technology, open meetings law collide
By Bret Hayworth Journal staff writer | Posted: Wednesday, March 28, 2007
In the mid-February brouhaha over small gatherings of Sioux City Council members to hear information and weigh information outside of regularly scheduled public meetings, councilman Brent Hoffman threw a wrinkle into the discussions.
First at issue was the practice of having 2-2-1 meetings in which information was relayed to the councilmen from city staffers, which had been done several times in the last year. 2-2-1's are gatherings of no more than two councilmen, so that a quorum/majority (which would be three of the five members of the Sioux City council) aren't meeting at one time. That way it's not considered an official council meeting subject to public airing.
But beyond that, on Feb. 12, Hoffman said he "won't say how I am going to vote" in his e-mails with the councilmen, but that he's stopped with "reply-all" options on e-mails to all other councilmen.
"You've got to be very cautious about this," Hoffman said.
Hoffman's declaration to no longer send "reply-all" e-mails to the other four members shed light on how technology is changing the way elected officials communicate in the early 21st century, whether they be city council members, county supervisors or school board members. With increased options for chatting -- via cell phones, electronic mail, text messaging and instant messaging -- comes a chance that deliberations could be done outside meeting halls and chambers.
Kathleen Richardson, director of the Iowa Freedom of Information Council, said she's concerned by the 2-2-1 meetings, which are called "walking quorums" elsewhere. The goal of those is to avoid a quorum/majority of the elected officials in talking out issues, Richardson said, and they can occur in person, as well as through phone calls, e-mail or instant messaging.
"These shenanigans are not new," she said, but technology is changing how city, county and school officials communicate between meetings. "The technology of e-mail has added a whole new dimension," Richardson said.
Of the forms of non-face-to-face communication outside meetings by elected officials, Richardson said, instant messaging via a computer or handheld Blackberry is most concerning. "I think you could make an argument that (instant messaging) was a violation of the law. It is the same as a conference call," she said.
Not so clear, Richardson said, is whether e-mailing information on agenda item particulars via "reply all" to the other deliberating members of a body would violate the open meetings law. "Legally, it is a bit grayer ... but it certainly violates the spirit" of the open meetings law, she said.
Doug Walish, chairman of the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors, said when he took office in January 1999 he prepped himself for the post by reading information about the job, specifically about Iowa Code Chapter 21 relating to open meetings. Since that time, Walish said he's been "striving my best in upholding that section of the Iowa code."
Added Walish, "I do believe in every bit of openness that we as a county board can strive for. ... As any issue is acted upon and deliberated on, it should be discussed in open session. We owe that to the public at large."
Walish said he understands the concerns that come with new technology. While he's behind the curve on some strands -- laughing that "I have never text messaged in my life" -- Walish said with electronic mail, "I make a point of not debating or talking about issues at hand that should be discussed publicly. I don't think that is right, and I and the rest of the board members try to avoid anything like that. ... If you would mass e-mail it to a lot of people (fellow supervisors), that is a real red flag."
Richardson said she gets "complaints" from Iowans telling her they're "frustrated when decisions are made before the meetings." And she said, Iowa's open meeting law, first created in the 1960s, holds not only that decisions be made publicly, "but the basis and rationale" for the decisions are also openly aired.
"The benefit of having government deliberations as open as possible is it allows Iowans to have a voice into the decision making," Richardson stated. "It encourages citizen faith in their government."
Richardson said in 2007 the Iowa Legislature "is interested in issues concerning open meetings," particularly since there was controversy over Iowa Board of Regents members using e-mail to share ideas and opinions during the hiring process of a University of Iowa president. As legislators discuss open meeting law revisions, she said, it would behoove state lawmakers "to look at electronic communication."
Alan Kemp, director of membership servicers for the Iowa League of Cities, said city councils overall do well in complying with open meetings laws.
"When the Iowa open meetings law was written, these electronic components simply didn't exist," Kemp said.
"It is something that city councils have to be aware of. You have to be cautious on e-mails, the league and many city attorneys would caution councils on deliberating in e-mails." Kemp said when members are "giving opinions and replies back and forth, if you are not careful, one could argue that you are deliberating technologically."
Also, Kemp said, the e-mails detailing city issues that flow back and forth between council members also fall into the open records portion of the law, and the e-mails are "a record that likely is an open document" for public inspection.
Iowa Association of School Boards attorney Mary Gannon said in 2003 she wrote a special report for school board members on e-mails being public records "and how the use of them could be an open meetings issue as well." Gannon said IASB has "advised our members to not use 'reply to all' when responding, so they don't cross the line into what could be perceived as a board meeting."
Kemp said he suggests council members maintain two e-mail accounts -- one for personal matters and another for city business.
The Iowa League of Cities, he said, is trying to stay abreast of the issue, and the league's magazine a few years ago dealt with the intersection of new technology and open meetings. The issue will continue to be timely, Kemp said, especially as a younger generation of city councilpersons come forth with a reliance on communication avenues like text messaging.
Bret Hayworth may be reached at (712) 293.4203 or brethayworth@siouxcityjournal.com
First at issue was the practice of having 2-2-1 meetings in which information was relayed to the councilmen from city staffers, which had been done several times in the last year. 2-2-1's are gatherings of no more than two councilmen, so that a quorum/majority (which would be three of the five members of the Sioux City council) aren't meeting at one time. That way it's not considered an official council meeting subject to public airing.
But beyond that, on Feb. 12, Hoffman said he "won't say how I am going to vote" in his e-mails with the councilmen, but that he's stopped with "reply-all" options on e-mails to all other councilmen.
"You've got to be very cautious about this," Hoffman said.
Hoffman's declaration to no longer send "reply-all" e-mails to the other four members shed light on how technology is changing the way elected officials communicate in the early 21st century, whether they be city council members, county supervisors or school board members. With increased options for chatting -- via cell phones, electronic mail, text messaging and instant messaging -- comes a chance that deliberations could be done outside meeting halls and chambers.
Kathleen Richardson, director of the Iowa Freedom of Information Council, said she's concerned by the 2-2-1 meetings, which are called "walking quorums" elsewhere. The goal of those is to avoid a quorum/majority of the elected officials in talking out issues, Richardson said, and they can occur in person, as well as through phone calls, e-mail or instant messaging.
"These shenanigans are not new," she said, but technology is changing how city, county and school officials communicate between meetings. "The technology of e-mail has added a whole new dimension," Richardson said.
Of the forms of non-face-to-face communication outside meetings by elected officials, Richardson said, instant messaging via a computer or handheld Blackberry is most concerning. "I think you could make an argument that (instant messaging) was a violation of the law. It is the same as a conference call," she said.
Not so clear, Richardson said, is whether e-mailing information on agenda item particulars via "reply all" to the other deliberating members of a body would violate the open meetings law. "Legally, it is a bit grayer ... but it certainly violates the spirit" of the open meetings law, she said.
Doug Walish, chairman of the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors, said when he took office in January 1999 he prepped himself for the post by reading information about the job, specifically about Iowa Code Chapter 21 relating to open meetings. Since that time, Walish said he's been "striving my best in upholding that section of the Iowa code."
Added Walish, "I do believe in every bit of openness that we as a county board can strive for. ... As any issue is acted upon and deliberated on, it should be discussed in open session. We owe that to the public at large."
Walish said he understands the concerns that come with new technology. While he's behind the curve on some strands -- laughing that "I have never text messaged in my life" -- Walish said with electronic mail, "I make a point of not debating or talking about issues at hand that should be discussed publicly. I don't think that is right, and I and the rest of the board members try to avoid anything like that. ... If you would mass e-mail it to a lot of people (fellow supervisors), that is a real red flag."
Richardson said she gets "complaints" from Iowans telling her they're "frustrated when decisions are made before the meetings." And she said, Iowa's open meeting law, first created in the 1960s, holds not only that decisions be made publicly, "but the basis and rationale" for the decisions are also openly aired.
"The benefit of having government deliberations as open as possible is it allows Iowans to have a voice into the decision making," Richardson stated. "It encourages citizen faith in their government."
Richardson said in 2007 the Iowa Legislature "is interested in issues concerning open meetings," particularly since there was controversy over Iowa Board of Regents members using e-mail to share ideas and opinions during the hiring process of a University of Iowa president. As legislators discuss open meeting law revisions, she said, it would behoove state lawmakers "to look at electronic communication."
Alan Kemp, director of membership servicers for the Iowa League of Cities, said city councils overall do well in complying with open meetings laws.
"When the Iowa open meetings law was written, these electronic components simply didn't exist," Kemp said.
"It is something that city councils have to be aware of. You have to be cautious on e-mails, the league and many city attorneys would caution councils on deliberating in e-mails." Kemp said when members are "giving opinions and replies back and forth, if you are not careful, one could argue that you are deliberating technologically."
Also, Kemp said, the e-mails detailing city issues that flow back and forth between council members also fall into the open records portion of the law, and the e-mails are "a record that likely is an open document" for public inspection.
Iowa Association of School Boards attorney Mary Gannon said in 2003 she wrote a special report for school board members on e-mails being public records "and how the use of them could be an open meetings issue as well." Gannon said IASB has "advised our members to not use 'reply to all' when responding, so they don't cross the line into what could be perceived as a board meeting."
Kemp said he suggests council members maintain two e-mail accounts -- one for personal matters and another for city business.
The Iowa League of Cities, he said, is trying to stay abreast of the issue, and the league's magazine a few years ago dealt with the intersection of new technology and open meetings. The issue will continue to be timely, Kemp said, especially as a younger generation of city councilpersons come forth with a reliance on communication avenues like text messaging.
Bret Hayworth may be reached at (712) 293.4203 or brethayworth@siouxcityjournal.com
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 0 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
