min r&o 10-21-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Members of the committee stated that they each would like to do a deeper review of the city's current public records policy, which was distributed at the meeting. It was discussed that Council could require that a public records policy only be amended by a vote of the body. Chairwoman George summed up the conversation by noting that the matter at hand is whether committee wants to go the ordinance or policy route in updating the city's public records procedure and made note of the significant burden of an ordinance conflicting with state code. Director Butler gave an example case where the Law Department has taken significantly longer than average to make a decision on a public records request due to its complexity and it causing contradiction between records law and state expungement law. The case involved an employee who was disciplined years ago for not disclosing prior criminal convictions of a harassing/menacing nature. A hearing was held and the employee chose to resign instead of being fired, however the discipline issued to that employee became a matter of public record. Some of those prior criminal convictions have been expunged in court and the employee requested that the matters be expunged from his/her personnel file. The Law Department is still trying to figure out how to address the request and whether it can redact the file, as state law says to expunge it and records law says to keep it. Director Butler stated that his department can normally release a standard personnel file request within a day after redaction. He noted that when the city records request portal is up and running, the average turnaround time for a request should be a day or two. The new system will have a public facing component where the public can see how long a request is taking to fulfill. As a point of comparison, Cleveland's average turnaround time for a request is 28 days. In regard to the new city records request portal, Councilman Rader stated that he really liked NextRequest the most out of the 3 vendors that came to the city. He added that making a public records law that is criminalizing in nature would make it extremely punitive and makes him hesitant to codify an ordinance, however he would still like to go through the policy given by the administration at the meeting thoroughly. Councilman Litten suggested scheduling another meeting on the matter to review the policy in depth. Chairwoman George stated that the committee would like a provision requiring Council approval in order to change the policy added into the draft policy. Director Butler encouraged members to email him with other ideas that they would like to see included as well. Councilman Litten encouraged the drafters of the ordinance to make sure their intent is reflected in the policy. Councilman Anderson stated that he understands certain parties involved in the ordinance are beholden to their respective parties and campaign contributors. He added that the public records policy path makes it more conducive for the city to respond to public records requests. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.