September 12, 2000; Lake County
9/12/2000 10:14:43 AM
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.
Facts and Procedural History:For purposes of simplification, the information presented by the person who requested this opinion and the response from the government entity with which the person disagrees are presented in summary form. Copies of the complete submissions are on file at the offices of IPA and, except for any data classified as not public, are available for public access. On June 23, 2000, IPA received a letter from Dean I. Tharp, on behalf of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME.) In this letter, Mr. Tharp asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding his right to gain access to certain data maintained by Lake County. IPA staff requested that Mr. Tharp clarify his opinion request; he did so in a letter dated July 21, 2000. In response to Mr. Tharp's request, IPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Clair A. Nelson, Chairman of the Lake County Board of Commissioners. The purposes of this letter, dated July 26, 2000, were to inform him of Mr. Tharp's request and to ask him to provide information or support for the County's position. On August 10, 2000, IPA received a response from Wilma H. Clark, Administrative Clerk of the Lake County Board of Commissioners. A summary of the facts of this matter follows. According to Mr. Tharp, AFSCME and the Board were involved in very critical negotiations for the 2000 labor agreement. . . . After the strike was averted and the contract ratified by both parties, Union members expressed strong interest in obtaining the tapes of closed sessions of the Board. In a letter to Lake County dated March 20, 2000, Mr. Tharp requested copies of tapes recorded of closed meetings of the Board of Commissioners pertaining to contract negotiations of all bargaining units for the 2000-2001 labor agreements. In a letter dated March 22, 2000, Mr. Nelson responded: [t]here were no closed meetings pertaining to contract negotiations and therefore, are no tapes to provide to you. In a letter dated April 10, 2000 Mr. Tharp wrote again, asking for copies of tapes, and stated: Board minutes show that a closed meeting of the Board was held on December 30, 1999. Ms. Clark provided a copy of a letter she wrote to Mr. Tharp, dated April 18, 2000, in which she stated: The following, appears in the minutes of December 30, 1999: Meeting was then closed for a union negotiation strategy session.' This was a poor choice of words on my part. The negotiating team . . . only updated the board members on where negotiations stood on that day; no strategy was discussed. Unfortunately, when the official board meeting was adjourned, the keeper of the recorder, turned it off. That is clearly reflected on the tapes, which are available in my office. In her response to the Commissioner, Ms. Clark wrote: During the regular County Board meeting of December 30, 1999, it was mentioned that there would be a negotiations report at the end of the meeting. I erroneously assumed that that portion of the meeting would be closed. However, this was not correct. No portion of the meeting was closed to the public. There was no vote to hold a closed meeting and no closed meeting occurred. The negotiations team reported to the Board in open session at the end of the regular meeting on December 30, 1999. Issue:In his request for an opinion, Mr. Tharp asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.03, subdivision 1, government data are presumed to be public unless otherwise classified by state or federal law. Pursuant to section 471.705, subdivision 1a, [t]he proceedings of a closed meeting to discuss [labor] negotiation strategies shall be tape-recorded at the expense of the governing body. The recording shall be preserved for two years after the contract is signed and shall be made available to the public after all labor contracts are signed by the governing body for the current budget period. Given the content of the official minutes of the Board meeting held on December 30, 1999, Mr. Tharp understandably assumed that a portion of the meeting was closed and there was a tape recording of that portion. If the Board had held a closed meeting to discuss labor negotiations, then per the requirements of section 471.705, subdivision 1a, a tape recording should have been made and retained. However, according to Ms. Clark, the entry in the minutes is inaccurate; there was no closed meeting held to discuss labor negotiation strategy. Accordingly, no audiotape exists that satisfies Mr. Tharp's request. To avoid this kind of misunderstanding in the future, if the Board has not formally corrected the minutes of the December 30, 1999, meeting, it should do so. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Tharp is as follows:
Signed:
David F. Fisher
Dated: September 12, 2000 |
Closed meetings
Open Meeting Law
Labor negotiations
