Date:
09/16/2021
Subject:
Kay Bergren/City of Otho - Dismissal Order
Opinion:
The Iowa Public Information Board
|
In re the Matter of: Kay Bergren, Complainant And Concerning: City of Otho, Respondent |
Case Number: 21FC:0082
Dismissal Order
|
COMES NOW, Margaret E. Johnson, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order:
On August 25, 2021, Kay Bergren filed formal complaint 21FC:0082, alleging that the City of Otho (City) violated Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22.
Ms. Bergren alleged that on August 10, 2021, the city council held a public meeting. During the meeting, the Mayor stated that he was looking at the purchase of computer equipment with funds provided to the City. She alleged that the minutes from the meeting are incorrect. She also alleged that the city council did not vote to approve this purchase.
Following this meeting, Ms. Bergren alleged that she requested “any and all records regarding this matter.” She alleged that she was denied any records “as they are free.” She included a copy of the August 23, 2021, record response from the City:
“As I stated in my previous email these are free and won’t be coming from our budget. The state had excess funds from COVID relief. The city submitted a request via the portal they had set up. There are no public records to send you. The materials are expected to come in sometime in November. At that time if you would like to know what we received then you are more than welcome to submit a request.”
Ms. Bergren provided a copy of the published minutes of the meeting in question. The minutes state: “Groat informed council that he had Simmons order five laptops and two tablets with some money that the government is giving cities to use for this specifically.” (NOTE: Mark Groat is the Mayor and Sherri Simmons is the city clerk.)1
Legal counsel for the City responded to this complaint on August 27, 2021. He stated that the city council did not “deliberate or take action” upon the order placed by the Mayor for the computer equipment. The Mayor was informing the city council of the application made to acquire the free equipment. Therefore, there is no violation of Iowa Code chapter 21.
Legal counsel also provided additional information about the City’s efforts to participate in a program to obtain free computer technology. He provided a copy of the email sent by the League of Cities to all Iowa cities concerning the opportunity (see attached). The equipment was “ordered” by using the portal provided by the State of Iowa at BuyIT.iowa.gov.2 The response, including the email, was provided to Ms. Bergren on August 27, 2021.
In reply, Ms. Bergren stated that there is no mention of the laptops on her recording. She alleged that including this information in the minutes violated Iowa Code chapter 21.
Copies of the agenda and minutes of the meeting in question were provided by the City’s legal counsel. A review of the agenda and minutes indicates that the information concerning the request for free computer equipment came as part of the Mayor’s report to the council. No vote or deliberation occurred. The comment was informational only.
Iowa Code section 21.3 provides the requirements for the minutes of a governmental meeting:
Each governmental body shall keep minutes of all its meetings showing the date, time and place, the members present, and the action taken at each meeting. The minutes shall show the results of each vote taken and information sufficient to indicate the vote of each member present. The vote of each member present shall be made public at the open session. The minutes shall be public records open to public inspection.
There are no allegations that the minutes published by the City failed to provide the information required by Iowa Code section 21.3. There are no allegations or information that the city council took any action, by vote or otherwise, on this issue. Iowa Code does not require that minutes include informational comments made by those in attendance.
The only record that the City received concerning the computer equipment was the notice sent by the League of Cities. Although that record may not be responsive to the record request, Ms. Bergren has received a copy of that record.
Iowa Code section 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint. This complaint does not fulfill those requirements.
IT IS SO ORDERED: Formal complaint 21FC:0082 is dismissed as legally insufficient and without merit pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.8(2) and Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(2)(b).
Pursuant to Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(3), the IPIB may “delegate acceptance or dismissal of a complaint to the executive director, subject to review by the board.” The IPIB will review this Order on September 16, 2021. Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.
By the IPIB Executive Director
________________________________
Margaret E. Johnson
1. Ms. Bergren also attached an audio recording of the meeting. However, the recording could not be opened and reviewed with IPIB equipment.
2. Additional information provided indicates that the technology at issue was “requested” rather than “ordered'' despite the language used in the League of Cities email. Submitting a request for the technology does not guarantee that such will be received and is similar to filing a grant request. Should the request be approved, at that time there will be paperwork generated that would be a public record.
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
This document was sent by electronic mail on the ___ day of September, 2021, to:
Kay Bergren
Brian Yung, attorney for the City of Otho