24FC:0058 Chad Miller/Scott County Board of Review - Dismissal Order

Date:
10/17/2024

Subject:
Chad Miller/Scott County Board of Review  - Dismissal Order

Opinion:

The Iowa Public Information Board

COMES NOW, Erika Eckley, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order: 

On July 5, 2024, Chad Miller filed formal complaint 24FC:0058, alleging the Scott County Board of Review (“Board”) violated Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22.

Facts

Mr. Miller alleges the Board is still not complying with chapters 21 and 22 despite a complaint filed last year.[1] Specifically, he alleges the Board did not give adequate notice of the time, date and place of meetings or post a tentative agenda for their 2024 meetings on May 1, 6, and 10. He also alleges the Board did not publish notice of the meetings for property tax assessment appeals. He alleges the Board did not keep complete and accurate minutes of their meetings because the Board provided minutes showing a record of their vote, but the vote was not taken in public at the meeting as witnessed by Mr. Miller when he was in attendance from 8:48am-10:17am. Mr. Miller attended his hearing and listened to a couple that came afterwards. Some of the other hearings contained a vote immediately following the appeal, but not all. He also alleges Mr. McManus, the county assessor, does not have authority to represent the Board in this matter.

In response, Mr. McManus alleges Mr. Miller has filed this complaint because the Board disagreed with him on the assessment of his property. Mr. McManus stated he personally confirmed that for every meeting and protest hearing, the Board gave at a minimum of 24 hours advance notice by posting the notice/agenda on the public meetings notice board located in the foyer of the Scott County Administration Center at 600 W 4th St in Davenport, Iowa. He stated this is the customary way of posting notice for these meetings/hearings in Scott County. He stated there is currently no Iowa statute requiring notice be posted electronically. He also stated the Board was not required to publish notice of the meetings for the 2024 session in a local newspaper. 

He stated the Board kept complete, accurate, and detailed minutes of all meetings, hearings and votes. All documents were previously shared with IPIB and Mr. Miller as part of the resolution of the previous complaint.

All meetings, hearings, actions, and votes of the Board were taken in open public meetings. He explained that he is representing the Board as authorized by their rules of procedure as provided in Iowa Code § 441.33.[2]

Applicable Law

“Meetings of governmental bodies shall be preceded by public notice as provided in section 21.4 and shall be held in open session unless closed sessions are expressly permitted by law. Except as provided in section 21.5, all actions and discussions at meetings of governmental bodies, whether formal or informal, shall be conducted and executed in open session. 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.” Iowa Code § 21.3.

“[A] governmental body shall give notice of the time, date, and place of each meeting including a reconvened meeting of the governmental body, and the tentative agenda of the meeting, in a manner reasonably calculated to apprise the public of that information. Reasonable notice shall include advising the news media who have filed a request for notice with the governmental body and posting the notice on a bulletin board or other prominent place which is easily accessible to the public and clearly designated for that purpose at the principal office of the body holding the meeting, or if no such office exists, at the building in which the meeting is to be held.” Iowa Code § 21.4(1)(a).

Analysis

Notice of Meeting

Mr. Miller’s first allegation is the Board failed to provide notice of the Board’s meetings. A photograph of the notice for the May 10, 2024 meeting was provided by Mr. Miller with concern that he could not determine whether the notice had been timely posted. He also alleged the notice was not sent to the media or published in the newspaper.

The Board has responded that the physical notice was posted on the County’s bulletin board designated for such postings as required under Iowa Code § 21.4. The Board stated that no media notice was requested, so none was provided, and that no publication requirement existed, so no newspaper publication was made.[3]

In this case, there is evidence the posting was made, but no facts to suggest the time frame regarding the posting was not met. No media requested notice and no newspaper publication was required,[4] There are no facts provided the posted notice was not posted in a timely fashion. Under these facts there is no violation of Iowa Code chapter 21.

Accurate Minutes

Mr. Miller’s second allegation is the Board did not take accurate minutes because they did not vote on his appeal after his allotted time and while he was present. Mr. McManus stated that “[d]ue to multiple hearings per meeting, and hearing time constraints, and in the interest of overall operational efficiency, the Board frequently ‘does not’ take action/votes immediately following a hearing while the petitioner is still present.” The Board may have to review multiple grounds for appeal, copious amounts of data, or they may need to do additional research. The Board often takes the actions and votes at the end of the meeting after all oral protests are heard, or at the end of a session, but that all votes are taken in an open meeting.

Mr. Miller has agreed that in the time he attended his hearing and others afterwards, only some of the hearings were concluded with action and a vote by the Board immediately following the appeal. Nothing in Chapter 21 addresses how a governmental body works through its agenda. In 14FC:0079, IPIB addressed a complaint regarding a government body’s practice of skipping around an agenda to fill in gaps while waiting for scheduled items. “The Supervisors, with the assistance of the Osceola County Attorney, reviewed and revised the previous practice of listing agenda items without time indications and the practice of moving around the agenda randomly to consider items.  While this action is not specifically prohibited by Iowa Code section 21.4, the Supervisors agreed that the spirit of the section, to ‘apprise the public’ of the action before the Supervisors and to allow public observation of the meetings, was better served by considering matters in the order presented in the agenda.”

The minutes provided did reflect a vote on Mr. Miller’s appeal was taken on the date of his hearing, the action did not occur when he was present. There is nothing in chapter 21 that requires a vote at a specific time, so there is no violation of chapter 21 under these facts. The Board should consider, however, how they can work to “apprise the public” better about when deliberation and action may be taken on specific appeals during the open meeting to ensure interested parties can know when to be present for the deliberation and action. 

County Assessor Responding for the Board

IPIB exists to provide an efficient review of chapter 21 and 22 disputes in lieu of the requirement to go to district court. In this role, IPIB works to allow for parties to address their issues in an efficient manner. Many complainants are pro se and IPIB has not required an attorney to respond on behalf of the governmental body. The Scott County Board of Review has designated the following: “Any time the Board is considered out of session, the Board authorizes the Scott County Attorney’s Office along with assistance from the Scott County Assessor’s Office to speak and act on the Board’s behalf in all assessment appeal matters.” Whether the Board under Iowa Code § 441.33 is allowed to designate Mr. McManus to respond on behalf of the Board is beyond the jurisdiction of IPIB.

Conclusion

Iowa Code § 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint. Following a review of the allegations on their face, it is found that this complaint does not meet those requirements.

Under the facts of this complaint, there are no facts disputing the notice of the meeting was posted in compliance with chapter 21. The minutes reflect a vote that was taken in an open meeting, but at a later time than immediately following the appeal by Mr. Miller. Iowa Code chapter 21 does not specify how an agenda is organized.

IT IS SO ORDERED:  Formal complaint 24FC:0058 is dismissed as it is legally insufficient pursuant to Iowa Code § 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 October 17, 2024.  Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.

By the IPIB Executive Director

_________________________

Erika Eckley, J.D.

[1] 23FC:0074 Chad Miller/Scott County Board of Review

[2] https://www.scottcountyiowa.gov/assessor/board-review/rules-regulations

[3] There is no newspaper publication or website posting requirement in Iowa Code chapter 21. 

[4] Any publication requirement would have been outside the jurisdiction of IPIB.