24FC:0090 Sarah Weber/Orange City - Informal Resolution Report

Date:
05/15/2025

Subject: 
Sarah Weber/Orange City  - Informal Resolution Report

Opinion:

The Iowa Public Information Board

On October 9, 2024, Sarah Weber filed formal complaint 24FC:0090, alleging that Orange City violated Iowa Code Chapter 21.

The IPIB accepted this complaint at its meeting on December 19, 2024.

Background

In August 2024, Sarah Weber (the complainant) submitted a Chapter 22 records request with the City, seeking records relating to a local livestock ordinance. Based on records disclosed by the City, Weber filed formal complaint 24FC:0090, which alleged the City had violated Chapter 21 by holding private meetings of city council members without notice or public access. Two categories of violation were alleged and considered by IPIB.

I. Orange City’s Practice of Holding 2x2 Meetings

In the first part of her complaint, Weber alleged that the City had been engaged in a multi-year practice of holding “2x2 meetings,” which typically involve private, in-person conversations between up to two council members, the mayor, and the city administrator. According to the City, these meetings are used “to inform council members of upcoming issues that may need to be dealt with, and to allow council members an opportunity to share their own questions or concerns.” A series of these meetings were held with regards to the livestock ordinance in July 2024 following a contentious public session, when one council member reached out to the city administrator to organize “2x2 meetings with council members to get a direction on how people will vote.”

In reviewing the allegations, IPIB relied on the precedent set by Hutchison v. Shull, in which the Iowa Supreme Court held that meetings of a government body could arise, even without a majority of members present at any given time, when a city administrator acts as a “conduit” to facilitate deliberation between members. 878 N.W.2d 221, 235–36 (Iowa 2016). Based on this standard and the evidence presented, IPIB accepted this portion of the complaint for further review and informal resolution, finding that the City’s use of 2x2 meetings likely did not satisfy the standards set forth in Chapter 21.

II. Orange City’s Use of Emails Between Council Members

The complaint also highlighted several email conversations produced through Weber’s Chapter 22 records request. The emails provided to IPIB showed multiple instances in which council members shared their opinions and proposals for how the council should proceed on the livestock ordinance. The City has maintained that no decisions were ever made and that council members involved in email discussions ultimately “voted in compliance with the law” during open session. The City also asserted that there was no “deliberation,” on the basis that multiple options were weighed in hypothetical terms and multiple paths were in play.

Iowa courts have held that a meeting may arise where “a majority of the members of a body engage in any discussion that focuses at all concretely on matters over which they exercise judgement or discretion.” Hettinga v. Dallas Cnty. Bd. of Adjustment, 375 N.W.2d 293, 295 (Iowa Ct. App. 1985) (quoting Iowa Att’y Gen. Op. 81–7–4(L), at *10). “Deliberation” occurs for the purposes of a meeting when members inject their own commentary into a discussion, sharing “thoughts, concerns, opinions, or potential action on the matters” before the government body. 24AO:0004, Attendance at Social and Ministerial Events. Based on this standard, IPIB accepted these allegations for further review as well, finding at least some of the emails constituted “deliberation” between a majority of council members on a matter within policy-making duties (in this case, the livestock ordinance).

Applicable Law

“‘Meeting’ means a gathering in person or by electronic means, formal or informal, of a majority of the embers of a governmental body where there is deliberation or action upon any matter within the scope of the governmental body’s policy-making duties. Meetings shall not include a gathering of members of a governmental body for purely ministerial or social purposes when there is no discussion of policy or no intent to avoid the purposes of this chapter.” Iowa Code § 21.2(2).

Informal Resolution

While IPIB accepted the complaint for further review on the basis that the allegations in the complaint could support findings that violations of Chapter 21 occurred on both bases, no formal determination has been made at this stage. The City maintains that neither the 2x2 meetings nor the email conversations provided in the complaint constitute violations.

Despite this disagreement, the parties negotiated and reached an informal resolution with the goal of ensuring future meetings are held in accordance with Chapter 21.

Pursuant to Iowa Code § 23.9, IPIB presents the following terms for an informal resolution of this matter:

1. This Informal Resolution will be formally approved at a meeting of the Orange City Council. The City will include a copy of this Informal Resolution in its meeting minutes and will provide IPIB staff with a copy of the minutes demonstrating approval.
2. Members of the Orange City Council, along with the mayor and city administrator, will complete training on Iowa’s open meetings and public records laws. This training will be arranged by the City and conducted by IPIB during an open meeting.
3. The City will develop an official policy to avoid deliberation over email. This policy must be reasonably drafted to prevent a majority of council members from discussing their “thoughts, concerns, opinions, or potential action” amongst themselves on matters within the City Council’s policy-making duties outside of official council meetings. The City will provide IPIB staff with a copy of this policy after it is approved.
4. The City will end the practice of holding “2x2 meetings” outside of open session. Any future “2x2 meetings” or similar arrangements must be preceded by proper notice and open to the public.

The terms of the Informal Resolution will be completed within 60 days of the date of approval of

this Informal Resolution by all parties. Upon showing of proof of compliance, the IPIB will dismiss this complaint as successfully resolved.

Sarah Weber approved the Informal Resolution on April 16, 2025.

The Orange City Council approved the Informal Resolution on April 10, 2025.

The IPIB staff recommend the IPIB approve the Informal Resolution Report.

By the IPIB Agency Counsel,

________________________

Alexander Lee, J.D.