Date:
03/20/2025
Subject:
Krystal Weringa/City of Roland - Dismissal Order
Opinion:
The Iowa Public Information Board
In re the Matter of: Krystal Weringa, Complainant And Concerning: City of Roland, Respondent |
Case Number: 25FC:0019 Dismissal Order
|
|---|
COMES NOW, Erika Eckley, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order:
On February 11, 2025, Krystal Weringa filed formal complaint 25FC:0019, alleging the City of Roland violated Iowa Code Chapter 21.
Facts
On February 11, 2025, Weringa filed a complaint alleging the City of Roland failed to properly post minutes within 15 days. The complaint further stated, “I’m also wondering if they are including all the needed information in their minutes.”
In response to the complaint, IPIB staff reviewed minutes available on the City’s website for timeliness and content.
Applicable Law
“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(2).
Analysis
Weringa’s first allegation within the complaint is based on the timing of the posting of minutes. Weringa states the minutes are not being posted within 15 days. There is nothing within Iowa Code § 21.3(2) establishing minutes be posted on the governmental body’s website or that minutes be posted within a specific timeframe. Rather, the law requires that governmental bodies keep minutes and make those minutes available to public inspection as public records. There is nothing alleged by Weringa indicating the City is not complying with the law in Chapter 21.
Weringa’s second allegation questions the content of the minutes. It is unclear from Weringa’s complaint whether this is truly a component of the complaint or curiosity. Due to the ambiguity, IPIB staff reviewed available records to determine whether facial information existed to support Weringa’s question or allegation. IPIB staff reviewed minutes on the City’s website and found the minutes included all required information. Iowa law requires that minutes show the date, time and place of the meeting, the members present, the action taken, the results of each vote taken, and information sufficient to indicate the vote of each member present. Iowa Code § 21.3(2).
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.
The complaint alleges that minutes are not appropriately posted within 15 days on the City’s website. There are no legal posting or timeframe requirements for meeting minutes of governmental bodies. The complaint further questions whether the content of minutes is appropriate. IPIB staff found the minutes to include all information required by law.
IT IS SO ORDERED: Formal complaint 25FC:0019 is dismissed as 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 March 20, 2025. 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.