Local governments may be less responsive to the public over email thanks to a new law called the Local Records Act, which goes into effect Jan. 1, 2015.
The new law prevents individual elected officials from replying to people on behalf of an entire governmental body, according to Chris Jasculca, senior director of Policy, Planning and Communication for Oak Park Elementary School District 97.
“People are going to need to understand that if the board had its way, you would continue to respond to people as you have in the past, but changes in the law preclude this from happening,” Jasculca told the Board at its Dec. 16 meeting.
Members of the public can continue to send questions or comments to the board and its members, but in almost all instances, those communications will now be forwarded to the superintendent.
“In accordance with the Open Meetings Act and the oath of office taken by board members, individual board members will not (a) reply to an email on behalf of the entire board, or (b) engage in the discussion of district business with a majority of board-quorum,” Jasculca said in a Dec. 16 memo to the board.
The new law requires taxing bodies serving areas with fewer than a million people to provide a “uniform single email address” on their websites to facilitate communication between board officials and the public unless officials have individual email addresses. In District 97, both are available. The law specifically does not require the same for social media sites.
“We are fully in compliance now,” Jasculca told the board.
Legal officials from Policy Reference Education Subscription Service, or PRESS, advised District 97 officials that because of the change in the law, there should never be a time that board members offer a substantial response to an individual or group email. Jasculca told the board he believes this also applies to written correspondence sent by other methods, including the U.S. Postal Service.
“Board members will not take individual action that might compromise the board or district,” Jasculca’s memo said.
He said even though it’s not legally required, the legal team at PRESS also encouraged board members to forward all messages sent to their individual district email accounts to each of the other board members. Additionally, Jasculca said, board members should photocopy any hardcopy letters sent through the mail and distribute them to their colleagues.
“It creates difficulty because you obviously have quorum issues when you start a discussion via email,” he told the board.
The only way a board member can respond, Jasculca said, is if the communication becomes an agenda item for an open board meeting.
Board President Robert Spatz said for the sake of transparency, he’d like to see a disclaimer on the website near the contact information that explains members of the public should not have an expectation of privacy in their communications with the board.
“This isn’t meant to discourage contact. It’s a state law,” he said.
Spatz acknowledged there are times when family, friends and acquaintances contact board members through their district email for personal reasons because that’s the only way they know how to reach them. In those instances, he said, it’s OK to give those people their personal contact information.
Spatz said because this involves most taxing bodies, he’d like to see the local governments get together and develop uniform, policies, procedures and language for handling this issue.
Board member Denise Sacks said she believes the practical thing to do is to treat written communications the same way the board treats public comments at board meetings. In most instances, the comments and questions are forwarded to the appropriate administrator for response.
