The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet - 2001-03-19 SpecialCity Councilors Judie Hammerstad, Mayor Jack Hofnan, Council President Ellie McPeak Gay Graham Karl Rohde Bill Schoen John Turchi CITY COUNCIL INFORMAT1ON SESSION Monday, March 19,20.0-1 4:00 P. Al. Council Chambers City Hall 380 A Avenue AGENDA Also published on the intemet at: ci.oswego.or.us Contact: Robyn Christie, Deputy City Recorder E -Mail: public_affairs@ci.oswego.or.us Phone: (503) 675-3984 This meeting is in a handicapped accessible location. For any special accommodations, please contact Public Affairs, (503) 635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. INFORMATION SESSION 3.1 E -Government 3.2 Comprehensive Plan 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(e), to deliberate with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions and (h) to discuss potential litigation with legal counsel. 5. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 6. ADJOURNMENT City Council Information Session March 19, 2001 Page 1 of I City Attorney's Office To: Judie Hammerstad, Mayor Members of Lake Oswego City Council Doug Schmitz, City Manager Council Report From: David D. Powell, City Attorney Subject: City Council E-mail Communications — Public Records Law Date: March 19, 2001 The purpose of this report is to outline the basics of public records law relating to e-mail communications by the City Council. Three separate considerations arise with respect to any particular e-mail communication: (1) Is the e-mail communication a public record? (2) If so, how long must the record be retained? (3) When must the public record be disclosed? 1. E-mail Communications as Public Records A public record includes any document, writing, photograph, recording, etc., including a "machine readable electronic record," that is made, received, filed or recorded in connection with the transaction of public business, regardless of whether the communication is confidential or not. 1 Virtually any a -mail communication by a Council member relating to city matters would be considered a public record. Even seemingly trivial communications (transmittals, acknowledgements, thank you notes, etc.) are public records if thely relate to city business. 2. Retention of E-mail Public Records State law grants the State Archivist the authority to adopt rules for the retention or destruction of public records.2 So long as Council members send copies of all e-mail communications to the city "post office," they needn't worry about how long documents should be kept. The City Recorder will archive any records that need to be retained. The Council may nevertheless be interested in how these retention requirements apply to City Council e-mail. Most of the Archivist's retention schedules pertain to the records of specific city ` ORS 192.005(5); ORS 192.410(4) and (5) 2 ORS 192.105(1). E-mail Communications/Public Records Law March 19, 2001 Page 2 departments. The City Council's e-mail communications typically will not be department records and therefore NNUI usually be subject to one of the following "Administrative Records" retention requirements: ° Ephemeral Correspondence (retain until read) Communications of a preliminary or informational nature that do not contain significant information about the City's programs, fiscal status, or routine city operations. Records include advertising circulars, drafts and worksheets, desk notes, memoranda, and other preliminary or informational records. General Correspondence (retain 1 year) Communications that do not contain significant information about a city's programs (but are -more than merely preliminary or informational). Program Correspondence (retain per the appropriate city department schedule) Communications that document and add significant information to a program or primary functional responsibility of a city office. Financial Correspondence (retain 2 years) Correspondence, memoranda and similar records that add significant infonnation about the financial status of the city. Policy and Historical Correspondence (retain permanently) Correspondence, memoranda and other records that state or form the basis of policy, set important precedents, or record historic events related to the organization or operation of the city. Calendars and Notes (retain 1 year) Records documenting and facilitating routine planning, scheduling, and similar actions relating to meetings, appointments, trips, visits, and other activities. This applies to records that contain significant information that is not summarized or otherwise included in reports or similar documents. Drafts and ;Vorksheets (retain as needed) Records of a preliminary or working nature that do not represent significant steps in the preparation of final copy documents. Obviously these retention requirements also apply to public records that are not e-mail communications. 3 Council members are often provided copies of department reports and records. However, under state law extra copies of a document preserved for convenience of reference are not "public records" for the purposes of retention requirements. ORS 192.005(5)(d). OAR 166-200-0010 (5) -(10). E-mail Communications./Public Records Law March 19, 2001 Page 3 3. Disclosure of Records State law provides that citizens have the right to inspect and copy public records.5 This applies to electronic records such as e-mail, in addition to documents in more traditional formats.6 There are dozens of exceptions to the disclosure requirement. Among them are: ➢ Communications within a public body or between public bodies of an advisory nature to the extent that they cover other than purely factual materials and are preliminary to any final agency determination of policy or action. This exception does not apply unless the city shows that, in the particular instance, the public interest in encouraging frank communication between officials and employees of public bodies clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure. 7 Information submitted to the city in confidence, not otherwise required by law to be submitted, where such information should reasonably be considered confidential, the city has obligated itself in good faith not to disclose the information, and when the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.8 > Any records or information the disclosure of which is prohibited or restricted or otherwise made confidential or privileged under Oregon law.9 (This includes attorney- client communications). ➢ Records pertaining to litigation in which the city is a party, or if the city shows that such litigation is likely to occur. This exception does not apply to litigation that has been concluded, nor does it limit discovery rights of a party to the litigation.10 This exception applies unless the public interest requires disclosure. ➢ Information relating to the appraisal of real estate prior to its acquisition.' 1 As with the litigation exception, this exception does not apply if the public interest requires disclosure. A record that has existed for more than 25 years must be disclosed, even if it would otherwise fall within one of the exceptions. 12 It is important to remember that the exceptions mean that the city is not obligated to disclose the record. Most exceptions do not prohibit the city from making the disclosure. s ORS 192.420 ° ORS 192.410(6). ORS 192.502(l). ° ORS 192.502(4) ° ORS 192.502(9) t0 ORS 192.501(1) " ORS 192.501(6) t2 ORS 192.495 E-mail Communications/Public Records Law March 19, 2001 Page 4 4. Conclusion People often consider e-mail to be similar to communicating by telephone. However, when it comes to public records requirements, a far more lasting, and possibly disclosable, record is made with an e-mail message than with a telephone call. Council members are encouraged to make sure that the City Recorder is provided with copies of all documents relating to city business, e-mail or otherwise, so that any retention and disclosure requirements can be met. C •,rtE-Government City of Lake Oswego rD�finitions * E -Government -- Information Services provided to citizens • Telephone • Walk -In • Web Site • Email E -Commerce -- Transactional Services provided to citizens • Integrated Communications -40 Current Broadband Capability ... _ rpp�� h1 I , �` - � �r�Aiiaw�a°iWw■"�� II I1 III IIII III III I .�„i- Beaverton Tualatin Hillsboro Webserver �v/ Lake Oswego Tigard IT In rastrttcture @ LakeO IT Manager 1---- ------------------------------------, Network Engineer Computer Specialist Computer Specialist Dotted Line Relationship with... I 1 Nctwoj-ked City Buildings 250+ C0111tluters & Email Accounts Maintenance M;ot System HMIIICial Mit & I- LUM1r1 RcsO�urrCs SySt<,111 Ccyurt Docket Mgt System Utility Billing System Welbsitc Police IT (2) Library IT (2) Web Committee(18) ✓••� rodayE-Govemment T * Searchable Website/City Code *Department Information *Council/Board Meetings & Agenda *Current News & Events *Emergency Information *Neighborhood Information *Job Openings 1 E-Coinnierce Today * Library — via LINCC -- Request Materials to be picked up -- Renew material online *Parks & Recreation — via RecreationBiz -- Register for classes & events • Recreation & Special Activities • Adult Community Center • Golf/Tennis EConnInerce Tomorrow t� * Web Store — Coming Soon! Lien Search Capability Utility Bills * Court Fines *Dog License Renewals *Planning & Permit Fees * Integrate Web, Telephone, Walk-in's •Consider. . Jim I��Nl111�II Which Transactions * Cost effectiveness Outsource * Staffing Training Marketing Tinning �.. cnallenges *Utility Billing System Update * Court System Update — Six to 12 Months Out — $25 -SOK to Upgrade Each * Increased need for Backup Systems i Some Costs to Consider... Outsourcing — First Application $30,000 — Additional A.ppl. $15,000 + Server $15,000 * T-1 w/Internet $18,000/yr * Firewall $20,000 * Firewall Maint $15,000/yr * Webmaster $60,000/yr * Backup Systems $30-50K * Consultants $200/hour Next Steps... i lam I i I , � *Mayor and Council to get City Notebooks * City Email Accounts to be established * Forwarding to "at home"' accounts *Electronic Council Packets Coming Soon! *Public Records Law Impacts *Policy and Procedures need to be developed 6V, 3 11.o) The Comprehensive Plan City of Lake Oswego What is the Comprehensive Plan? - Generalized goals and policies, land use map and factual data and projections on which policies were based - Helps city develop in a logical and coordinated manner to accommodate desired needs and activities Roots of Planning in Oregon - 1919 first enabling legislation - Growing pains - Decades of "local option" planning - Senate Bill 10 - 1969 Oregon Land Use Act of 1973 — Established DLCD and LCDC — req'd to establish Statewide goals — Required cities/ counties to adopt Comprehensive Pian — Required state agency plans to conform to LCDC goals — Required cities/counties to have zoning, subdivision and other ordinances to implement Comprehensive Plans — Required widespread citizen involvement in all facets of planning History of Lake Oswego's Plan - Adopted first Comprehensive Plan in 1978 - DLCD reviewed in 1983 - DLCD determined City non-compliant with Goals 2, 5, 6, 10. 11, 12, 14 and 15 "Acknowledged" by DLCD in 1984 First Periodic Review in 1989 Plan Update in 1992-94 2 What's in the Plan? - Two process Goals — Goal 1 Citizen Involvement — Goal 2 Land Use Planning - Six development Goals — Goal 9 Economy — Goal 10 Housing — Goal 11 Public Facilities — Goal 12 Transportation — Goal 13 Energy Conservation — Goal 14 Urbanization What's in the Plan? Eleven Conservation Goals — Goals 3 and 4 Agriculture and Forest — Goal 5 Open Spaces, Scenic, Historic and Natural Resources — Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality — Goal 7 Natural Disasters and Hazards — Goal 8 Recreational Needs — Goal 15 Willamette River Greenway — Goals 16, 17, 18, 19 Coastal Goals 3 How is the Plan implemented? - Zoning Code (describes uses permitted in different areas, criteria and standards, variances, conditional uses, ) - Zoning Map - labels uses allowed in each area - Development Code (outlines process and criteria for reviewing land use requests) - Utility codes, streets, sidewalk codes, etc. - Non -regulatory programs (Downtown Plan, Capital Improvement Plan; Neighborhood Enhancement Grants) - Intergovernmental Agreements (public facility providers - fire, sewer, etc., County) Chancriner the Comprehensive Plan - Local Plan Amendment process — Major text updates since acknowledgment » Adoption of Neighborhood Plan » Public Facility Plan Transportation System Plan » Growth Management policies and Design Types — Sensitive Lands Zoning Map amendments — Property owner requests to amend Comprehensive Plan map and Zoning map on their land 4 Changing the Comprehensive Plan State required Periodic Review — City had first Periodic Review in 1989 — Next Periodic Review scheduled for 2002 Changes in state and regional regulations » Changes in local circumstances New information Relationship to Other Jurisdictions Metro has land use powers to manage the Portland UGB and lands within to ensure efficient use and quantity of land — City's Plan must be consistent with Metro's RUGGOs and Functional Plan (Metro reviews City's Plan Amendments) - Clackamas County — City/County Plans must be coordinated — Dual Interest Area/Comprehensive Planning Where has the Plan taken us? - Focused commercial/higher density along transit lines and major streets - Ensured a system of parks and open space - Protected the most important natural resources - Provided a multi -modal transportation system plan - Provided a citizen involvement program "It isgood to Have an end to journe_Y toward; but it is thejourney that matters in the end "' Ursula K. LeGuin 6