Politics & Government

Maplewood Council's E-Discussions Violate Law, Media Experts Say

The discussion of any public business must be conducted during an official meeting, media law experts say.

Originally published May 5, 2011 at 9 p.m. 

Maplewood City Council members routinely discuss public business by email, outside of public meetings, according to at least one council member. It’s a practice that violates the Missouri Sunshine Law, media law experts say.

The most recent example was in late March, when the council staged a lengthy email discussion about banning the “open carry” of firearms in the city. Before the council took a vote at its March 22 meeting—a meeting that generated no discussion from council members—three council members already discussed how they would vote and why.

Find out what's happening in Maplewood-Brentwoodwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

“They’re supposed to air their differences in front of people who attend the meetings so citizens have an opportunity to be heard and to participate in the process,” said Charles Davis, who researches media law as a professor at the University of Missouri School of Journalism. “What we have here is sort of the meeting’s equivalent of theater. Everyone knows the script and they come in and perform according to the script.”

But exchanging emails about public business allows council members to be better prepared for meetings, Ward 3 Councilman Barry Greenberg said.

Find out what's happening in Maplewood-Brentwoodwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The council is continually violating the Missouri Sunshine Law when members discuss public business through email instead of at a meeting, Davis said. The law requires public officials to adhere to two main ideas: provide open records to citizens and discuss public business during meetings open to the public. Exceptions are made for personnel, legal and real estate discussions, which can be held behind closed doors.

Maplewood officials follow the first half of the sunshine law, but don't comply when it comes to public meetings, Davis said.

Ward 2 Councilman Tim Dunn, Ward 3 Councilman Shawn Faulkingham and Greenberg all participated in an online debate on March 17.

Dunn wrote, "I'm leaning to no open carry allowed... trust me, I'd rather not have conceal carry either, but I'm not sure banning open carry is helpful/better."

Greenberg responded, "Tim, if someone is going to use a gun for illegal purposes, I seriously doubt that they are going to openly carry a weapon to be in conformance with the law.”

Greenberg, Faulkingham and Mayor James White participated in a follow-up discussion leading up to the too.

The debate followed . Council members responded to an e-mail from City Manager Marty Corcoran, who wrote:

"Before I would put something like this on the Council agenda, which has the potential to create public controversy on both sides of the issue based on the response of the public and management of Walmart and on the other side the response by second amendment individuals, I want to get your input on the matter."

During an interview in March, Corcoran said he only wanted to know if he should add the item to the agenda or not.

"I wasn't looking for some eloquent debate. Obviously, there was some eloquent debate," Corcoran said. "Most of the time, that doesn't take place. That is not the norm."

The city typically follows a consistent method for every meeting: Corcoran submits memos and supporting documents, such as city staff e-mails or construction bids, to council members before scheduled city council meetings—documents he also makes available to the journalists who cover the meetings. Members then call or email Corcoran for more information. Some issues draw longer debate between council members.

The system works for Greenberg, he said. He researches ordinances from other cities and prefers to send his findings to other council members, he said, because it’s an efficient way to govern.

“I don’t know how we can have an intelligent conversation unless everyone is up to speed on a particular topic,” Greenberg said.

Greenberg talked to voters at the polls on April 5 and met with business owners in his ward. Overall, he heard from 170 people and 99 percent of them supported the ban, he said. He didn’t feel compelled to share all of this information during the official council meeting.

“I could have gone on for a while about open carry, but I don’t know what purpose it would have served in that venue,” Greenberg said.

And while this system might occasionally make for a more productive city government, it’s still illegal, Davis said.

“Nobody said that our form of government was convenient or efficient. There are other forms of government that are far more efficient, and far more authoritarian. Our government was supposed to be created so that everyone had a say,” Davis said.

The Missouri General Assembly updated the sunshine law a few years ago to include communication through new technologies, said Jean Maneke, an attorney in the Kansas City area who represents the Missouri Press Association.

New language in the law defines public meetings as somewhere where public business is discussed, whether that's in person or "by means of communication equipment, including, but not limited to, conference call, video conference, Internet chat, or Internet message board," the law reads.

“Certainly what you got here is a discussion of public business by communication equipment. This is clearly a public meeting via email," Maneke said.

And the council can't be held responsible for breaking the sunshine law unless a private citizen files a suit, Maneke said. The Missouri Attorney General's office—which enforces the state's sunshine law—could take action too.

Greenberg said it would make sense for the council to hold more public discussion if more citizens attended city council meetings. Right now, only a handful of people consistently show up.

More people might show up if the council complies with the law, Davis said.

"If they actually discuss public business before the public, then the public might actually become interested in the civic life of the town," he said. "I don’t think any of these people are evil or bad, I just think that over the years they created a system that works for them, but they’re certainly not thinking about how it purports with the sunshine law."


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

More from Maplewood-Brentwood