South Windsor Council Discusses Texts, Emails During Meetings

OMG! Where do u stand on this issue?

The Town Council recently had a discussion concerning members texting and e-mailing during meetings and whether those communications could be subject to disclosure under the state’s Freedom of Information Law.

Mayor Tom Delnicki said he brought up the discussion item after he was approached by residents who said that councilors appeared to be texting on their electronic devices during meetings.

Delnicki received an opinion from an associate at Murtha Cullina - the town attorney - that provided that texts or e-mails either to or from town councilors that relate to the conducting of town business during meetings would likely be considered public records under the state Freedom of Information law.

That would mean that any member of the public would have the right to inspect those messages, according to the opinion.

Further, any communication involving a quorum of the council could be considered an unlawful meeting if it is not properly noticed.

As part of the research into the opinion, the attorney who drafted the memorandum contacted a commissioner at the Freedom of Information Commission, who provided some of the analysis.

The conclusion of the legal opinion was that best practices called for councilors to refrain from texting or sending e-mail messages during meetings unless absolutely necessary.

“Even innocent [messages] could give the appearance that [members of the public] are being excluded from the thoughts and deliberations [of the councilors],” said Delnicki, quoting the legal opinion.

If someone were to file a complaint with the Freedom of Information Commission, and a violation was suspected, the commission could go so far as to have a councilor’s electronic device subpoenaed for a review of its contents.

Murtha Cullina attorney Dwight Johnson said at the meeting that it was of course perfectly fine for a councilor to take a personal call or text during a meeting, but that messages concerning town business would likely be subject to the state’s Freedom of Information Act.

Delnicki said that he is required to be on call for his job “24/7,” but that he leaves his cell phone in his car during meetings. In the event of an emergency, he can be reached by phone in the council meeting chambers.

Several councilors, including Keith Yagaloff and Dr. Saud Anwar, said that they found the discussion item helpful.

Yagaloff said that there was a problem that could evolve into councilors texting one another how to vote without having the public discussion that is so valuable in open meetings.

Councilor Kevin McCann noted that while he generally does not text during meetings, several weeks ago he had to tend to a personal matter that required him to do so.

McCann also noted that most of the councillors are professionals who are required to keep in contact with clients or patients at all hours.

But, McCann said that he would take the opinion under advisement.

Councilor Cary Prague said that while the public “has a right to know, it does not have a need to know.”

Prague said that the state budget was passed in secrecy.

Johnson noted that while the Freedom of Information Commission tends to err on the side of disclosure, state courts are far less liberal when interpreting the Freedom of Information Act and tend to bar more items from being made public.