Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> Release of confidential attorney advice to the Council requested by Ms. Carr and Mr. Crow. <br />Ms. Carr stated that she provided the Council with the February 10, 2013, “University City <br />Bulletin Board” sent out by Mayor Shelley Welsch and she noted in the first paragraph was <br />a legal opinion from the City Attorney, Paul Martin. She said that it quoted much of what <br />was supposed to be a confidential attorney-client privilege to the Council only. Ms. Carr <br />said she was shocked and dismayed because the confidential document was re-printed in <br />the Mayor’s newsletter. The top of the document read that it constitutes a privileged <br />communication between a governmental body and its attorney and may be maintained in <br />closed record in accordance with its provisions RSMO 610.021. She said the download <br />was also similarly marked confidential, which contained the same caveat at the top. Ms. <br />Carr said at no time did the Council discuss or receive an e-mail stating the document <br />could be released to the public. She said City Attorney Mr. Paul Martin informed her, when <br />she first came on the Council that the determination of what was public information cannot <br />be made by one Councilmember alone, but made by the entire Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow asked the City Attorney if University City had adopted the Missouri Open <br />Meetings and Records Act known as the Sunshine Law. Mr. Martin stated that it had been <br />adopted some time ago by resolution. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow asked that as part of that act and by the best of his knowledge, it said that all <br />legal opinions are deemed confidential. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin stated that it was definitely one of the exceptions to the public records <br />presumption, yes. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow asked if all information remain closed until action was taken by the City to make <br />them public. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin stated that he had no doubt that it was in there. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow said it also stated that no person shall disclose without being authorized by law or <br />by a vote of the City, in the same statute. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin stated that he did not have the statute in front of him to review, but would expect <br />that to be in there. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow said that after he looked through all of the opinions that Mr. Martin provided for <br />them since he has been on Council, the City Attorney has been consistent with the <br />disclaimer that is listed at the top of the document. Mr. Crow said that he felt it was safe to <br />say that the attorney-client privilege that they have was for the entire Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin stated that he thought that would be his opinion. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow said that that attorney-client privilege could only be waived by a vote of the entire <br />Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin stated yes. He said that to foster clear communications with the Council, he felt <br />the proper procedure would be to not have individual members make individual decisions <br />about whether they can disclose. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow stated that this could compromise the City’s position on any given item. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin said that would depend on the circumstances. <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />