Councilwoman questions public discussion of her private email contents

By JIM BROOKS
Nelson County Gazette / WBRT Radio

Wednesday, Nov. 9, 2016, 11:45 p.m. — At Wednesday’s special Bardstown City Council meeting, Councilwoman Kecia Copeland sought answers to questions regarding the public disclosure of her private emails on her council iPad.

Councilman Francis Lydian asks questions regarding the council’s use of city-issued iPads at Wednesday night’s special-called city council meeting.

During a discussion regarding the city-issued iPads, Copeland asked about the Open Records Request regarding her use of her city iPad, and why the content of her personal emails was discussed at the last city council work session on Tuesday  — despite being told the content of her private emails would not be revealed.

City Attorney Tim Butler said Copeland’s private information on the iPad would not be available to the public via any sort of records request. Only official, city-related data would be available via records request.

“Anything that is private on your iPad is exempt from an open records request,” he said. However, that same private information on the city-owned device would be available for internal review by the city, he said.

Copeland then asked how her private emails wound up being discussed in last week’s meeting and to the media. Butler said the emails were not available to the public via open records request.

“Beyond that there’s no policy, there’s no guidance we’ve had,” he said.

After the meeting, Copeland expressed her frustration over not getting an answer to her question about the public discussion of her private email on her city iPad.

“My question was, ‘Why did you release information to the public that it wasn’t going to know about it? Why did you do that?’ ” she asked.

And what was the reply she received?

Councilman Roland Williams, left, and City Attorney Tim Butler look over a document on Williams’ iPad Wednesday night.

“Crickets,” she said. “I didn’t get any information. Mum’s the word.”

Butler explains that Capt. McKenzie Mattingly’s open records request about Copeland’s personal use of her city iPad was the first request of its type involving the iPads.

Copeland’s iPad was taken as part of the records request because of an allegation it was being improperly used, Butler said. “With all due respect to privacy, we tried to address that,” he said.

In the wake of the disclosure that members of the council were using city-issued iPads for personal use, Butler recommended the members of the council limit the use of their iPads to city-related business and email.

Butler said his recommendation is based partly on the fact that the council members have no guarantee to privacy of personal information they have on a city-owned device, regardless of the type.

The city-issued iPads should not be a council member’s main computer device, nor should they be used to avoid paying for a personal computing device.

If a crime had been committed or an ethics ordinance violated, there are avenues to pursue justice in both instances. But Butler was clear in his review of the situation.

“No city policy has been violated,” he said. If a formal policy would be helpful in clarifying proper use of the iPads, and Butler said he was willing to help draft one.

Butler said personal information — emails, photos and other files — taken from Copeland’s iPad should be destroyed if she wishes, with a copy retained in the event an ethics complaint is filed. That information should be quarantined and not available for public review.

-30-