Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Email It topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council IT explains quarantined and junk mail after members report missing constituent messages
Summary
City IT staff explained how enterprise spam filters and quarantine settings can cause constituent emails to be routed to quarantine or junk folders, described default retention and whitelist options, and offered steps staff will take to reduce missed messages.
An IT staff member briefed council members on why some constituent emails did not appear in council inboxes and described steps to reduce future delivery failures.
The presenter said Ogden’s enterprise spam filter (Microsoft Office 365) processes roughly 10,000–15,000 messages a day and classifies incoming mail into categories such as known‑malicious (quarantine not delivered), probable spam (quarantine for review) and junk mail. The presenter explained that quarantined messages are held for 30 days by default and that the system uses machine‑learning rules and global signals to flag suspicious mail.
The nut graf: council members reported a small number of constituent emails ending up in quarantine or junk and asked what staff can do to prevent misses; IT staff recommended checking junk folders regularly, using whitelist rules for recurring senders, and offered to search server records for specific missing messages.
Clarifications and next steps provided by IT staff included: - Quarantine vs junk: quarantine holds messages that need human review; junk is a lower‑confidence flag kept in client junk folders. - Retention/defaults: quarantine default retention was described as 30 days for some clients; administrators can change retention and can set ‘‘no limit’’ to preserve messages longer for client devices. - White‑list and training: staff can whitelist known constituent addresses or domains and use training to reduce false positives; marking messages as ‘‘not junk’’ on client devices also helps the filter learn. - Troubleshooting: IT staff offered to trace specific missing messages if council members can provide sender addresses, date/time or subject lines.
Council members asked whether changing the public contact form would avoid the issue; staff said messages submitted via the website still route through the same mail filtering and thus are subject to the same checks. IT staff offered to work with council offices to whitelist recurring senders and to provide instructions for checking junk/quarantine on phones and tablets.
Ending: IT staff asked council members to forward examples of missed messages so staff can whitelist or trace them and recommended a habit of checking the junk folder weekly while staff tune filters.
