Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sunshine Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County attorney reminds advisory board that off‑line discussions and many messages are public records
Summary
Amanda Swindle of the Lee County attorney's office gave a Sunshine Law and public‑records primer to the advisory committee on May 20, warning that communications about foreseeable board action are public records and that two or more members must not discuss board business outside noticed meetings; she also reviewed voting‑conflict rules and answered member questions about social media.
Amanda Swindle of the Lee County attorney's office told advisory committee members on May 20 that Florida's Sunshine Law subjects advisory board members to the same open‑meeting and public‑records standards as elected officials.
"You should assume that all your communications regarding matters that come before this board are public records," Swindle said, summarizing the scope of public‑records obligations and advising members to consult staff when in doubt. She warned that two or more members of the same board may not discuss matters on which foreseeable board action may be taken except at a noticed public meeting.
Swindle reviewed practical pitfalls: emailing or texting two or more members about nominations, replying‑all on group messages, forwarding materials with personal notes, and social‑media exchanges can all create Sunshine Law exposure. She said that forward‑looking or informal hallway conversations about nominations that will return to the board may be treated as prohibited communications and advised members to contact staff to clarify whether a communication should be handled as a public record.
On voting conflicts, Swindle said members must abstain when a matter before the board could benefit the member, a relative or an employer, and must file the required forms and announce conflicts at the meeting. She also noted the county’s public‑records retention duties and the need to forward potentially responsive messages to county servers so records are preserved.
During Q&A members asked about social media and post‑meeting comments. Swindle said sharing information after a matter is final generally presents less risk than discussing a pending nomination before board action, but she recommended caution about back‑and‑forth discussions online. She offered to answer follow‑up questions individually and to provide legal opinions as needed.
The presentation was followed by committee business that included multiple advisory recommendations for preserve acquisitions; the committee adjourned after scheduling its next meeting for June 17 at 5:30 p.m.
