Get email alerts on the Government Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press county on NDAs and public-records transparency
Summary
Multiple speakers urged the board to disclose nondisclosure agreements and provide signatory lists or redacted copies where exemptions are claimed; one commenter said the state attorney general is reviewing which materials may be withheld.
Several members of the public raised concerns about the county’s use of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) and the transparency of contract-related records.
Joe Hurley told the board that NDAs in use appear to include one-year confidentiality windows and that citizens have a right to see signatory pages and redacted records when exemptions are claimed. "As the NDAs have been signed, they have a 1 year, confidentiality agreement," Hurley said, urging that redacted copies be released with line-by-line statutory citations for any portions withheld. He said the issue is with the state attorney general’s office for interpretation of exemptions under public-records law (119.071(e) was referenced in his remarks).
Other speakers echoed worries about a perceived lack of openness and recommended the board provide more disclosure about who signs NDAs and what is being withheld. The transcript records that the matter is now with the attorney general and that the requester is awaiting that office’s decision; no further action was recorded during the meeting.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
