1 2 3 4 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 FOR THE COUNTY OF GRANT 6 OREGONIAN PUBLISHING COMPANY LLC, an Oregon limited liability 7 corporation; and LES ZAITZ, STOEL RIVES LLP 760 SW Ninth Avenue, Suite 3000, Portland, OR 97205 Main (503) 224-3380 Fax (503) 220-2480 8 Plaintiffs, 9 v. 10 GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; GLENN PALMER, in his official capacity; 11 and SALLY DeFORD, in her official capacity, 12 Defendants. 13 No. 15-0596CV DECLARATION OF BRAD S. DANIELS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 I, Brad Daniels, declare under the penalty of perjury: 15 1. I am one of the attorneys representing Plaintiffs and make this declaration on 16 personal knowledge. 2. 17 Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of a screen shot showing a 18 portion of the official internet website page of the Grant County Sheriff’s Office. 3. 19 I have visited the Grant County Sheriff’s Office web page numerous times 20 since April 2016, including most recently on July 19, 2016. Each time I have done so, a link 21 labelled “contact: General Info/Sheriff” appears in the “Contact” portion of the web page. 22 When I have clicked on that link, an email form pops up, containing in its address line the 23 following address: gepalmer400@centurytel.net. 4. 24 Attached as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of Defendant’s Response to 25 Plaintiffs’ First Request for Admission No. 1. 26 Page 1 - DECLARATION OF BRAD S. DANIELS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 87139185.1 0057220-00160 5. 1 Attached as Exhibit 3 are true and correct copies of emails sent from the email 2 address gepalmer400@centurytel.net. 6. 3 Attached as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ letter to 4 Defendant Palmer dated February 16, 2016. 7. 5 Attached as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ letter to 6 custodian of records of Defendant Sheriff’s office dated April 26, 2016; 8. 7 Attached as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of Defendant Palmer’s STOEL RIVES LLP 760 SW Ninth Avenue, Suite 3000, Portland, OR 97205 Main (503) 224-3380 Fax (503) 220-2480 8 response letter dated April 27, 2016. 9. 9 Attached as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of a response to the February 10 16, 2016 public records request from Plaintiffs, which is dated July 15, 2016. 10. 11 Attached as Exhibit 8 is a true and correct copy of a response to the April 26, 12 2016 public records request from Plaintiffs, which is dated July 8, 2016 11. 13 Attached as Exhibit 9 is a letter from Plaintiffs’ counsel to Defendants’ 14 counsel dated July 12, 2016. 12. 15 On July 15, 2016, Plaintiffs’ counsel and Defendants’ counsel had a telephone 16 conference in which Defendants’ counsel asserted the following: • 17 All public records responses related to the Centurytel Account to date 18 were on behalf of both Sheriff’s Office and Palmer. Thus, when 19 Defendants assert that “Grant County Sheriff’s Office” does not 20 possess certain records, they mean that neither Sheriff’s Office nor 21 Palmer possess the requested records. • 22 The electronic version of every email received into or sent from the Centurytel Account is deleted. 23 • 24 Contrary to Defendants’ express representations, some copies of 25 emails are printed and retained in paper files. Defendants’ apparent 26 position, however, is that the records requests did not seek hard copies Page 2 - DECLARATION OF BRAD S. DANIELS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 87139185.1 0057220-00160 1 of emails because they are not “emails.” Defendants did not specify 2 which emails are retained in hard copy, how those emails are chosen, 3 or why only certain emails are retained in this fashion. • STOEL RIVES LLP 760 SW Ninth Avenue, Suite 3000, Portland, OR 97205 Main (503) 224-3380 Fax (503) 220-2480 4 Defendants maintain that the systematic deletion of emails from the 5 Centurytel Account is proper pursuant to the policy from the Oregon 6 State Archives. In a subsequent email, Defendants provided the E- 7 mail Policy Manual for Local Government published by the Oregon 8 State Archives as the document that allegedly supports their retention 9 practices. 13. 10 During the July 15 telephone conference, Plaintiffs’ counsel requested a copy 11 of the authority from the State Archives on which Defendants were relying to justify their 12 email policies. On July 15, Defendants’ counsel provided Plaintiffs’ counsel via email with a 13 copy of the E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government published by the Oregon State 14 Archives. 14. 15 Attached as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of the E-mail Policy Manual 16 for Local Government published by the Oregon State Archives. 17 I hereby declare that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge 18 19 and belief, and that I understand it is made for use as evidence in court and is subject to 20 penalty for perjury. 21 DATED: July 22, 2016. 22 23 /s/ Brad S. Daniels BRAD S. DANIELS, OSB No. 025178 bsdaniels@stoel.com 24 25 26 Page 3 - DECLARATION OF BRAD S. DANIELS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 87139185.1 0057220-00160 7/19/2016 Contact Us Grant County Sheriff's Office Contact Documents Grant County Sheriff's Office Keep in touch, check for updates and get media release information when available. Need documents? Looking for information on Concealed Carry? It's all right Contact the Sheriff's Office Give us a call or send an email General Information County Sheriff Glenn Palmer 205 South Humbolt Street Canyon City, Oregon 97820 Phone: 541-575-1131 Email: General Info Sheriff Civil Deputy Civil Deputy Sally Deford 205 South Humbolt Street Canyon City, Oregon 97820 Phone: 541-575-1131 Email: Civil Deputy (D (D 2 3' Security Grant County Sheriff's Office takes pride in the delivery of security to its citizenry to maintain a peaceful community. Professionalism Our staff and deputies take pride in their work and strive to deliver the highest quality service possible in Grant County. Compassion In our offices and jails, Grant County promises the best care and compassion in order to preserve the service we provide. 2013-2016 Grant County Sheriff's Office 205 South Humbolt Street Canyon City, Oregon 97820 541-575-1131 Email: General Info Sheriff Visitor number: Home Contact Documents Site Design and Maintenance by Consulting EXHIBIT 1 Page 1 of 1 1/1 LII?bbdw THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF GRANT Case No. OREGONIAN PUBLISHING COMPANY LLC, an Oregon limited liability corporation; and LES ZAITZ, GLENN RESPONSE TO FIRST Plaintiffs, REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION and - GRANT COUNTY GLENN PALMER, in his of?cial capacity; and SALLY in her of?cial capacity. Defendants. Defendant Glenn Palmer, in his of?cial capacity as the Sheriff of Grant County, (?Palmer?) provides the following responses, pursuant to ORCP 45, to plaintiffs? Requests for Admission: A. General Objections l. Palmer object to plaintiffs? Requests as being vague, ambiguous, poorly written, and/ or grammatically incorrect to the extent that Defendants are required to speculate or question as to their meaning. 2. Palmer objects to plaintiffs? Request on the grounds that plaintiffs? Requests are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 3. Palmer objects to plaintiffs? Requests on the grounds that plaintiffs? Requests do not separately set forth each matter of which an admission is requested, as required by ORCP 45A. Page 1 - DEFENDANT GLENN RESPONSE TO FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION P/ResponseAdmissions EXHIBIT 2 Page 1 of4 HOSTETTER LAW GROUP, ATTORNEYS AT LAW 203 E. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 - PO Box 400 OREGON 97828 TELEPHONE (541)426?4584 0 FAX (541)426-3281 0 Email: of?ce@hostetterlawgroupcom {Jigsaws 4. Palmer?s objections and responses to the speci?c Requests set forth below shall 2 be deemed to incorporate, and shall not be deemed a waiver of, these General Objections. 3 5. Plaintiffs failed to ?le these requests as required by ORCP 9. 4 RESPONSES 5 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.1: Admit that, since January 2, 2016, you have used the email address gepalmer400@centurvtel.net to send or receive email that relates to public business. RESPONSE: Admit. RDOOQON 10 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.2: Admit that, since January 2, 2016, you have used the 11 telephone number (541) 620-2420 to receive or place telephone calls or to receive or send text .12 messages that relate to public business. 13 RESPONSE: Objection and Nevertheless, admit that this phone number has been 14 used on occasion for public business. 1 5 16 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.3: Admit that, at least since January 2, 2016, you had a 17 contract with Century Link that enabled you to send and receive emails using the email address 1 8 gepalmer400@centurvtel.net. I 19 RESPONSE: Deny. A different agency of the County Government has contracted with Centry 20 Link to provide email accounts to county government of?cials and employees. 21 22 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION No.4: Admit that, at least since January 2, 2016, the email 23 address gepalmer400@centurvtel.net was listed on the Grant County Sheriff 3 Of?ce's website 24 under the "Contact" tab. 25 RESPONSE: Admit. 26 Pagez - DEFENDANT GLENN RESPONSE TO PLAIN FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION EXHIBIT 2 P/ResponseAdmissions Page 2 of 4 HOSTETTER LAW GROUP, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 203 E. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 PO Box 400 ENTERPRISE, OREGON 97828 TELEPHONE (541) 426?4584 0 FAX (541) 426-328] 0 Email: of?cc@hostetterlawgroupcom heREQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 5: Admit that Defendant Sheriffs Of?ce accepted and processed at least one application for a concealed handgun license in 2014. RESPONSE: Admit. REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.6: Admit that Defendant Sheriffs Of?ce accepted and processed at least one application for a concealed handgun license in 2015. RESPONSE: Admit. REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.7: Admit that Defendant Sheriffs Of?ce accepted and processed at least one application for a concealed handgun license in 2016. RESPONSE: Admit. REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 8: Admit that Defendant Palmer was listed as the primary arresting of?cer on at least one arrest report dated between January 1 and December 31, 2015. RESPONSE: Admit. REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.9: Admit that Defendant Sheriffs Of?ce maintains copies of arrest reports. RESPONSE: Admit. REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 10: Admit that Salvatore "Sal" Cascuccio was appointed as a special deputy of the Defendant Sheriffs Of?ce. RESPONSE: Admit. Page 3 - DEFENDANT GLENN RESPONSE TO FIRST REQUESTS FOR EXHIBIT 2 Page 3 of 4 HOSTETTER LAW GROUP, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 203 E. MATN STREET, SUITE 2 - PO Box 400 ENTERPRISE, OREGON 97828 TELEPHONE (541) 426-4584 0 FAX (541) 426?3281 0 Email: U1th Page 4 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 11: Admit that from January 1, 2016 to the present you maintained two Facebook accounts. RESPONSE: Admit. However, Facebook accounts are not maintained in Sheriff Palmer?s of?cial capacity. DATED this day of July, 2016., . D. Zachary?Hostetter, OSB #100541 Ben Boyd, OSB #105854 Hostetter Law Group, LLP Attorneys at Law 203 E. Main Street P. O. Box 400 Enterprise, OR 97828 Tel: (541) 426-4584 Fax: (541) 426-3281 @hostetterlawgroup.com Of Attorneys for Defendants DEFENDANT GLENN RESPONSE TO FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION EXHIBIT 2 P/ResponseAdmissions Page 4 of 4 HOSTETTER LAW GROUP, LLP A1TORN EYS AT LAW 203 E. MAIN STREET, Sums 2 - PO Box 400 ENTERPRISE, OREGON 97828 TELEPHONE (54 1) 42645 84 FAX (541) 426-3 281 0 Email: of?ce@hostetterlawgroupeom Plocharsky, Janet L -FS From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: gepalmer400@centurytel.net Friday, October 09, 2015 11:08 AM Tidwell, Tom -FS Pena, James - FS; Beverlin, Steven K -FS; cbenkosk@blm.gov; Cliff Bentz ; Ted Ferriloi ; Brooks Smith; Jim Sproul Coordination Letter and attachment Sept 30 letter to Forest Service.docx; FLPMA DOC.pdf Attached are two documents regarding the notice of intent to coordinate with the US Forest Service. I will follow up with copies mailed to you in the US mail. Sheriff Palmer 1 EXHIBIT 3 Page 1 of 22 October 9, 2015 USDA Forest Service National Office Chief Tom Tidwell ttidwell@fs.fed.us 1400 Independence Ave, SW Washington, DC 20250-111 USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region James Pena, Regional Forester, Region 6 jpena@fs.fed.us 1200 SW 3rd Ave. Portland, Or 97204 USDA Forest Service, Malheur National Forest Steve Beverlin, Forest Supervisor sbeverlin@fs.fed.us 431 Patterson Bridge Road John Day, Or 97845 The Grant County Sheriff is pleased to advise you that Grant County, Oregon is asserting the coordination process with the United States Forest Service. The “coordination process” as directed by congress is simply that: a process by which local government and federal agencies are to meet in a government- to –government dialogue in order to attempt to reach consistency between federal plans and actions and local plans, policies and local laws. Congress has directed every federal agency to engage in that government-to-government process with local governments. The ultimate goal Congress has set for the “coordination process is CONSISTENCY between federal and local plans, policies and laws. The “coordination” process provides a congressional sanctioned method of amicably resolving conflicts between federal, state and local government sovereignties. In 1969 Congress passed the National Environment Policy Act (NEPA) that required the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service and other federal agencies to “coordinate” with local governments. In 1972 Congress passed the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA) which also mandated that the BLM coordinate federal plans, policies and management actions with local government or its elected officials. The Act declared that the goal for coordination would be the establishment of consistency between the federal-state-local plans, policies, and management actions. The National Forest Management Act also requires the Forest Service to work “in coordination” with local governments. The Endangered Species Act also requires meaningful coordination between the Fish and Wildlife Service and local government officials. When the Secretary of the Interior, as overseer of the Fish and Wildlife Service, intends to make a decision as to the listing of a species, he must give local government an early and advance notice of the proposed action. EXHIBIT 3 Page 2 of 22 In addition, prior to making any listing decision, the Secretary must take into account any local government plan to protect such species, whether by predator control, protection of habitat and food supply, or any other conservation practices. He must analyze the impact of the local plan, if any, on his proposed decision. The bottom line is that local government has a meaningful place at the table regarding ESA decisions. When the Secretary of Agriculture issued the first planning rules for implementation of the National Forest Management Act, he set forth a process for “coordination” that tracks the Congressional definition of the word in FLMPA passed contemporaneously with the Forest Management Act. At the time the Secretary issued the Planning Rules, he was aware of the manner in which Congress had passed and defined the term “coordinate”. In 1972 the Secretary issued a Forest Service Planning Rule mandating the Forest Service coordinate with other public planning efforts, thus bringing it into consistency with FLPMA, 43 USC Section 1712. The Planning Rule issued by the Secretary provided that: “The responsible line officer shall coordinate regional and forest planning with the equivalent and related planning efforts of other federal agencies, states and local governments, and Indian Tribes”. Having full knowledge of the elements prescribed for coordination by Congress in FLPMA, the Secretary spelled out the following equivalent elements for the Forest Service. 1. Notice must be given to the County of any intent to prepare a land and resource management Plan, along with a general schedule of anticipated activities to the governing body of the County. 2. The line officer has to review the planning and land use policies of the local government, and this review must later be reported in the EIS for the Plan (This is the rule requirement that guarantees transparency so that the citizens can see who is influencing the planning and is involved in providing or gather data will be used) The “Review” by the line officer “SHALL” include the following: a. Consideration of the objectives of the local government as expressed in their rules, plans or policies; b. Assessment of the interrelated impacts of the local and federal rules, plans and policies: c. Determine how the Forest Service plan shall deal with the interrelated impacts; d. In developing the plan, the line officer “shall meet” with representatives of local government AT THE BEGINNIN OF THE PLANNING PROCESS TO DEVELOP PROCEDURES FOR COORDINATION” the emphasized language is actually in the Rule, meaning that there is no “CANNED” process which the Forest Service can dictate; it does not say that the Forest Service will tell the local government how it will accomplish coordination, rather it requires the U.S. Forest Service line officer to meet with local officials “to develop” the process for coordination. EXHIBIT 3 Page 3 of 22 e. As a minimum, this coordination meeting must take place after public issues have been identified and management concerns have been identified and it must take place before recommendation of a preferred alternative is made. f. In developing the forest plan, the office “shall seek input from federal, state, local government and universities and “help resolve management concerns in the planning process and to identify areas where additional research is needed.” g. The line officer is told to include a monitoring and evaluation program that “includes coordination of the effects of National Forest Management on land, resources, and communities adjacent to or near the National Forest being planned We are pledged to work under Oregon Law, Oregon Revised Statutes, 192.610-690, to work for the citizens in open, public, officially noticed meetings, at regular times, and with agendas published ahead of time and in meetings open to the public. Our committee believes that the coordination, governmentto-government process, best fits the Oregon Law that rules the form of County Government. We cannot make County decisions in regional multi-county meetings such as those you hold under the cooperating agency memorandum of understanding. We are now prepared to schedule with you our first meeting to begin our government-to-government coordination relationship. We are glad that you’re chief if the Service, Tom Tidwell, favors the style of communication we have selected. Chief Tidwell commented: “I appreciate your continued interest in maintaining a good relationship with the Forest Service. I commend the local county supervisors on their commitment to balance economic needs with environmental conservation and protection. These relationships result in better communication of information that is essential to making sound, responsible land management decisions.” We will be submitting an agenda of some of our proposals we wish to earnestly discuss. As you well know, we have lost over 110,000 acres to fire alone this season that has burnt. Not to mention over 50 homes lost as well as grazing for big game and domestic livestock. Without immediate action severe flooding and erosion will most likely devastate an already severely harmed environment this winter and spring. It certainly appears that restoration and soil stability issues are critical issues which will likely be reached with a NEPA study. The regulations by which the NEPA analysis are issued and implemented by the Council on Environmental Quality’ and a very significant rule requires that you begin sharing your discussions of remedial actions with local governments at the earliest possible time. The committee is offering to host a meeting at which you can provide meaning participation for our government in the preparation of an overwhelming task of recovery. This marks the first time that our county has asked for coordination and has provided a County Public Lands Natural Resource plan for that implementation of coordination. We look forward to scheduling this meeting at a time to be announced. Because of the extreme consequences of these fires and management decisions to our overall community, we are inviting the following agencies and governmental officials to our coordination meeting: EXHIBIT 3 Page 4 of 22 Grant County Sheriff, Glenn E. Palmer gepalmer400@centurytel.net Staff of Congressmen. Greg Walden greg.walden@mail.house.gov Fax: 541-624-2402 State Legislators, State Representative Cliff Bentz Rep.CliffBentz@state.or.us State Representative Ted Ferrioli sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us Mayor of John Day, Ron Lundbom Mayor of Canyon City, Steve Fisher Grant County Court, County Judge, Scott Myers Commissionor, Chris Labhart Commissionor, Boyd Britton THE MEETING WILL BE A PUBLIC MEETING, OPEN TO THE PUBLIC BUT NOT TO PUBLIC COMMENT OR DISCUSSION. Members of the public will have an opportunity in the future, at a regular coordination meeting to make comments regarding the presentation. The date and time to follow and will be publically announced. Sincerely, Glenn E. Palmer Grant County Sheriff EXHIBIT 3 Page 5 of 22 EXHIBIT 3 Page 6 of 22 Appendix item #1 THE FEDERAL LAND POLICY MANAGEMENT ACT, 43 U.S.Code Section 1711 et secg Introduction and Usage MANDATE THAT BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT COORDINATE: In 43 USC 1712, this statute directs the Bureau of Land Management (through the Secretary of Interior) to use inventory, planning and management activities" with State, local governments and Indian Tribes. DEFINES COORDINATION: The statute defines "coordination" by directing the steps in the communication and action process in which the BLM must engage State and local governments. When the BLM is involved in management of the land or program in which the local government is affected, FLPMA requires coordination as defined in 43 U.S.C. 1712: "In the deveIOpment and revision of land use plans, the Secretary shall (9) to the extent consistent with the laws governing the administration of the public lands, coordinate the land use inventory, planning, and management activities of or for such lands with the land use planning and management programs of other Federal departments and agencies and of the States and local governments within which the lands are located, including, but not limited to, the statewide outdoor recreation plans developed under the Act of September 3, 1964 (78 Stat. 897), as amended [16 U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.], and of or for Indian tribes by, among other things, consider the policies of approved State and tribal land resource management programs. In implementing this directive, the Secretary shali, to the extent he finds practical: keep apprised of State, local and tribal land use plans; Assure that consideration is given to those State, local, and tribal plans that are germane in the development of land use plans for public lands; Assist in resolving, to the extent practical, inconsistencies between Federal and non-Federal Government plan_s, and shall provide for meaningful public involvement of State and local government officials, both elected and appointed, in the development of land use programs, land use regulations, and land use decisions for public lands, including early public notice of proposed decisions EXHIBIT 3 Page 7 of 22 which may have a significant impact on non-Federal lands. Such officials in each State are authorized to furnish advice to the Secretary with respect to the development and revision of land use plans, land use guidelines, land use rules, and land use regulations for the public lands within such State and with respect to such other land use matters as may be referred to them by him. Land use plans of the Secretary under this section shall be consistent with State and local plans to the maximum extent he finds consistent with Federal law and the purposes of this Act.? APPLICABLE TO ON-GOING INVENTORY: Section 1712 requires coordination in conducting inventory of lands. Section 1711 specifically identifies an on-going duty on the part of the Secretary to inventory lands under the agency?s jurisdiction and the resource values of those lands. Local governments should leap at the opportunity to require coordination during the development of the inventory process, from start to finish. The local government must put the BLM on notice that it intends to be involved from day one of the planning for conduct of the inventory process. Section 1711 provides: ?The Secretary shall prepare and maintain on a continuing basis an inventory of all public lands and their resource and other values (including, but not limited to, outdoor recreation and scenic values), giving priority to areas of critical environmental concern. This inventory shall be kept current so as to reflect changes in conditions and to identify new and emerging resource and other values. The preparation and maintenance of such inventory or the identification of such areas shall not, of itself, change or prevent change of the management or use of public lands? EXHIBIT 3 Page 8 of 22 Appendix item #2 THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT, 42 This critical environmental statute was passed in 1970 even though it is referred to as the Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It was signed into law on New Year?s Day in 1970 by President Richard M. Nixon. The statute sets forth for the first time a national policy providing for reaching a harmonious and productive environment in which both the human environment and the natural environment can effectively survive. The statute established the President's Council on Environmental Quality to provide oversight of implementation by all federal agencies. NEPA establishes a format for procedural review of the environmental consequences of any major federal action. All federal agencies are required to prepare studies and statements setting forth the environmental impacts-?human and natural??-of the proposed action, and must also include a study of and statement of the cumulative impacts of the project studied. Several on-going events led to enactment of NEPA: An Outdoor Recreation Report commissioned under the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower, enactment of the Wilderness Act, enactment of the Clean Air and Water Acts, and a massive environmentally conscious populist movement. Ever focused on poll numbers, President Nixon recommended a plethora of environmental protection statutes including NEPA. The statute is now applied to every project, federal or state, which is funded by federal funds, which involves work performed by the federal government, or which may be licensed or permitted by a federal agency. The Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing the Act is found in 40 CFR Parts 1500 to 1508. The entire statute is set forth because of the fact that it is key to the coordination role for every local government in the conduct of any Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. One thing to remember is that coordination is required by NEPA and the implementing regulations for NEPA projects. But coordination is not limited to NEPA projects. Coordination is required during the development and implementation of management actions and policies regardless of whether a NEPA process is involved. Pay special strategic attention to the preamble, which states: ?To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man,- to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the nation.? The Act is a strategic tool by which the local Tenth Amendment police powers can be emphasized in analyzing impact on species and balancing the impact with the project in mind, while always keeping the on economy and the social cohesiveness of the community, e.g. schools, medical treatment, fire services, some law enforcement services are reliant on EXHIBIT 3 Page 9 of 22 volunteers who come from ranchers and other workers employed by or dependent on natural resource production. The National Environment Policy Act, U.5. Code Section 4331 et seq., says: Section 4331 is that which requires the Secretary to cooperate with local government to see that coordination is accomplished. Congress makes it clear that federal projects must be studied in coordination with local government in order to assure that the ?-social and economic needs of local citizens are met, and that the police power functions relating to provision for safety and health are considered. 42 U.S.C 4331 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) The Congress, recognizing the profound impact of man?s activity on the interrelations of all components of the natural environment, particularly the profound influences of population growth, high-density urbanization, industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and new and expanding technological advances and recognizing further the critical importance of restoring and maintaining environmental quality to the overall welfare and development of man, declares that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation with State and local governments, and other concerned public and private organizations, to use all practicable means and measures, including ?nancial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans. In order to carry out the policy set forth in this chapter, it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may-- (1) fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; (2) assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings; (3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; (4) preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice; (5) achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities; and (6) enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depleted resources. The Congress recognizes that each person should enjoy a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment. Sec. 4332. Cooperation of agencies; reports; availability of information; recommendations; international and national coordination of efforts The Congress authorizes and directs that, to the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regulations, and public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in this chapter, EXHIBIT 3 Page 10 of 22 and (A) utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision making which may have an impact on man?s environment; (8) identify and develop methods and procedures, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality established by subchapter ll of this chapter, which will insure that presently un?quantified environmental amenities and values may be given appropriate consideration in decision making along with economic and technical considerations; (C) include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on?? The environmental impact of the proposed action, (ii) Any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, Alternatives to the proposed action, (iv) The relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and Any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. Prior to making any detailed statement, the responsible Federal official shall consult with and obtain the comments of any Federal agency, which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved. Copies of such statement and the comments and views of the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, which are authorized to develop and enforce environmental standards, shall be made available to the President, the Council on Environmental Quality and to the public as provided by section 552 of title 5, and shall accompany the proposal through the existing agency review processes; (0) Any detailed statement required under subparagraph (C) after January 1, 1970, for any major Federal action funded under a program of grants to States shall not be deemed to be legally insufficient solely by reason of having been prepared by a State agency or official, if: The State agency or official has statewide jurisdiction and has the responsibility for such action, (ii) The responsible Federal official furnishes guidance and participates in such preparation, The reSponsible Federal official independently evaluates such statement prior to its approval and adoption, and (iv) After January 1, 1976, the responsible Federal official provides early notification to, and solicits the views of, any other State or any Federal land management entity of any action or any alternative thereto which may have significant impacts upon such State or affected Federal land management entity and, if there is any disagreement on such impacts, prepares a written assessment of such impacts and views for incorporation into such detailed statement. The procedures in this subparagraph shall not relieve the Federal official of his responsibilities for the scope, objectivity, and content of the entire statement or of any other responsibility under EXHIBIT 3 Page 11 of 22 this chapter; and further, this subparagraph does not affect the legal sufficiency of statements prepared by State agencies with less than statewide jurisdiction. (E) Study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended courses of action in any. proposal which involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources; (F) Recognize the worldwide and long-range character of environmental problems and, where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States, lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs designed to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and preventing a decline in the quality of mankind?s world environment; (G) Make available to States, counties, municipalities, institutions, and individuals, advice and information useful in restoring, maintaining, and enhancing the quality of the environment; (H) initiate and utilize ecological information in the planning and development of resource- oriented projects; and (I) Assist the Council on Environmental Quality established by subchapter ll of this chapter. Sec. 4333. Conformity of administrative procedures to national environmental policy All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance with the purposes and provisions of this chapter and shall propose to the President not later than July 1, 1971, such measures as may be necessary to bring their authority and policies into conformity with the intent, purposes, and procedures set forth in this chapter. Sec. 4334. Other statutory obligations of agencies. Nothing in section 4332 or 4333 of this title shall in any way affect the specific statutory obligations of any Federal agency (1) To comply with criteria or standards of environmental quality, (2) To coordinate or consult with any other Federal or State agency, or (3) To act, or refrain from acting contingent upon the recommendations or Certification of any other Federal or State agency. EXHIBIT 3 Page 12 of 22 Appendix item it 3 THE NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT ACT (NFMA), 16 USC 1602 et seq. introduction and usage: MANDATE THAT FOREST COORDINATE In 16 USC section 1604 the Forest Service is directed by Congress to coordinate the development of, the maintenance of, and revision ofland and resource management plans with local government. Some employees of the Forest Service will say that coordination is required only when the Service is writing 0r revising a management plan. But, the clear language of the Congress is to the contrary. Congress requires coordination even when the Service acts to ?maintain? its plans. The word "maintain" is a word of common usage and is defined as ?to keep in an existing state (as of repair, ef?ciency or validity); preserve from failure or decline.? Merriam-Webster. Preserving a plan from failure or decline, keeping it in efficient and valid status requires efficient, plan consistent MANAGEMENT ACTIONS. When Forest Service employees urge that coordination applies only to the planning process, they ignore the "maintain" portion of section 16 USC 1604. Moreover, the coordination process is required for planning and maintenance of planning related to the "program provided for by section 1602 of this title.? Section 1602 specifically provides for program development that includes monitoring and management actions of the Service. CONTENTS OF THE PLANNING AND ACTION PROGRAM TO BE DEVELOPED BY THE FOREST SERVICE ARE FOUND IN SECTION 1602 Section 1602 specifies that the ?program? that must be developed by the Forest Service: "Shall provide in appropriate detail for protection, management, and development of the National Forest System, inciuding forest development roads and trails; for cooperative Forest Service programs; and for research . . "The Program shall include, but not be limited to (1) an inventory of specific needs and opportunities for both public and private program investments. EXHIBIT 3 Page 13 of 22 The emphasized words demonstrate that the planning program includes monitoring and implementation of speci?c management actions. The specifications for the inventory to be conducted, again make it clear that management actions are included in the development of the Forest management program: The inventory shall differentiate between activities which are of a capital nature and those which are of an operational nature; (2) specific identification of Program outputs, results anticipated, and benefits associated with investments in such a manner that the anticipated costs can be directly compared with the total related benefits and direct and indirect returns to the Federal Government; (3) a discussion of priorities for accomplishment of inventoried Program opportunities, with specified costs, outputs, results, and bene?ts; (4) a detailed study of personnel requirements as needed to implement and monitor existing and ongoing programs; and (5) Program recommendations which - (A) evaluate objectives for the may Forest Service programs in order that multiple-use and sustained-yield relationships among and within the renewable resources can be determined; (B) explain the opportunities for owners of forests and rangeland to participate in programs to improve and enhance the condition of the land and the renewable resource products therefrom; (C) recognize the fundamental need to protect and, where appropriate, improve the quality of soil, water, and air resourcesl (D) state national goals that recognize the interrelationships between and interdependence within the renewable resources; (E) evaluate the impact of the export and import of raw logs upon domestic timber supplies and prices; and (F) account for the effects of global climate change on forest and rangeland conditions, including potential effects on the geographic ranges of species, and on forest and rangeland products.? COORDINATION IS REQUIRED IN DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE 1602 PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS. Coordination is mandated for the 1602 program development and maintenance. Section 1604 provides as follows: 16 U.S.C. 1604 National Forest Management Act (NFMA) As a part of the Program provided for by section 1602 of this title, the Secretary of Agriculture shall develop, maintain, and, as appropriate, revise land and resource management plans for units of the National Forest System, coordinated with the land and resource management planning processes of State and local governments and other Federal a encies. EXHIBIT 3 Page 14 of 22 COORDINATION BY FOREST SERVICE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DEFINITION OF AND SET FORTH IN THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT POLICY ACT. Even though Section 16 USC 1604 does not define "coordinate" and "coordination" as does 43 USC 1712 in the Federal Land Policy Management Act, the definition provided in 43 USC 1712 applies to the use ofthe words by USC 1604. Under several judicial and legal theories, the words coordinate and coordination as used in the Forest Act mean the same as Congress has defined the terms in FLPMA. a. Statutes are in "parimateria", thus must be read consistently. Professor Sutherland?s definitive work ?Statutory Construction? states: "Statutes are considered in 'parimateria? to pertain to the same subject-matter when they relate to the same person or thing, or the same class of persons or things, or have the same purpose and object. They may be independent or amendatory in form, they may be complete enactments dealing with a single, limited subject matter or sections of a Code or revision; or they may be a combination of these.? Sutherland, "Statutory Construction?, Section 5202. He follows with the "principle that statutes in ?parimateria? should be construed together is merely an extension of the principle that all parts of a statute should be construed together. . lbid. FLPMA and the National Forest Management Act are statutes in "pari material? because they both set forth management processes, procedures and directives from Congress by which the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service must manage the public or federal lands, mostly rangelands for the BLM and Forests for the Forest Service. They represent enactments by the same session of Congress and they have the same "purpose and object?, effective, efficient, productive management of the federal lands. The scores of cases cited by Professor Sutherland support the statement he makes in section 5202 quoted above, and supports a conclusion that FLPMA and the National Forest Management Act are in "pari material?. The United States Supreme Court has enunciated this principle on scores of occasions. Leading cases are cited as supporting authorities for the statements made by Professor Sutherland. EXHIBIT 3 Page 15 of 22 Each state offers a variety of case decisions holding the same principles. A series of cases from the courts in Virginia sets forth the various principles related to in "pari material? that are applicable to FLPMA and the National Forest Management Act. The cases state the same principles enunciated by Sutherland and by case decisions in each of the states: Peerless Ins. Co. v. County of Fairfax, 274 Va. 236, 645 478; Priilaman v. Commonwealth, 199 Va. 401, 405, 100 S.Ed.2d 4 (1957) quoting an extensive American Jurisprudence collection of cases at 50 Am. Jurisdiction, ?Statutes? Section 349 at 345; Washington v. Commonwealth, 46 Va. App. 276, 616 774; Benton, J. 81 Fitzpatrick, C.J., dissenting; Smith v. Kelley, 162 Va. 645, 174 S.E. 842 (1934); Zamani v. Commonwealth, 26 Va. App. 59, 492 854, affirmed at 256 Va. 391, 507 S.E. 2d 608 (1998); Lillard v. Fairfax County Airport Authority, 208 Va. 8, 155 S.E. 2d 338 (1967); ACE Trucking, Inc. v. Griffin, 5 Va. App. 542 (citing numerous other authorities), and Board of Supervisors v. Marshall, 215 Va. 756, 214 146 (1975). The principles set forth in this list of cases include the following: ?It is well accepted that statutes relating to the same subject should not be read in isolation.? "Statutes dealing with the same subject matter should be construed together to achieve a harmonious result, resolving conflicts to give effect to legislative intent.? When in pari material statutes provide for a general process in one and a specific in the other, "the general must give way to the specific.? "Statutory provisions are not to be considered as isolated fragments of law. Such provisions are to be considered as a whole, or as parts of a greater connected, homogeneous system of laws, or a single and complete statutory compilation.? "Statutes in pari material are considered as if they constituted but one act, so that sections of one act may be considered as though they were parts of the other act.? "Closer related statutes must be read as being consistent with one another?. "Two statutes which are closely interrelated must be read and construed together and effect given to all of their provisions.? "Statutes should be construed, if possible, so as to harmonize and force and effect should be given the provisions of eachf? Congress undertook revision of the Forest management statutes at the same time it took up development of the Federal Land Policy Management Act. As a result of the decision by the Richard Nixon administration that the federal government would maintain control and ownership of the western rangelands, Congress considered the necessities for developing a management agency and program. The Forest Management Act was passed just short months before FLPMA was passed. Congress placed the coordination mandate in the Forest Act, and then placed the coordination mandate and definition in FLPMA. EXHIBIT 3 Page 16 of 22 Plocharsky, Janet L -FS From: Sent: To: Subject: gepalmer400@centurytel.net Wednesday, November 04, 2015 10:46 AM Beverlin, Steven K -FS HWY 395 Detour/Closure Info Hi Steve, Writing you regarding the road closure and detour on Hwy 395 and would ask that you consider making one or the other roads going up ( 840 Rd there at the Lynch Res.) or coming down the hill at the (Sugar Loaf Gulch Road) to the Starr Ridge Road (I think is the 196 Road that runs E/W) comes out just south of the sledding hill.....looking or suggesting that one way traffic be posted to minimize or eliminate vehicles meeting on the narrow roads for the 10 day closure of HWY 395. Wondering if there could be an temporary one way traffic going up hill on the 840 road and the down hill traffic comes down Sugar Loaf Gulch so that we don't have two way traffic meeting on narrow roads? Not sure how much traffic is going to be detoured or whether you think this is going to be a safety concern. Or whether your worried about it at all? Appreciate your thoughts. Sheriff Palmer 1 EXHIBIT 3 Page 17 of 22 Logo Department Name Agency Organization Organization Address Information United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Malheur National Forest P.O. Box 909 431 Patterson Bridge Road John Day, OR 97845 541-575-3000 FAX: 541-575-3001 File Code: Date: 7700 November 9, 2015 Glenn Palmer Grant County Sheriff 205 South Humbolt Avenue John Day, Oregon 97845 CERTIFIED MAIL: 70083230000321004283 Dear Sheriff Palmer: Thank you for your e-mail dated November 4, 2015, regarding the road closure and detour on Highway 395. After in-depth conversations with my engineering staff, I believe the roads which you propose to utilize as an alternate detour, are not practical or safe for the following reasons: 1) These roads are Maintenance Level 2 roads and are not subject to the Federal Highway Safety Act. Because they do not fall under this Act, we do not have them signed to the same degree for Public safety, which would be required if we were to route the public onto them. 2) A traffic engineering study for signing, followed by the purchase and installation of signs would take several days to perform. 3) Hazard trees have not been mitigated along the roads you have mentioned. Without surveying and mitigating all hazard trees, we should not route the public onto those roads. 4) Winter weather conditions may include snow and ice. The roads identified are narrow, steep and not designed for public traffic especially should there be icy conditions. 5) The speed on these bypass roads is low (or, should be for prudent drivers); the time savings versus travelling the open roads (15 and 16) is minimal. If needed, we can provide road use permits for access for specific purposes such as use by power companies or state agencies, which include specific stipulations. Thank you for bringing a potential detour opportunity to our attention. Sincerely, /s/ Steven K. Beverlin STEVEN K. BEVERLIN Forest Supervisor Caring for the Land and Serving People EXHIBIT 3 Page 18 of 22 Printed on Recycled Paper Felts, Adam A -FS From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: gepalmer400@centurytel.net Thursday, May 07, 2015 7:46 AM FS-objections-pnw-regional-office Fwd: Objection Wolf Project Beverlin Letter.doc From: gepalmer400@centurytel.net To: "US Forest Service" Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2015 7:03:06 AM Subject: Objection Wolf Project In regards to the Wolf Project Environmental Assessment Draft Decision Notice Finding of No significant Impact and Forest Plan Amendment #79for the Wolf Vegetative Project Environmental Assessment. I object to material on page 20 of 46 with data in this mentioned document that is not true nor is it accurate under Grant County Court and Grant County Sheriff. I have objected in the past with a letter to Forest Supervisor Steve Beverlin that is herein attached by email. US Forest Service needs to follow the County Ordinance in reference to this objection. See attachment incorporated into this objection dated January 20, 2015. Glenn E. Palmer, Sheriff Grant County, Oregon 205 South Humbolt Street Canyon City, Oregon 97820 541-575-1131 1 EXHIBIT 3 Page 19 of 22 Grant County Sheriffs Office Glenn E. Palmer, Sheriff 205 South Humbolt Canyon City, OR 97820 Phone (541) 575-1131 Fax (541) 575-2580 Jail (541) 575-1134 January 20, 2015 Steve Beverlin, Forest Supervisor Malheur National Forest 431 Patterson Bridge Road John Day, Oregon 97845 Mr. Beverlin, You have stated that you intend to take action to close multiple roads in Grant County, Oregon. Teresa Raaf signed a document on September 30, 2014 that purports to close some roads in Grant County. These actions are in violation of Grant County Ordinance 2013-01. These road closures have not been authorized for closure by the Grant County Court and the Grant County Sheriff. Please take action to comply with this Ordinance. Sincerely, Glenn E. Palmer Sheriff cc: Grant County Court EXHIBIT 3 Page 20 of 22 Logo Department Name Agency Organization Organization Address Information United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region 1220 SW Third Avenue (97204) P.O. Box 3623 Portland, OR 97208-3623 File Code: Date: 1570; 1950 May 19, 2015 Sheriff Glenn E. Palmer Grant County Sheriff 205 South Humbolt Street Canyon City, OR 97820 Dear Sheriff Palmer: On April 15, 2015, I received your objection (#15-06-00-0019-218(B)) to the Final Environmental Assessment (EA), draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Wolf Vegetation Management Project, located on the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest. Eligibility to object to this and other projects is described in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 36 CFR 218, specifically at 36 CFR 218.5 under “Who may file an objection.” Specifically, it states that “[i]ndividuals and entities who have submitted timely, specific written comments regarding a proposed project or activity…during any designated opportunity for public comment may file an objection.” A search of our records for this project found no written comments submitted by you during the scoping or comment period. A review of the Final EA indicates that on February 17, 2015, you were invited by certified mail to participate in a meeting discussing the Wolf Project, as well as other projects. Forest Supervisor Steve Beverlin preceded this letter with a phone call to your office on February 11, 2015, extending the same invitation. No response was received from your office. See the Wolf Project EA at 1-13. Therefore, because you did not provide written comments during any designated opportunity for public comment, you are not eligible to object. Thus, in accordance with the regulation at 36 CFR 218.10(a)(3), your objection is being set aside from review. If you have questions or concerns regarding the objection process, please contact Regional Administrative Review Coordinator Debbie Anderson at 503-808-2286, or danderson01@fs.fed.us. Sincerely, /s/ Rebecca Lockett Heath (for) JAMES M. PEÑA Regional Forester cc: Beverlin, Steve; Plocharsky, Janet; Cheyne, Christy A; Bailey, Lori; Anderson, Debbie; Felts, Adam Caring for the Land and Serving People EXHIBIT 3 Page 21 of 22 Printed on Recycled Paper USDA Forest Service 1220 SW Third Avenue (97204) P.O. Box 3623 Portland, OR 97208-3623 United States Paci?c Northwest Region Department of Agriculture File Code: 1570; 1950 Date=May 19, 2015 Sheriff Glenn E. Palmer Grant County Sheriff 205 South Humbolt Street Canyon City, OR 97820 Dear Sheriff Palmer: On April 15, 2015, I received your objection to the Final Environmental Assessment (EA), draft Decision Notice and Finding of N0 Signi?cant Impact for the Wolf Vegetation Management Project, located on the Emigrant Creek Ranger District, Malheur National Forest. Eligibility to object to this and other projects is described in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 36 CFR 218, specifically at 36 CFR 218.5 under ?Who may file an objection.? Specifically, it states that ?[i]ndividuals and entities who have submitted timely, specific written comments regarding a proposed project or activity. . .during any designated opportunity for public cormnent may file an objection.? A search of 'our records for this project found no written comments submitted by you during the scoping or comment period. A review of the Final EA indicates that on February 17, 2015, you were invited by certified mail to participate in a meeting discussing the Wolf Project, as well as other projects. Forest Supervisor Steve Beverlin preceded this letter with a phone call to your office on February 1 1, 2015, extending the same invitation. No response was received from your office. See the Wolf Project EA at 1-13. Therefore, because you did not provide written comments during any designated opportunity for public comment, you are not eligible to object. Thus, in accordance with the regulation at 36 CFR your objection is being set aside from review. If you have questions or concerns regarding the objection process, please contact Regional Administrative Review Coordinator Debbie Anderson at 503?808-2286, or danderson01@fs.fed.us. Sincerely, WW AMES M. PENA Regional Forester cc: Beverlin, Steve; Plocharsky, Janet; Cheyne, Christy Bailey, Lori; Anderson, Debbie; Felts, Adam . Printed on Recycled Paper Caring for the Land and Serving People Page 22 of 22 Sheriff Glenn Palmer Grant County Courthouse Canyon, City, OR DELIVERED VIA EMAIL Feb. 16, 2016 PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST Dear Sheriff Palmer, This request is made pursuant to the Oregon Public Records Act. I request immediate access to following records in your possession or control: 1. All emails, received and sent, to your Grant County email account of palmerg@grantcounty-or-gov from Jan. 2, 2016, to present. 2. All emails, received and sent, to your email account of gepalmer400@centurytel.net from Jan. 2, 2016, to present. This request is limited to emails that relate to public business, including but not limited to your performance as sheriff, matters relating to the Harney County occupation, matters relating to the community meeting in John Day, matters in any way relating to dealings by your or others with militia members, patriots, and others. This request does NOT include purely personal emails that in no manner relate to the conduct of public business. 3. The record of all telephone calls received or sent from your cell phone of (541) 620-2420. This can be provided by providing access to your cell phone or by producing printed call records in which calls relating purely to personal business may be redacted. 4. The record of all text messages sent or received from your cell phone of (541) 620-2420 relating to public business. 5. The record of all telephone calls received or sent from your county-provided cell phone number of (541) 620-1493. 6. The record of all text messages sent or received from your cell phone of (541) 620-1493 relating to public business. 7. The record of the contract for service for cell phone number (541) 620-1493. 8. Any calendar maintained by you, electronic or otherwise, in which meetings, appointments and other notations are made. This request covers the period from Jan. 2, 2016, to present. EXHIBIT 4 Page 1 of 3 Please note that I am requesting access as provided by law and not copies. If you prefer to provide copies of these records at your expense, that is acceptable if they are provided within the reasonable time envisioned by law. Regarding what you consider your personal email account, you have publicly listed this email on your official office website as the point of contact for the public to reach you. Therefor, any redactions should be strictly limited. You may wish to review the litigation record in the case of Cylvia Hayes vs. Oregonian Publishing Co., filed in Marion County Circuit Court. Ms. Hayes in that litigation attempted to prevent disclosure of emails related to public business that were part of her personal email accounts. The state judge has rejected that position and ordered Ms. Hayes to produce the records. For your information, I have attached the judge’s letter opinion, but urge you to review the entire record to see how Oregon law applies to the personal email accounts of public officials such as yourself. I also feel it necessary to remind you that Oregon law prohibits public officials from improperly destroying public records. In an earlier note, you said you had deleted from your cell phone a text message from Ammon Bundy to you, a text message apparently sent to you in your capacity as sheriff. Under ORS 162.305: “A person commits the crime of tampering with public records if, without lawful authority, the person knowingly destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any public record.” Because this regards a matter of significant public interest, I ask that your office waive any fees for producing this information. I also ask that you provide each requested class of records as it becomes available rather than waiting to compile all the requested documents before releasing any of it. If you elect to withhold any information, please cite the record and your statutory authority for so doing. Unless otherwise agreed, I will look forward to receiving this information within 10 days, the generally accepted standard in Oregon for a “reasonable” time to respond. You may reach me at lzaitz@oregonian.com or (541)421-3031 with any questions, concerns or to arrange the inspection of these records. Sincerely, Les Zaitz Senior investigative reporter The Oregonian/OregonLive PO Box 837 - John Day, OR 97845 Cc: County Judge Scott Myers, County Counsel Ron Yockim EXHIBIT 4 Page 2 of 3 BEAVERTON LEADER DRIVETIME EXPLORE THE PEARL FOREST GROVE LEADER HILLSBORO ARGUS 1320 SW BROADWAY PORTLAND, OR 97201 OREGONIANMEDIAGROUP.COM THIS WEEK EXHIBIT 4 Page 3 of 3 Sheriff Glenn Palmer Grant County Courthouse Canyon, City, OR April 26, 2016 DELIVERED VIA EMAIL PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST Dear Sheriff Palmer, This request is made pursuant to the Oregon Public Records Act. I request immediate access to following records in your possession or control: 1. All emails, received and sent, to your Grant County email account of palmerg@grantcounty-or.gov for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present 2. All emails, received and sent, to your email account of gepalmer400@centurytel.net for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present This request is limited to emails that relate to public business, including but not limited to your performance as sheriff. This request does NOT include purely personal emails that in no manner relate to the conduct of public business. 3. The billing statement covering telephone calls received or sent from your cell phone of (541) 620-2420 for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present 4. The billing statement covering telephone calls received or sent from your cell phone of (541) 620-1493 for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present 5. The record of travels by you to any locale in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho where the purpose of the trip in whole or in part included conducting firearms education classes to qualify attendees for concealed handgun licenses or for accepting and processing concealed handgun licenses. This request is meant to establish the dates of such travel, the expense of such travel, and who funded such travel expenses. This would include mileage records, reservation records, correspondence with hosts, lodging and meal expenses, record of reimbursement to you or on your behalf for such expenses. This request covers the period from Jan. 1, 2010, to present. 6. The record of all payments received by you or by the Grant County Sheriff’s Office for teaching, hosting, or conducting any class to qualify attendees for concealed handgun licenses or any other class in which a charge was assessed by you, on your behalf, or otherwise paid to you. This request covers the period from Jan. 1, 2010, to present. EXHIBIT 5 Page 1 of 2 7. Your duty “permanent notebook” for the period Nov. 1, 2015, through present. Section 58 of the Grant County Sheriff’s Office Policy and Procedure Manual outlines the requirement for such notebook. Please note that I am requesting access as provided by law and not copies. If you prefer to provide copies of these records at your expense, that is acceptable if they are provided within the reasonable time envisioned by law. Regarding what you consider your personal email account, you have publicly listed this email on your official office website as the point of contact for the public to reach you. Therefor, any redactions should be strictly limited. You may wish to review the litigation record in the case of Cylvia Hayes vs. Oregonian Publishing Co., filed in Marion County Circuit Court. Ms. Hayes in that litigation attempted to prevent disclosure of emails related to public business that were part of her personal email accounts. The state judge has rejected that position and ordered Ms. Hayes to produce the records. For your information, I have attached the judge’s letter opinion, but urge you to review the entire record to see how Oregon law applies to the personal email accounts of public officials such as yourself. Please be reminded Oregon law prohibits public officials from improperly destroying public records. In an earlier note, you said you had deleted from your cell phone a text message from Ammon Bundy to you, a text message apparently sent to you in your capacity as sheriff. Under ORS 162.305: “A person commits the crime of tampering with public records if, without lawful authority, the person knowingly destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any public record.” Because this regards a matter of significant public interest, I ask that your office waive any fees for producing this information. I also ask that you provide each requested class of records as it becomes available rather than waiting to compile all the requested documents before releasing any of it. If you elect to withhold any information, please cite the record and your statutory authority for so doing. Unless otherwise agreed, I will look forward to receiving this information within 10 days, the generally accepted standard in Oregon for a “reasonable” time to respond. You may reach me at lzaitz@oregonian.com or (541)421-3031 with any questions, concerns or to arrange the inspection of these records. Sincerely, Les Zaitz Senior investigative reporter The Oregonian/OregonLive PO Box 837 - John Day, OR 97845 Cc: County Judge Scott Myers, County Counsel Ron Yockim EXHIBIT 5 Page 2 of 2 OR EGON @119 ('Drcgonian OPEGONIAN MEDIA GROUP Sheriff Glenn Palmer April 26, 2016 9 a /7 Grant County Courthouse 2 Canyon, City, OR (5Z4 DELIVERED VIA EMAIL PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST [44/5 . NW Dear Sheriff Palmer, This request is made pursuant to the Oregon Public Records Act. I request immediate access to following records in your possession or control: 1. All emails, received and sent, to your Grant County email account of 33/5 If!) IL for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present 2i 2. All emails, received and sent, to your email account of for of?? the periods: bmca fiva a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 .py?e?f/M b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present W917 This request is limited to emails that relate to public business, including but not limited to your performance as sheriff. This request does NOT include purely personal emails that in no manner relate to the conduct of public business. 3. The billing statement covering telephone calls received or sent from your cell phone of ?v 41) 620-2420 for the periods: I [My WM 4mm a. Nov. 1, 2015,/to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present fl? 4. The billing statement covering telephone calls received or sent from your cell phone of (54 620-1493 for the periods: IMO 179% a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 mu/?Z b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present 514,419? 5. The record of travels by you to any locale in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho where the purpose of the trip in whole or in part included conducting firearms education classes to qualify attendees for concealed handgun licenses or for accepting and processing (0 ll concealed handgun licenses. This request is meant to establish the dates of such travel, LA the expense of such travel, and who funded such travel e?This would include mileage records, reservation records, correspoWdence with hosts, lodging and meal Kg expenses, record of reimbursement to you or on your behalf for such expenses. This request covers the period from Jan. 1, 2010, to present. (6. The record of all payments received by you or by the Grant County Sheriff?s Office for Jo dip teaching, hosting, or conducting any class to qualify attendees for concealed handgun We, {\uf licenses or any other class in which a charge was assessed by you, on your behalf, or {a otherwise paid to you. This request covers the period from Jan. 1, 2010, to present. EXHIBIT 6 Page 1 of2 OREGON LIVE @119 Wye/gawk?, ?15 00717L iot?k?c Mam/(1? OREGONIAN MEDIA GROUP 7. Your duty "permanent notebook? for the period Nov. 1, 2015, through present. Section 58 ofthe Grant County Sheriff?s Office Policy and Procedure Manual outlines the requirement for such notebook. Please note that I am requesting access as provided by law and not copies. If you prefer to provide copies of these records at your expense, that is acceptable ifthey are provided within the reasonable time envisioned by law. Regarding what you consider your personal email account, you have publicly listed this email on your official office website as the point of contact for the public to reach you. Therefor, any redactions should be strictly limited. You may wish to review the litigation record in the case of Cylvia Hayes vs. Oregonian Publishing Co., filed in Marion County Circuit Court. Ms. Hayes in that litigation attempted to prevent disclosure of emails related to public business that were part of her personal email accounts. The state judge has rejected that position and ordered Ms. Hayes to produce the records. For your information, I have attached the judge?s letter opinion, but urge you to review the entire record to see how Oregon law applies to the personal email accounts of public officials such as yourself. Please be reminded Oregon law prohibits public officials from improperly destroying public records. ln an earlier note, you said you had deleted from your cell phone a text message from Ammon Bundy to you, a text message apparently sent to you in your capacity as sheriff. Under ORS 162.305: person commits the crime of tampering with public records if, without lawful authority, the person knowingly destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any public record.? Because this regards a matter of significant public interest, ask that your office waive any fees for producing this information. I also ask that you provide each requested class of records as it becomes available rather than waiting to compile all the requested documents before releasing any of it. If you elect to withhold any information, please cite the record and your statutory authority for so doing. Unless otherwise agreed, I will look forward to receiving this information within 10 days, the generally accepted standard in Oregon for a "reasonable" time to respond. You may reach me at Izaitz@oregonian.com or (541)421-3031 with any questions, concerns or to arrange the inspection of these records. Sincerely, Les Zaitz Senior investigative reporter The Oregonian/OregonLive PO Box 837 - John Day, OR 97845 Cc: County Judge Scott Myers, County Counsel Ron Yockim EXHIBIT 6 Page 2 of 2 D. Rahn Hostetter D. Zachary Hostetter Benjamin Boyd I Partner partner Associate Also admitted in Washington Also admitted in Wyoming July 15, 2016 SENT VIA EMAIL ONLY Charles Hinkle Brad Daniels Stoel Rives, LLP 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204 Re: Les Zaitz - Public Records Request - Feb. 16, 2016 (1) Oregonian v. Grant County Sheriff?s Oj?ce, et al. Our File No. 1478-01 Dear Mr. Hinkle and Mr. Daniels: This is to acknowledge Mr. Zaitz?s written public records request to Grant County Sheriff? 5 Of?ce dated February 16, 2016. Grant County Sheriff?s Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer respond as follows: 1. All emails, received and sent, to your Grant County email account of Dalmerg@grantcounW-or-gov from Jan. 2, 2016, to present. Response: Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce is the custodian of about 200 emails received and sent from this email account from November 2015 to late April 2016. Non?exempt emails will be provided in a reasonable time after receipt of the sum of $360, which will cover the cost of two hours of Mr. Hostetter's attorney time for reviewing these records and redacting any exempt material. (This estimate also applies to Mr. Zaitz?s similar request dated April 26, 2016). 2. All emails, received and sent, to your email account of gepalmer400@centurytel.net from an. 2, 2016, to present. This request is limited to emails that relate to public business, including but not limited to your performance as sheriff, matters relating to the Harney County occupation, matters relating to the community meeting in John Day, matters in any way relating to dealings by your or others with militia members, patriots, and others. This request does NOT include purely personal emails that in no manner relate to the conduct of public business. Response: Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer do not possess the records requested in this speci?c email account. BOW phinney PO Box 400, 203 E. Main St. Suite 2, Enterprise, OR 97828 ?ice Manager Donna Mccodden (541) 426-4584 (541) 426-3281 Stephen Tollefson Legal Assistants hos tetterlawgroup.com EXHIBIT 7 Page 1 of 3 1,3 D. Rahn Hoste?cter D. Zachary Hoste?c?cer Benjamin Boyd Partner Partner Associate . .. Dr Also admitted in Washington Also admitted in Wyoming Mr. Hinkle, Mr. Daniels July 15, 2016 Page 2 3. The record of all telephone calls received or sent from your cell phone of (541) 620-2420. This can be provided by providing access to your cell phone or by producing printed call records in which calls relating purely to personal business may be redacted. Response: Grant County Sheriff?s Of?ce does not possess the records requested. Glenn Palmer does not possess these records in his individual capacity. The request to access Sheriff Palmer?s personal cell phone is denied. See Or. Atty. Gen. Public Records Manual at 14 (?the right to inspect does not include a right to rummage through electronic 4. The record of all text messages sent or received from your cell phone of (541) 620?2420 relating to public business. Response: Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer do not possess the records requested. 5. The record of all telephone calls received or sent from your county?provided cell phone number of (541) 620?1493. Response: Because this request is not limited to a speci?c date or range of dates, Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce requests additional information or clari?cation for the purpose of expediting the response to the request. In addition, the record of calls received and sent from this number during speci?c time periods in response to the public records requests dated April 26 and 27, 2016. 6. The record of all text messages sent or received from your cell phone of (541) 620-1493 relating to public business. Response: Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer do not possess the records requested. 7. The record of the contract for service for cell phone number (541) 620-1493. Response: Grant County Sheriff?s Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer do not possess the records requested. The Grant County Court may have this record available. EXHIBIT 7 Page 2 of 3 D. Rahn Hoste?tter D. Zachary Hostetter Benjamin Boyd Partner Partner Associate D: Also admitted in Washington Also admitted in Wyoming Mr. Hinkle, Mr. Daniels July 15, 2016 Page 3 8. Any calendar maintained by you, electronic or otherwise, in which meetings, appointments and other notations are made. This request covers the period from Jan. 2, 2016, to present. Response: Copies attached. Sin yours, Benjamin Boyd BDB/tjp Enclosures: anuary/ February Calendar cc: Clients EXHIBIT 7 Page 3 of 3 iv D. Rahn Hoste?cter D. Zachary Hostet?cer Benjamin Boyd partner Partner Associate Also admitted in Washington Also admitted in Wyoming July 8, 2016 SENT VIA EMAIL ONLY TO brad.daniels@stoel.c0m and charles.hinkle@st0el.com Charles Hinkle Brad Daniels Stoel Rives, LLP 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204 Re: Les Zaitz - Public Records Requests April 26, 2016 and April 27, 2016 Oregonian v. Grant County Sheri??s O?ice, et al. Our File No. 1478-01 Dear Mr. Hinkle and Mr. Daniels: This is to acknowledge Mr. Zaitz? written public records requests to Grant County Sheriff? Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer dated April 26, 2016 and April 27, 2016. The two public records requests are identical in substance, so one response will be provided. Grant County Sheriff?s Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer respond as follows: 1. All emails, received and sent, to the Grant County email account of for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present Response: Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce is the custodian of about 200 emails received and sent from this email account from November 2015 to late April 2016. Non-exempt emails will be provided in a reasonable time after receipt of the sum of $360, which will cover the cost of two hours of Mr. Hostetter?s attorney time for reviewing these records and redacting any exempt material. (This estimate also applies to Mr. Zaitz's similar request dated February 16, 2016). 2. All emails, received and sent, to Sheriff Glenn Palmer's email account of gepalmer400@centurvtel.net for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present g?ep?ug?nnazyer PO Box 400. 203 E. Main St, Suite 2, Enterprise, OR 97828 Donna Mccudden (541) 426?4584 (541) 426-3281 Stephen Tollefson o??ice@hos tetterlawgrouprom Legai hostetterlawgroup.com EXHIBIT 8 Page 1 of 3 1i" D. Rahn Hostet?cer D. Zachary Hostetter Benjamin Boyd '1 Partner Partner Associate - Also admitted in Washington Also admitted in Wyoming Mr. Hinkle Mr. Daniels July 8, 2016 Page 2 This request is limited to emails that relate to public business, including but not limited to your performance as sheriff. This request does NOT include purely personal emails that in no manner relate to the conduct of public business. Response: Grant County Sheriffs Office does not possess the requested records. 3. The billing statement covering telephone calls received or sent from cell phone of {541} 620-2420 for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present Response: Grant County Sheriffs Office does not possess the requested records. Any billing statements are not public records but are possessed by Glenn Palmer in his capacity as a private individual. 4. The billing statement covering telephone calls received or sent from cell phone of {541} 620?1493 for the periods: a. Nov. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2015 b. Feb. 16, 2016, to present Response: Copies attached. 5. The record of travels by Sheriff Glenn Palmer to any locale in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho where the purpose of the trip in whole or in part included conducting ?rearms education classes to qualify attendees for concealed handgun licenses or for accepting and processing concealed handgun licenses. This request is meant to establish the dates of such travel, the expense of such travel, and who funded such travel expenses. This would include mileage records, reservation records, correspondence with hosts, lodging and meal expenses, record of reimbursement to Glenn Palmer or on his behalf for such expenses. This request covers the period from Jan. 1, 2010, to present. EXHIBIT 8 Page 2 of 3 I i D. Rahn Hostetter D. Zachary Hostetter Benjamin Boyd 7. Partner Partner Associate ,4 .3 Also admitted in Washington Also admitted in Wyoming Mr. Hinkle Mr. Daniels July 8, 2016 Page 3 Response: Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce does not possess the records requested. 6. The record of all payments received by Sheriff Glenn Palmer in his capacity as sheriff or by the Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce for teaching, hosting, or conducting any class to qualify attendees for concealed handgun licenses or any other class in which a charge was assessed by you, on your behalf, or otherwise paid to you. This request covers the period from Jan. 1 2010, to present. Response: Grant County Sheriff?s Of?ce does not possess the records requested. 7. Sheriff Glenn Palmer's duty "permanent notebook" for the period Nov. 1, 2015, through present. Section 58 of the Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce Policy and Procedure Manual outlines the requirement for such notebook. Response: Copies attached. Sin cg Benjamin Boyd BDB/tjp Attachments: Duty phone records Duty notebook records cc: Client EXHIBIT 8 Page 3 of 3 Portland, OR 97205-2584 I LLP T. 503.224.3380 F. 503.220.2480 760 SW Ninth Ave, Suite 3000 BRAD S. DANIELS Direct 503.294.9854 July 12, 2016 brad.daniels@stoel.com Benjamin Boyd Hostetter Law Group, LLP 203 E. Main Street, Suite 2 Enterprise, OR 97828 Re: Oregonian Publishing Co. v. Grant County Sherg??s Of?ce Grant County Circuit Court Case No. Dear Mr. Boyd: This letter responds to the various letters and responses received to date. A. Response to June 30 Letter Our June 30 letter to you asked several speci?c questions regarding the responses received to date, most importantly whether any of those responses were on behalf of Sheriff Palmer or Civil Deputy DeFord. In your letter of July 8, you state that Ms. DeFord is not a ?public body? with ?independent legal responsibilities? to respond to public records requests. You also state that responses thus far have been on behalf of Grant County Sheriffs Of?ce and Sheriff Palmer as the elected of?cial. We disagree with your position regarding Deputy DeFord. Employees of a public body may create and retain records that ?contain[] information relating to the conduct of the public?s business.? ORS Deputy DeFord apparently does so using a personal email address that is listed on the GCSO website. Those documents are responsive public records, and no exemption applies. They must be made available. In addition, although you state that you are responding on behalf of both GCSO and Sheriff Palmer, the responses to date on behalf of Sheriff Palmer have been incomplete and evasive. For example, in response to the request for emails related to public business from or to the email address gepalmer400@centurytel.net, you state that ?Grant County Sheriff?s Of?ce does not possess the requested records.? (See Response to Public Records Requests of April 26 and 27, 2016.) To date, however, you have refused to answer whether Sheri]? Palmer possesses those records, or similar records using the same email address. 87023026.] 0057220-00160 EXHIBIT 9 Page 1 of 4 Mr. Benjamin Boyd July 12, 2016 Page 2 It is indisputable that Sheriff Palmer uses his centurytel email address in connection with public business. That email address (like Ms. DeFord?s email address) is listed on the GCSO website. We know of several examples in which he has used that email address in connection with public business, two of which are attached to this letter. Those emails must be preserved, reviewed, and produced immediately. There are other examples. In response to the May 2 Request, you state??in apparently calculated fashion?that ?Grant County Sheriff? 5 Of?ce does not possess the requested records.? As the attached email and letter con?rm, however, responsive documents clearly exist and were sent by Sheriff Palmer from his centurytel email address and in written letters from GCSO. Similarly, you responded to the March 31 request by stating that ?Grant County Sheriff? Of?ce does not possess the requested records.? If Sheriff Palmer possesses those records, however, they must be produced. Given Sheriff Palmer?s conduct of public business from personal email accounts and other devices, his status as an elected of?cial, and the evidence that he is the custodian of requested public records, responses that, by their terms, are limited to GCSO are de?cient. Sheriff Palmer?s continued failure to produce public records?or even to respond to the requests?is unacceptable and will require us to take the issue to the Court. B. Responses to Public Records Requests In addition to the general matters described above, we have several questions and concerns regarding the speci?c responses and documents produced to date. 1. February 16, 2016(3) and February 22, 2016 Defendants have said that responsive, non-email documents were provided on March 7. As to emails, Defendants claim that there are 45 responsive emails from Deputy DeFord?s Grant County account. You request a $45.00 fee for ?reviewing and redacting? those emails, as necessary, representing 15 minutes of attorney time at $180.00 per hour. For this request and all other requests, Plaintiffs request that fees for production should be waived pursuant to ORS If you determine that fees will not be waived, please inform us of that decision and its basis. Any payment of fees by Plaintiffs will be without waiver of, and expressly reserves, the right to seek reimbursement of those fees at a later date. EXHIBIT 9 Page 2 of 4 87023026.] 0057220~00160 Mr. Benjamin Boyd July 12, 2016 Page 3 Defendants claim that the email address ?sedford425@centurytelnet? is not an email address in use at the GCSO. As Sheriff Palmer previously acknowledged, however, the clear intent of this request is for emails using the address sdeford425@centurytelnet, which is listed on GCSO website as Deputy DeFord?s contact information. The typographical error in the request should be ignored, and responsive emails should be reviewed and produced immediately. 2. February 23, 2016 Defendants claim there are no records responsive to this request, citing the fact that Sheriff Palmer only ?believed? that such records existed. The request, however, is unquali?ed and seeks ?[a]ll police reports or other reports prepared by for the time period and on the subject in question, not only those records that Sheriff Palmer believed to exist. If no such records exist based on a proper understanding of the scope of the request, please confirm. 3. March 31, 2016 and April 14, 2016 You have claimed certain records are exempt pursuant to ORS 192.4480) and ORS The ?rst exemption is inapplicable. Oregon law only prohibits disclosure of ?records or information that identifies a person as a current or former holder of, or applicant for, a concealed handgun license.? ORS 192.448 (emphasis added). Thus, an extremely narrow category of information is exempt, and this request does not seek that information, or any individual?s concealed handgun license. Rather, Mr. Zaitz requests ?any and all communications? between the Sheriff?s Office and Mr. Casucciomclearly a broader category of public records that are not covered by this limited exemption. As to the second exemption, both the investigation of Mr. Willingham and Mr. Peterson are closed, as even GCSO has acknowledged. ORS 192.501(3) conditionally exempts criminal investigatory material, but it does not extend to the record of any arrest, nor does it extend to any records that are not related to an open investigation. As the Oregon Court of Appeals has opined, ?information compiled in an investigation not connected with pending or contemplated prosecution will remain secret only if the public body establishes that disclosure would,? among other things, deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or disclose the identity of a confidential source. Attorney General ?5 Public Records and Meetings Manual, p. 43 (2014 edition). Defendants have not established that any and all of the requested records fall within the claimed exemption. 87023026.] 0057220-00160 EXHIBIT 9 Page 3 of 4 Mr. Benjamin Boyd July 12, 2016 Page 4 4. Outstanding Requests Based on our review, the requests of February 16, 2016 to Sheriff Palmer, the request of March 14, 2016 and the request of March 17, 2016 remain outstanding. Please advise when responsive documents will be made available. Please contact me if you wish to discuss these matters or have any questions. Very truly yours, aw Brad S. Daniels EXHIBIT 9 870230261 0057220-00160 Page 4 of 4 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Developed by: Oregon State Archives 800 Summer St. NE Salem, OR 97310 http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us and Oregon Association of Municipal Recorders Records Management Committee http://www.oamr.org Page 1 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 1 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Introduction This manual was developed under the auspices of the Oregon State Archives and the Oregon Association of Municipal Recorders (OAMR) Records Management Committee (RMC) as a tool to help local government agencies answer the following types of questions related to e-mail: • • • • • • • • Do I have to print all e-mails? How long do I have to keep them? What about junk e-mail? Can’t I just delete them? How should I handle work-related e-mail that is sent from a personal account? Does a public records request mean that I am responsible for producing copies of any and all e-mail messages I have received? Do city councilors and county commissioners have to follow the agency e-mail policy? Does training on the e-mail policy need to be provided? How should the e-mail policy be enforced? Many users have come to rely on e-mail as a convenient and efficient communication tool. Oregon’s Public Records Law applies to e-mail in state and local government agencies, requiring them to treat e-mail in the same manner as the other important business records of their office. By preserving information for as long as it is needed in order to document business functions, agencies can reduce their risks of litigation and loss of important information. The following chapters should be helpful to anyone who uses e-mail in the course of business: Chapter 1: Public Records Issues Chapter 2: Writing a Policy (a) Use (b) Access (c) Retention (d) Training/audit Chapter 3: Retention/Disposition/Filing Chapter 4: Security Chapter 5: Technology Chapter 6: Budget Chapter 7: Netiquette APPENDIX A. E-mail Policy Templates B. Glossary C. Training By using the suggestions presented in this manual, you should be able to meet any administrative and/or legal challenges regarding the access to and retention of e-mail messages. There is no onesize-fits-all solution to e-mail management issues, but the advice contained in this manual can help any agency begin to meet their responsibilities for managing e-mail. Page 2 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 2 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Using this Manual This manual is designed to help you take control of the e-mail records in your office. The chapters that follow are organized to allow easy access to the specific information about that topic. Each chapter provides an introduction that describes the purpose of that section; a case study to provide examples of applying the information to the workplace; and a short quiz at the end of each section to assist users in thinking about the issues that have been presented. Chapters also provide valuable links to additional resources and works that have been cited. Following those links will lead to websites that provide further explanation and information. The manual can be printed and used in a traditional manner (pdf version) or used electronically as an interactive guide and tutorial. The electronic version provides hyperlinks to the glossary for standardized definitions of terms relating to e-mail and e-mail management. For example whenever you see the word “e-mail” it will appear as underlined and in a different color (i.e. e-mail). When you click on the word, you will be taken to its definition in the glossary. A six-minute introductory video, illustrating the need for a formal plan for managing your e-mail, is also posted on the Oregon State Archives website. The manual’s quiz questions are also posted to the website, allowing users to take interactive quizzes on the material covered in each of the manual chapters. Therefore, it is up to you to decide just how much information you need to manage your e-mail effectively. So start at the beginning or jump straight to the section you need most. Either way, if your organization needs an effective approach for managing its e-mail, then this manual should prove to be a valuable tool. Page 3 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 3 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 1 Public Records Issues Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to familiarize employees with the Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192) in relation to both access and retention. A clear understanding of the law should eliminate many of the questions and misunderstandings that staff may have with e-mail messages as public records. It is important for all local government employees to be aware that an e-mail message may be a public record for both access and retention purposes. In our quest for efficiency, we use computers to communicate with each other and with our constituents. This kind of communication may put us at risk of violating Oregon’s open government laws, specifically the public records and open meeting laws. These laws were adopted to ensure that the government process remains open to the public. The Oregon Public Records Law The Oregon Public Records Law was enacted by the Oregon Legislative Assembly in 1973. The law is divided into two parts. The first part relates to the retention and disposition of public records. ORS 192.105 authorizes the State Archivist to grant public officials authorization for the retention and/or disposition of public records in their custody, after the records have been in existence for a specified period of time. In granting such authorization, the State Archivist shall consider the value of the public records for legal, administrative or research purposes and shall establish rules for procedure for the retention or disposition of the public records. The second part of the law, ORS 192.420 establishes “every persons” right to inspect any nonexempt public record of a public body. ORS 192.501 conditionally exempts certain records from disclosure “unless the public interest requires disclosure in the particular instance.” Very few records, in Oregon, are exempt from disclosure. Oregon’s Public Records Law applies to all public entities in the state, but does not apply to private entities or private bodies such as nonprofit corporations or cooperatives. The law requires the custodian of public records (i.e. a city) to provide “proper and reasonable opportunities for inspection and examination of the public records during usual business hours.” The law further requires that persons inspecting records be provided with “reasonable facilities” for reviewing records. Public Records Defined The definition of public record in Oregon is also defined according to its relationship with retention and disposition and its relationship to access. ORS 192.005 (5) defines a public records for retention and disposition purposes: “Public record” includes, but is not limited to, a document, book, paper, photograph, file, sound recording or machine readable electronic record, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made, received, filed or recorded in pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of public business, whether or not confidential or restricted in use. Page 4 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 4 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government ORS 192.410(4) defines a “public record” as it relates to access: “…any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business, including but not limited to, court records, mortgages and deed records, prepared, owned, used or retained by a public body regardless of physical form or characteristics.” Both definitions include information stored on computer tape, microfiche, photographs, film, tape or videotape, maps, files or electronic recordings that may be in “machine readable or electronic form.” However, purely personal messages, as well as unsolicited messages and advertisements (spam), are not public records under the retention/disposition aspect of the law but may be accessible to the public under the access portion of the law. Therefore, it is imperative that your agency’s written email policy clearly defines appropriate use of your e-mail system and individual e-mail accounts. In addition, work done on private e-mail accounts as well as personally purchased computers and hand held devices might be considered a public record for both access and retention/disposition. It is strongly recommended that elected officials use a designated account for official business and that the policy prohibits official business from being conducted by Instant Messaging or Chat Rooms unless there is a specific mechanism in place to capture this information. It is also important for agencies to provide training on public records issues for elected officials, board and commission members, and employees. Finally, records need not have been prepared originally by the public body to qualify as public records. If records prepared outside the agency contain information relating to the conduct of the public’s business and are “owned, used or retained” by the public body, the records are within the scope of the Oregon Public Records Law. Public Records Retention A record that fits the definition of a public record will also have a retention requirement—that is, how long shall this information be retained to satisfy the administrative, legal, fiscal and/or historical needs of an agency. The State Archives works with state and local government agencies to determine the proper amount of time (i.e. 3 years) a particular record needs to be kept. These “retention schedules” are your legal authority to dispose of public records and can be obtained through your City Recorder, County Clerk, agency records officer or by contacting the State Archives. However, since e-mail is a method or a tool for communicating, a blanket retention for “E-mail Records” does not exist. Therefore each message needs to be evaluated for content to determine which retention to apply. Retention of e-mail messages is covered in more detail in Chapter 3. Charging for Records Requests The Oregon Public Records Law expressly authorizes a public body to establish fees “reasonably calculated to reimburse it for its actual cost in making such records available.” It further permits local government to include in its fees “costs for summarizing, compiling or tailoring a record to meet the person’s request.” “Actual cost” may include a charge for the time spent by staff to locate the requested records, review the records to delete exempt material, supervise a person’s inspection of the original documents in order to protect the records, copy records, certify documents as true copies or send records by special methods such as express mail. It also includes the cost of an Page 5 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 5 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government attorney reviewing and segregating records that should not be disclosed. It is strongly recommended that local governments establish a fee schedule and written policy on public information/records requests and have the policy reviewed by legal counsel and adopted by the commissioners or councilors. What is exempt from disclosure? The Oregon Public Records Law is primarily a disclosure law, rather than a confidentiality law. The law generally favors the public’s interest in access to government records, rather than the government’s interest in confidentiality. A public body that denies a records inspection request has the burden of proving that the record is exempt from disclosure. Exemptions do not prohibit disclosure and most exemptions are conditional; disclosure is more often favored. The policy underlying the conditional exemption statutes is that disclosure decisions should be based on balancing those public interests that favor disclosure of governmental records against those public interests that favor governmental confidentiality, with the presumption always being in favor of disclosure. ORS 192.501 contains a list of “conditionally exempted” records. The ‘Why Not’ Approach (Local Focus/September 2002) Rather than viewing requests as adversarial, consider adopting a “Why not?” approach. When faced with any request ask yourself three questions: 1. Does federal or state law prohibit us from disclosing this information (i.e. would we be violating an employee’s right to privacy by disclosure)? 2. If there is no prohibition, does Oregon law provide an exemption from disclosure? 3. Even if there is an exemption, should we disclose anyway? In many cases, disclosure will only improve community relations and will serve to keep the government process open. After examining the request (with the assistance of your legal counsel), you may realize that no harm will be done by disclosure. Many government employees may not be aware that information stored on their computer is subject to public disclosure. Informing your staff about Oregon’s public records laws is the first step to ensuring that your agency complies with both the letter and the spirit of the law. For more information…. To become more knowledgeable about the Public Records Law, all City Recorders, County Clerks and agency records officers are strongly encouraged to obtain a copy of the Attorney General’s Public Records and Meetings Manual. This manual is an excellent resource for anyone responsible for public information/records requests. The manual may be purchased for a small fee from: Department of Justice Administrative Services Department 1175 Court Street NE Salem, OR 97310 Phone: 503-378-5555 Page 6 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 6 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 1 - Case Study Jane Allen submits a request for all City Council records relating to a particular zoning dispute. City Council members discussed the dispute in City Council meetings. In addition, several City Council members discussed the issue via Instant Messaging programs and in online chat rooms. Under Oregon’s Public Records Law and Public Meetings Law, what records must be produced to satisfy Ms. Allen’s request? Oregon’s Public Records Law has been interpreted very broadly. Subject to the exemptions and conditions of the Law, any covered documentation, whether in paper, electronic, or other format, can be considered a public record, which means that it must be retained according to records retention schedules and produced when requested. In addition, Oregon’s Public Meetings Law applies to all government entities in Oregon. The Public Meetings Law covers City Councils. The Public Meetings Law defines a meeting as the convening of an Oregon government entity “for which a quorum is required in order to make a decision or to deliberate toward a decision on any matter.” (ORS 192.610(5)) The requirements for a quorum can be met at a City Council meeting or in any electronic forum. All records of conversations or discussions of the quorum, including paper records, e-mail messages, or transcripts of on-line chats, are considered public records for the purposes of access and retention. Chapter 1 - Quiz 1. Is every e-mail message considered a public record? Only messages sent, received, filed or recorded in “pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of public business, whether or not confidential or restricted in use are considered public records” under ORS 192.005 (5) for retention and disposition purposes. However, purely personal messages, as well as unsolicited messages and advertisements (spam), are not public records under the retention/disposition aspect of the law but may be accessible to the public under the access portion of the law (ORS 192.410(4)). 2. What e-mail messages are exempt from disclosure as public records? The Oregon Public Records Law is primarily a disclosure law, rather than a confidentiality law. The law generally favors the public’s interest in access to government records, rather than the government’s interest in confidentiality. A public body that denies a records inspection request has the burden of proving that the record is exempt from disclosure. Exemptions do not prohibit disclosure and most exemptions are conditional; disclosure is more often favored. The policy underlying the conditional exemption statutes is that disclosure decisions should be based on balancing those public interests that favor disclosure of governmental records against those public interests that favor governmental confidentiality, with the presumption always being in favor of disclosure. ORS 192.501 contains a list of “conditionally exempted” records. 3. What should a city consider when establishing a fee schedule for an e-mail request? The Oregon Public Records Law expressly authorizes a public body to establish fees “reasonably calculated to reimburse it for its actual cost in making such records available.” It further permits local government to include in its fees “costs for summarizing, compiling or tailoring a record to meet the person’s request.” “Actual cost” may include a charge for the time spent by staff to locate the requested records, review the records to delete exempt material, supervise a person’s inspection of the original documents in order to protect the records, copy records, certify documents as true copies or send records by special methods such as express Page 7 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 7 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government mail. It can also include the cost of an attorney reviewing and segregating records that should not be disclosed. 4. How long do I need to keep my e-mail? Since e-mail is a method or a tool for communicating, a blanket retention for “E-mail Records” does not exist. Therefore each message needs to be evaluated for content to determine which retention to apply. The State Archives works with state and local government agencies to determine the proper amount of time (i.e. 3 years) a particular record needs to be kept. These “retention schedules” are your legal authority to dispose of public records and can be obtained through your City Recorder, County Clerk, agency records officer or by contacting the State Archives. 5. Are messages sent from the office using a free or private e-mail account public records? Work done on private e-mail accounts as well as personally purchased computers and hand held devices might be considered a public record for both access and retention/disposition, if the work meets the requirements of a public record defined in ORS 192. 6. It is acceptable for Councilors to discuss City business using their personal e-mail systems without concern for open meeting laws? No. In our quest for efficiency, we use computers to communicate with each other and with our constituents. This kind of communication may put us at risk of violating Oregon’s open government laws, specifically the public records and open meeting laws. These laws were adopted to ensure that the government process remains open to the public. Oregon’s Public Meetings Law applies to all government entities in Oregon and defines a meeting as the convening of an Oregon government entity “for which a quorum is required in order to make a decision or to deliberate toward a decision on any matter.” (ORS 192.610(5)) The requirements for a quorum can be met at a local government meeting (i.e. City Council meeting) or in any electronic forum. All records of conversations or discussions of the quorum, including paper records, e-mail messages, or transcripts of on-line chats, are considered public records for the purposes of access and retention. Sources League of Oregon Cities, LOCal Focus, September 2002 OAMR Records Management Manual “Oregon Attorney General’s Public Records and Meetings Manual” Secretary of State Archives Division E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000. Page 8 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 8 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 2 Writing a Policy Introduction Sending, receiving, and creating documents and information electronically have become the norm in the business world. A record can take many forms, such as electronic data, microfilm, or paper. A written e-mail policy that addresses access, use and retention of e-mail will establish the rights and responsibilities of the employees using the system and help to reduce the risks associated with email. Purpose This chapter will help you to develop an effective e-mail policy that addresses the use and access of the e-mail system and the retention of messages sent and received by the system. The chapter will also present ideas on training employees as to the proper uses of e-mail and offer tips on how you can measure the effectiveness of your policy. A strong written policy is the best defense your agency has against e-mail abuses. Types of E-mail Messages and when it is a Public Record E-mail messages come in many forms. Some messages are clearly business related while others are of a personal nature and still others come as unsolicited advertisements (spam). Other messages are meant to inform and no reply is needed (temporary or transitory messages) and finally we have those messages that are meant to solicit a reply. Below are examples of the various types of e-mail messages: • Personal e-mail can be defined as a personal exchange not covered by the State of Oregon records retention schedule. This type of e-mail should be extremely limited in use and deleted after it is read. Example: To: Chris From: Sue Subject: Dinner Chris, I’ll pick up dinner tonight. See ya at 7 p.m.! Sue Other examples of personal e-mails include: • Lunch plans • Jokes • Chain letters • Messages to family and friends • Attached files such as photographs Note: Minimize your use of your agency’s e-mail system for personal purposes. Remember, e-mail messages are subject to discovery under the Public Records law. Spam is an unsolicited e-mail message usually containing some form of advertisement. Page 9 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 9 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Example: To: Mary From: Market Access Subject: Discount Pills Other examples of spam include: Free Money Great deals on products and services Get great deals on prescription drugs! Note: Spam is very hard to control. You may want to consider spam filters for your e-mail system. Another way of controlling spam is not to open a message that appears to be spam or from an unknown source. By opening spam you verify that your address is real, subjecting you to more spam messages. Spam messages need to be deleted immediately. • Temporary or transitory e-mail messages are any exchange of communication that is fulfilled almost immediately upon request. Keep these messages until the task is complete or their value has passed. Example: To: Mike From: Fred Mike, send me the e-mail when you get a chance. Fred Other examples of e-mail with temporary / transitory value: • Charity campaigns • Listserv messages • Company-wide communications • Meeting reminders • Deadline reminders • Routing slips • Fax confirmation • Reading materials • Reference materials • FYI e-mail information does not elicit a response Note: Unnecessary retention of temporary e-mails can drive up storage costs and damage organizations in litigation. Remember that your e-mail is never private. E-mail messages soliciting a response is any exchange of communication that requires the recipient to respond or to perform an action on the message received. These messages may include attachments that the recipient will also need to respond to. The retention of these emails and any accompanying attachments will depend upon the content of the message. Page 10 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 10 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Example: To: Joe From: Sam Enclosed are my fourth quarter figures. Please add yours in the appropriate columns and return it to me ASAP! Other examples of e-mails soliciting responses are: • Contract negotiations • Administrative of fiscal communications • Policy drafts • Reports • Requests for information Note: E-mail messages that require a response are almost always public records in relation to access and retention. Remember that the e-mail system is not a secure medium and information of a confidential or sensitive nature should never be sent via e-mail. Writing Your Policy An effective e-mail policy is one that addresses the use and access of an e-mail system, addresses retention of the e-mail messages, provides for the training of each employee on what the policy means and how it works, and finally, allows you to monitor the actions of the system your employees to determine the effectiveness of the policy. When to use E-mail Every good policy will address how and when e-mail should be used by the agency. It will define what is appropriate use, what types of messages should not be sent over the e-mail system and consequences if an employee violates the agency’s written policy. A good policy will state that e-mail should be used for work purposes but may allow for personal use during scheduled breaks and lunches. The policy should also define whether or not subscriptions to work related listservs are allowed; if privately owned personal digital assistants (PDA’s) can be used to receive and send work related messages and how those messages will be transferred to the agency’s e-mail system or network; if work related discussions can occur in chat rooms or from private e-mail accounts; and in the case of elected officials (i.e. city councilors, county commissioners, etc.) whether e-mail discussions about agency business between members of the council/commissioners constitutes a quorum, and therefore subject to the Oregon Public Meetings Law (see Chapter 1). Below are some examples of good e-mail use statements. More examples can be found in the Appendix of this manual. Example 1 “Appropriate Use. (a) E-mail shall be used for business matters directly related to the business activities of the [Agency] and as a means to further the agency mission by providing services that are efficient, complete, accurate, and timely. (b) E-mail shall not be used for personal gain, outside business activities political activity, fundraising, or charitable activity not sponsored by the State of Oregon or the [Agency]. (c) E-mail shall not be used to promote discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, marital status, sex, Page 11 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 11 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government political affiliation, religion, disability, or sexual preference; promote sexual harassment; or to promote personal, political or religious business or beliefs.” Example 2 “Electronic mail systems are intended to be used primarily for business purposes. Any personal use must not interfere with normal business activities, must not involve solicitation, must not be associated with any for-profit outside business activity, and must not potentially embarrass the [Agency]. All messages sent by electronic mail are [Agency] records.” Example 3 “The use of privately owned e-mail accounts or personal digital assistants (PDA’s) for sending and receiving work related e-mail messages, may be used but is not recommended. However, if these resources are used for work related purposes, the user must transfer all work related messages to an agency owned system or network and must realize that these private accounts and PDA’s may be subject to public disclosure and retention requirements. PDA’s that are the property of the agency are subjected to the same use rules and expectations outlined in this agency’s acceptable use policy for …” Example 4 “Internal sensitive or confidential subjects (including our customers) should not be discussed via e-mails...” You may also want to include in your policy on acceptable use, the expectations for content, style, and tone also commonly referred to as ‘netiquette.’ See Chapter 7 for more detail on e-mail etiquette. Users must take the same care in drafting an e-mail message as they would for any other communication. Most e-mail systems are not secure. You should assume that people other than the recipient would be able to read your e-mail message. Confidential information should never be sent either in the body of an e-mail message or in an attachment. Access to E-mail Accounts An effective e-mail policy will clearly define and state who has access to individual e-mail accounts. If you plan on allowing supervisors and other employees in a position of management to monitor, access and review individual e-mail accounts then you need to clearly state this in your policy. Below are some examples of good e-mail access statements. More examples can be found in the Appendix of this manual. Example 1 “PRIVACY/PUBLIC ACCESS. (a) The [Agency] reserves the right to monitor e-mail messages and to access employee e-mail.” Example 2 “[Agency] reserves the right to access and disclose all messages sent over its electronic mail system, for any purpose. Supervisors may review the electronic mail communications of workers they supervise to determine whether they have breached security, violated…policy, or taken unauthorized actions. [Agency] may also disclose electronic mail messages to law Page 12 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 12 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government enforcement officials without prior notice to the workers who may have sent or received such messages.” You may also want to address the use of an employee’s e-mail account by another employee. Example 1 “No employee shall read e-mail received by another employee when there is no business for doing so.” Example 2 “No employee shall send e-mail under another employee’s name without authorization.” Example 3 “No employee shall change any portion of a previously sent e-mail message without authorization.” Retention of E-mail Messages If an e-mail message is a public record then it is subject to retention requirements based on the content of the message. How you choose to retain these messages should be clearly stated in your email policy. Messages may be retained as part of the e-mail system or copied and filed in another more appropriate electronic filing system, printed and filed as part of a paper filing system and then deleted from the e-mail account, or by using a combination electronic/paper filing system. The retention of e-mail messages is discussed in more detail in Chapter 3 “Retention/Disposition/ Filing” of this manual. The following is an example of a good e-mail retention statement. More examples can be found in the Appendix B of this manual. Example 1 “…all E-mail communication other than those defined as non-record by ORS 192 shall be printed and filed in accordance with procedures established by each unit for maintenance of its files. Non-record communications may be deleted when read.” Policy Awareness It is one thing to have a great written policy that covers all aspects of e-mail use, access, and retention and entirely another in making employees aware of the policy and what your expectations are for using e-mail. Every employee should be given his or her own copy of the agency’s e-mail policy. At the end of the policy there should be a space for the employee to sign and date the policy, affirming that they have read the policy and understand the consequences for failure to comply. Be very clear in stating the consequences for failure to comply. Below is a good example of this: Example 1 I have read the above policies and agree to comply with them. I further understand that noncompliance will result in appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal from state service. Page 13 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 13 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Name of Employee (printed) Date Signature of Employee Date Signed policies must be returned to the supervisor and filed in a secure location. It is also strongly recommended that each employee receive training on your agency’s e-mail policy. See the Appendix for an example of this training. In addition it is important to create relevant points of contact within the policy so that lines of accountability are established if any questions or issues arise relating to the use, access, and retention of e-mail messages. Delineate what role the recorder, the IT staff and anyone else has relating to this policy and note who is to be contacted regarding specific issues that are discussed within the policy. Training Policies and procedures are useless if employees do not know how they apply to their daily activities at work. Training is a crucial part of policy awareness and compliance. Training activities need to be created that work with each agency’s corporate culture, workload and schedules. Whether it is a web-based tutorial, a presentation from a trainer or giving each employee a specific amount of time to read the policy and ask questions, training is the key to an effective and well-referenced policy. An example of a training application can be found in the Appendix C. Ensuring and Enforcing Policy Compliance It is important to monitor how your agency is complying with your e-mail policy. This can be done in a number of ways, including surveying employees on their use of the system, sampling back-up tapes, and monitoring an employee’s job performance. If you suspect an employee is violating the agency’s e-mail policy, you must act at once. Consistency in enforcing your policy is your best defense. The rules outlined in your policy must apply to all employees, regardless of their status and/or rank. Chapter 2 - Case Study Josey Bag O’Donuts, a partner in a consulting firm, has contracted with a large city to evaluate its email use and retention policy. The City Manager has told Josey that there are numerous e-mail use and retention policy statements originating at all levels, from department heads, division managers and even the city council. Procedures for implementation do not accompany the policies. Josey has also contacted a number of individuals within the city to determine the type of e-mail use, access, and retention procedures currently in place. The conclusion is that there are no consistent, established policies or procedures for the use, access or retention of e-mail within the city. What Page 14 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 14 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government steps should Josey take to assess the problem and improve the city’s e-mail use and retention policy? Is the city exposed to litigation by not having a written e-mail policy in place? Explain. First, Josey should consult with all units that have issued policies to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the existing policies. Next, Josie may want to form a working group consisting of representatives of units that have policies and those that don’t to formulate a single, city-wide policy and procedure. The group could begin by consolidating the strong parts of existing policies and strengthening weak parts and adding to the policy ensuring that the policy is comprehensive. She could also choose to do the above on her own, consulting with city employees as she develops the policy. Once the policy is written and approved for use by the city, Josie should work with the city to develop detailed procedures for implementation and training. Additional policies relating to employee compliance should also be addressed by Josie. Second, the absence of written policies and procedures for e-mail is a liability for the city. Without written policies and procedures, there is little to no consistency in using the e-mail system, uncertainty as to access to the messages within the system and no clearly define rules as to what messages need to be retained and how employees should retain them. The lack of written policies and procedures may appear suspicious in the event of litigation or audit. The best defense against litigation and audit is a written policy, signed by each employee stating that they understand the contents of the policy, frequent employee training on the policy, and a mechanism in place to monitor compliance to the policy. Chapter 2 - Quiz True or False 1. Public employees do not need to follow the General Records Retention Schedules when it comes to their e-mail messages? False. If an e-mail message is a public record (see Chapter 1) then the message is subjected to the retention periods found in the General Records Retention Schedules OAR Chapter 166 Division 200 (cities) and OAR Chapter 166 Division 150 (counties and special districts). 2. All e-mail messages are covered under the State of Oregon Records Retention Schedule. False. E-mail messages that are not public records (see Chapter 1) are not listed in the general schedules and do not need to be retained. 3. The most inexpensive way to store e-mail is on my computer. False. Depending on the e-mail system, storing messages electronically may be more expensive than printing and deleting, especially if the system does not allow for messages to be deleted once they are stored. You will also want to consider the security of the system. If the system is not secure, your agency may be assuming additional risks and liabilities. 4. My personal PDA, which includes my work calendar, is not subject to discovery. False. If you use your PDA to perform public business or if you create, receive, send or file and record public records (see Chapter 1) then your PDA will be subject to discovery. 5. Every e-mail message that I receive should be opened and read. False. E-mail messages from unknown or suspicious addresses should not be opened in case they contain viruses. In addition, obvious spam messages should not be opened, because this verifies that your address is active and could subject you to additional spam messages. Page 15 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 15 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government 6. E-mail is not considered a record since it is intangible. False. E-mail may be a public record. See Chapter 1 for more information on the definition of a public record. Sources NARA Records management ERM Overview. www.archives.gov/records_management E-mail-policy.com www.e-mail-policy.com MessageRite – Free E-mail Policy Template www.messagerite.com E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000. Page 16 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 16 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 3 Retention / Disposition / Filing Purpose This chapter will help you to identify those e-mail messages that are subjected to retention and disposition requirements, provide you with three options for retaining messages until their retention requirements have been met and assist in establishing a simple filing system for your e-mail messages. Identifying E-mail Messages Subjected to Retention Many e-mail messages fall under the definition of public record found in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 192.005 (5). E-mail that constitutes a public record needs to be identified, managed, protected and retained for as long as needed to meet the administrative, legal, financial, and historical needs of the agency. Records needed to support program functions should be retained, managed and made accessible in a separate filing system in accordance with the appropriate program unit’s standard filing practices. Users should: Delete e-mail records after they have been filed in a record keeping system Delete records of transitory or little value that do not document agency activity Examples of messages sent by e-mail that typically are public records include: Policies and directives Correspondence or memoranda related to official business Work schedules and assignments Agendas and minutes of meetings Drafts of documents that are circulated for comment or approval Any document that initiates, authorizes, or completes a business transaction Final reports or recommendations Examples of messages that typically do not constitute a public record are: Personal messages or announcements Copies or extracts of documents distributed for convenience or reference Announcements of social events Messages received via a listserv Spam As with other records, retention periods for e-mail records are based on their administrative, legal, fiscal, and historical value. E-mail itself is not considered a record series. E-mail is simply a medium that creates and transmits records that have retention periods. Public business is subjected to the same laws, regardless of whether it is in a paper filing system or an e-mail system. Before you can identify the retention period of an e-mail message, you must examine its content. You can then determine what type of record the e-mail actually is and which records series it should be filed with. Page 17 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 17 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government In other words, each e-mail message must be categorized and classified according to its content, rather than simply lumped in with all other e-mail messages. E-mail should be retained in accordance with written retention policy and rules (see Chapter 2--Writing a Policy). Following these retention rules will protect both employees and the organization. The same rules that apply to paper records also apply to e-mail messages in that only one copy, the “official” or “record” copy, of the message needs to be kept when multiple copies exist. (OAR 166005-0010 (7)). Extra copies of a document, preserved only for convenience of reference, require no prior authorization for destruction (ORS 192.005(5)(d)). Because an e-mail message may be filed in multiple records series, users should identify any and all records series it belongs to. An e-mail message will generally have the same retention period as records in other formats that are related to the same program or function. For example, e-mail relating to an agency’s budget submission would be handled and retained just as any other budget record. Many e-mail messages are easily recognized as program records and will be filed with the relevant records. Other e-mail messages may be correspondence related to the program record. These messages will also be filed with the relevant records and have the same retention period (i.e. the budget record example from above). Correspondence has been defined as: Correspondence Records that: 1. document communications created or received by an agency AND 2. directly relate to an agency program or agency administration AND 3. are not otherwise specified in the City General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-200), County and Special District General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-150) or in any agency special schedule or in ORS 192.170. Records may include but are not limited to letters, memoranda, notes and electronic messages that communicate formal approvals, directions for action, and information about contracts, purchases, grants, personnel and particular projects or programs. Disposition: File with the associated program or administrative records. Retentions for records can be found in the City General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-200) or the County and Special District General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-150). Communications not meeting the above criteria do not need to be filed and may be retained as needed.) Just as with e-mail messages, attachments can belong to any records series. The attachment should always be filed together with the complete e-mail message, along with all header information and message text. Methods for Preserving E-mail Unless your e-mail system has been set up to handle retention and disposition, e-mail messages should not be retained in e-mail systems for extended periods of time, but should be filed in a separate system and deleted from the e-mail system in a timely fashion. To retain information in an Page 18 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 18 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government e-mail message for an extended period, it should be either transferred from the e-mail system to an appropriate electronic system or printed and filed in an existing paper filing system. There are three basic methods of preservation for e-mail: electronic, paper and a combination of the two. Regardless of the method you choose, your priority should be to ensure that you keep only email messages whose retention periods have not been met and that all others are deleted. Deciding which technique to use may hinge on such issues as cost, your office’s access needs, and the technical capability of your staff. Electronic filing system - The first option discussed here is retaining e-mail messages electronically. Your e-mail system may already be set up to store and retain messages for a limited period of time, or your system may be set up to transfer the messages from the e-mail system to some other type of electronic storage system. Still other methods of electronic filing systems require the user to convert the message to a text file and then to store that text file in another system. Whatever the electronic system may be, you need to be aware of the limitations of this type of filing system. These limitations may include: • Hardware and software obsolescence--for example, if your e-mail software company goes out of business or is bought by a competitor, your e-mail system may not be supported. This will require your organization either to migrate e-mails periodically from one e-mail format to another, or to save the e-mail message in a standard format. • Conversions to text files can be labor-intensive. • A migration plan would need to be developed to make sure messages are accessible until the retention period has been met. • Preserving metadata (data that describes data). • Deletion of messages once the retention period has been met. Paper filing systems - The second option is to print e-mail messages and interfile them with paper records. If you choose paper as a preservation medium, remember that printing e-mail for retention purposes is acceptable if you print the message and any attachments with all header information (metadata) intact; i.e., time and date, routing info, etc. This option is inexpensive, eliminates duplicate filing systems, and frees up space on servers and hard drives. The limitations of this option include: • Messages are no longer searchable. • Metadata and digital signatures may be lost. • E-mail records may be inadmissible in court if they are not printed out with all their metadata. • Printing messages is time-consuming and may be labor intensive. Combination of both electronic and paper filing systems - Using a combination of the above may be beneficial for your agency. With this system, you may choose to retain messages with shorter retention periods electronically, while messages with longer retention periods are printed and filed. Limitations are similar to the above and may also include: • Confusion as to what needs to be retained in which format. • Loss of information. Page 19 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 19 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Whichever method you choose, be sure to clearly define it in your e-mail policies and procedures (see Chapter 2--Writing a Policy). Note: It is important to remember that saving records to your hard drive is not a viable preservation strategy since all of your work can be wiped out in the event of virus, exposure to moisture or temperature extremes or disk defect. In addition, security back-ups do not constitute a long-term storage plan. Back-up tapes serve as a security copy in the event of disaster or large data loss and do not provide a way to search records or to maintain complex links between records. Long-term storage takes into consideration records retention and scheduling, and creates an environment for easier retrieval. Back-ups are not a substitute for the long-term storage of records on reliable storage media. E-mail Retention – General Comments Management of e-mail messages in accordance with retention schedules is necessary to comply with federal and state law. A strong records management program is the surest way to preserve only those records required by law and to dispose of the rest when their retention periods have expired. In determining which e-mail messages should be retained or deleted, you should first consult your agency’s records retention schedule. An informed e-mail management procedure that complies with the law requires a trained and knowledgeable workforce. This is also the best defense against lawsuits. Therefore, training employees on the classification, retention and disposition of electronic messages should be an ongoing process. Records retention can be a time-consuming process and retention of e-mail records can be particularly problematic. Individual users are often responsible for managing their own documents in the system, which can lead to dispersal of similar records and inconsistencies in the amount of time that records are retained. Each agency must develop its own system to manage retention and disposition and inform staff of that system through policies, procedures, training, and education. It is particularly important for the agency to develop uniform practices for maintaining e-mail messages that are records, and ensuring their continued accessibility as an agency resource. E-mail Disposition Disposition refers to the final phase of a record’s life cycle. This means either destruction of a record that is no longer needed or permanent retention of a record that has been determined to have historical value to your agency. Pursuant to the policies and procedures of each agency, an e-mail message may be deleted once its retention period is reached. Policies and procedures are crucial to establishing a routine for disposition. While destruction of records on a regular basis is viewed as an acceptable business procedure to increase efficiency, hurried bulk destruction of records can be viewed as suspicious, particularly if an audit or lawsuit is imminent. State law prohibits the destruction of e-mail or any other public record not listed on a current retention schedule. The law also prohibits the destruction of records before their retention period has been reached. Records destruction request forms that have been signed by records managers and agency policies pertaining thereto, will provide legal protection in the event that a record is subpoenaed after it is destroyed. Page 20 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 20 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government With planning, policy and training, your agency can comply with the laws regarding retention and disposition of e-mail records. Your agency’s records retention schedules should be consulted before disposing of any records, whether in paper, microfilm or electronic form. The Archives Division is available to answer any questions not addressed by this manual. Organization and Filing Filing practices for e-mail are not unlike filing practices for other office correspondence. Like paper records, many e-mail messages are easily associated with an entry in a records retention schedule and for e-mails messages that could reasonably go into several categories, you may want to add a cross-reference to the other filing locations. One acceptable option is to retain e-mail messages in an electronic environment outside of the e-mail system that created it. Be as clear as possible regarding who is responsible for filing. This may be done as part of your written policies and procedures. You may also choose to add a disclaimer at the bottom of every e-mail declaring the recipient and sender’s responsibilities in filing the message. However, you need to keep in mind that enforcement of disclaimers can be very difficult. Filing Systems Considerations for filing include ease of use for all users, as well as costs. If e-mail messages will be organized and filed electronically, you will want to consider not only costs for personnel, but also costs for hardware, software, technical support and electronic storage. Filing practices for e-mail messages are comparable to filing practices for other office records. The recommended method is to use the same filing scheme for paper and electronic files. You can set up as many folders as you need to organize your records in a way that makes sense to you. One recommendation is to set up folders by record series and retention or by project. If you have a file on your desk titled “Purchasing Records, 2003,” you may want to assign the same folder title to your electronic materials on that subject. Remember, filing systems should be simple, logical and easy to implement; otherwise, they will not be effectively used. Summary The goal of any program for managing e-mail messages should be to integrate the e-mail message into a total management program, one that covers all records – paper, electronic and otherwise. Email users require guidance on which e-mail messages can be deleted, which must be filed and how to dispose of e-mail messages once their retention period is reached. Chapter 3 - Case Study A business owner, John Davis, e-mails the city requesting a business license. The city responds that license applications are not yet accepted by e-mail and must be submitted in person at City Hall. One year later, when Mr. Davis is charged with operating without a business license. He files suit against the city, alleging that his attempts to obtain a business license were ignored. How do you go about defending against the lawsuit? How would your office locate records that would disprove the allegations? Page 21 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 21 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government If properly managed, e-mail can help the city defend against lawsuits. A written city policy, distributed to employees and enforced by supervisors, should establish how e-mail messages are to be retained. This will simplify the retention and retrieval of messages in the event of Public Records requests or legal discovery. The city should have treated the e-mail message as a business communication and physically retained it according to city policy for the entire length of the retention established in the City General Records Retention Schedule. If both messages have been retained, it will be quickly established that the city did respond in a timely manner and instructed Mr. Davis in the proper way of obtaining a business license from the city. However, if no policy existed on retaining email messages and city staff could no longer produce the messages relating to this transaction, then the city may be held liable. The IT department’s maintenance of an e-mail system’s backup tapes is not a sufficient means of retaining records. While IT policies vary across government, many agencies reuse backup tapes on a regular basis. By comparison, retention schedules can require certain e-mail messages to be kept for long periods of time such as 30 years or even permanently. Other issues to consider: Can the city produce a written procedure relating to business license applications and demonstrate that the procedure was followed in this case? Did the city’s policy and procedures for e-mail specify how the e-mail message was to be kept-electronic, paper or a combination of the two? If the policy required e-mail messages to be printed, deleted from the system and filed, were the proper metadata tags (message headers, etc.) saved in addition to the message text? Chapter 3 - Quiz 1. Can messages in an e-mail system be relevant to city/county/special district business? Yes. Many e-mail messages directly relate to an agency’s business. Public business is subjected to the same laws, regardless of whether it is in a paper filing system or an e-mail system. See Chapter 1 Public Records Issues 2. When can I delete e-mail messages? a. Immediately b. When I no longer need them to do my job c. It depends on the retention period associated with the record The correct answer is C. Before you can identify the retention period of an e-mail message, you must examine its content. You can then determine what type of record the e-mail actually is and which records series it should be filed with. In other words, each e-mail message must be categorized and classified according to its content, rather than simply lumped in with all other e-mail messages. E-mail should be retained in accordance with written retention policy and rules (see Chapter 2--Writing a Policy). Following these retention rules will protect both employees and the organization. 3. Your agency policy is to print and file each e-mail message that must be retained for administrative purposes. The e-mail message is then deleted from the e-mail system. The message text, or body, must be printed out. To provide context for the message and Page 22 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 22 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government make it legally admissible evidence, certain information must also be included in the printout. This information is called: a. content b. metadata (data that describes data) c. preservation The correct answer is B. Metadata is data that describes data and in relation to an e-mail message includes data elements such as to whom the message is sent, who sent it, time and date sent, and routing info. 4. A public employee receives and sends e-mail messages on a variety of topics to recipients both inside and outside the organization. Is it acceptable to treat all this email as one record series and to manage and retain it as a group for a uniform length of time? No. Before you can identify the retention period of an e-mail message, you must examine its content. You can then determine what type of record the e-mail message actually is and which records series it should be filed with. In other words, each e-mail message must be categorized and classified according to its content, rather than simply lumped in with all other e-mail messages. E-mail should be retained in accordance with written retention policy and rules (see Chapter 2--Writing a Policy). Following these retention rules will protect both employees and the organization. 5. A business document is e-mailed as an attachment. The business document is also filed in the office as paper records. Are the e-mail message and attachment subject to the same records retention schedule as the paper records? The records retention schedule only applies to the “Official” or "Record" copy of the information . ["Record copy" means the official copy of a public record when multiple copies exist. (OAR 166-005-0010 (7)). Extra copies of a document, preserved only for convenience of reference, require no prior authorization for destruction (ORS 192.005(5)(d)]. Once you have determined which version is the official copy, then that version will carry the retention requirements, regardless of its medium (electronic or paper). Sources E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000 Page 23 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 23 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 4 Security Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the issues and suggest steps or measures that might be taken by an organization to prevent unauthorized exposure, loss or corruption of vital information. Introduction An organization’s strength in sharing information electronically may become a vulnerability if security is breached. This chapter explores those valued organizational characteristics that may be vulnerable to loss or corruption and offers suggestions for controls an organization might consider putting in place. Any controls put in place should not only address networked personal computers (PC) and servers but also stand-alone personal computers with dial-up modems. In addition to employees working from home, there may be contractors and consultants accessing the computer network. Vulnerabilities Information is one of our greatest assets. Local governments are responsible for preserving the public record and as much care should be given our electronic records as are given other media we carefully store under lock and key. Local governments are accountable for protecting records from unauthorized access, guarding confidentiality and preventing modification, destruction, theft and general misuse of information. Every organization should be able to confidently answer the following information security questions: Confidentiality - Is your agency’s information accessible to only authorized users? Integrity - Is the accuracy and completeness of your agency’s information and processing methods safe? Availability - Is information available to authorized users so they can carry out their job duties? Types of Controls There are many types of controls an agency can implement. One relatively inexpensive method is the implementation of a user policy that serves the dual purpose of establishing rules and raising employee awareness. If funds are available, your agency may choose a less discretionary route and purchase security or encryption software for its network. Usage Policy Here are several suggestions you may wish to include in an administrative policy: Lines of Authority In order to effectively monitor the network and e-mail activity, certain lines of authority and responsibility should be established. Clearly define the roles of the system administrator and IT department, department managers and individual users. The person or group responsible for Page 24 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 24 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government network maintenance must establish the security policies and standards, ensure compliance and provide support and periodic training to managers and users. Managers must ensure employees under their supervision adhere to the established policies and standards and initiate disciplinary action when necessary. Users must understand and agree in writing, to comply with agency policies and standards. User Privileges Assign privileges based on what the user needs to perform his/her job to reduce the risk of lost or corrupted data. A user unfamiliar with proper procedures can do as much damage as someone with malicious intentions. Administrative privileges to all network applications should be granted on an extremely limited basis. User Passwords Passwords should not be shared with other users, although a department may wish to set up a confidential system of keeping managers informed of current passwords in the event a user is unexpectedly absent. To further protect the network, encourage users to avoid passwords that are family members’ names, the favorite pet’s name or a dictionary word. These types of passwords can easily be guessed. Unattended Workstations Encourage users to lock their workstations when they are absent for short periods of time to prevent an unauthorized person from browsing through files, sending messages or entering unacceptable Internet sites. Users leaving the building or who are for some reason unavailable for a period of time should be encouraged to shut down their computers. IT staff occasionally needs to take the network down or perform some service on a PC and cannot do so if the workstation is locked and the user is not available. Each agency should encourage the use of privacy screens by users handling confidential data. Monitoring and the Expectation of Privacy To ensure network integrity, authorized personnel may from time-to-time monitor user e-mail and Internet activities. Let users know that activity on the agency’s network is not private, regardless of whether it takes place during regular work hours or remotely from a dial-up connection. Message Opening and Forwarding It is important to caution users not to open and/or forward e-mail from unknown senders. The 1999 Melissa Virus was devastating to Microsoft Outlook users. Once the e-mail was opened, the virus mailed copies of itself to the first 50 names in that person’s address book. The virus was received from someone you knew and trusted. The 2000 ILOVEYOU virus was simply an e-mail attachment. The virus was launched when the recipient double-clicked on the attachment. Remind users to take some simple precautions and not let curiosity take over. These viruses cannot replicate without human help. Either delete a questionable e-mail or call IT Support. If you think you have inadvertently sent a virus to people in your address book, call and notify them. Page 25 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 25 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Software Downloads Agencies should issue policies prohibiting users from downloading any software from the Internet or other unknown source. Requests for necessary software should be directed to IT Support. Sending Confidential Information Establish rules relating to the type of information sent via e-mail. Do not transmit confidential or personal information such as credit card numbers and passwords unless the recipient has the proper safeguards in place. Unwanted E-mail or Spam Spam has increased to the point that it consumes over 50% of all e-mail traffic on the Internet. Rather than hitting the “delete” key a dozen times, investigate the options available for sending unsolicited e-mail directly to a trashcan for automatic deletion. IT Support can provide information on junk mail filtering software. Do not open obvious junk mail and do not attempt to remove yourself from the mailing list by replying. Any kind of response can verify to the sender that that your e-mail address is valid. Users are better off deleting unwanted e-mail immediately. Contractors and Consultants Discuss with your agency’s legal counsel, the feasibility of adding language to your contracts and personal service agreements that address how contractors and consultants handle your organization’s information and what the agency expects in terms of protection. Reporting Security Concerns Establish a clear process for reporting suspected security breaches including compromised passwords. Unusual behavior may be caused by a virus. Symptoms may include missing files, crashes, or misrouted messages. Back-ups Most IT departments have a data backup program in place. The loss of data can be inconvenient, but proper backups can help to restore what was lost. Good Use of Resources Discourage users from sending out virus alerts – leave this to the IT department. Unnecessary mass mailings should also be discouraged because they use up company resources and employee time. Virus Protection Software There are dozens of virus protection software products on the market to choose from as well as fixes provided by the software provider. Microsoft, for example, is a major target for hackers and regularly sends out patches for the program holes. It is important to keep up to date with all the new versions to adequately protect your PC and the network. Encryption When an e-mail is sent, it passes through numerous servers en route to its destination. Because most e-mail has no built-in security features, confidentiality and authenticity issues can arise. Encrypting Page 26 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 26 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government e-mail messages usually employs Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). Encrypting a message renders it undecipherable by others unless they possess the tool that decrypts the message. PKI issues all users within a system or community a private key, which is confidential and a public key, which is publicly held in a sort of digital signature “white pages”. When encrypted with either signature, only your corresponding signature will decrypt the message. Digital signatures can be used to do two things (both of these encryption methods can be used on the same message to protect confidentiality and to ensure that the sender is who they say they are): 1) If sender A encrypts a message with their private key, recipient B can then decrypt the message with the sender A’s public key. This method verifies that sender A really sent the message. Encrypted Message “Joe, meet me for lunch” “AOFljfajlS 89080ajla” A’s Private Key A’s Public Key “Joe, meet me for lunch” 2) If sender A encrypts a message with recipient B’s public key, recipient B can decrypt the message with it’s own private key. This method secures the confidentiality of the message as its being sent so that no one can intercept it without the recipient knowing. Encrypted Message “ouon890732lsa” “Here is the report you need” B’s Private Key B’s Public Key “Here is the report you need” More effort will be required to secure a web server if an organization is accepting online payments, or receiving sensitive information such as a Social Security Number. In this case, information passes through an intermediary known as a certificate authority that both the sending and receiving computers “trust”. It provides the asymmetric (public) key to each once the identity of each is verified. Digital Signatures Digital signatures ensure the authenticity of an electronic record, including e-mail, text file, etc. The transmitting computer sends the coded record in such a way that the receiving computer can verify the record is coming from a trusted source and that the record has not been altered in any way. Page 27 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 27 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Firewalls A firewall is a program or hardware device that filters information coming into a network at each Internet connection. At this point, an organization can put rules in place that flag certain incoming information and protect the integrity of the network as well as control user connections to the Internet. Without a firewall, hackers could take advantage of any security hole in the system. Firewalls use one or more of three methods below to control the information flow: 1. Packet filtering compares small chunks (or packets) of data against the filters or rules. Packets that do not make it through the filter are discarded. 2. Proxy service might be compared to a two-way messenger service that carries information between the Internet and the organization. 3. Stateful inspection compares key parts of a packet to a database of information. The firewall gathers defining characteristics of information going out from the organization, and incoming information is compared to these characteristics. If there is a reasonable match, the incoming information gets through the firewall. If the match is below standards, the packet is discarded. Similar to a biological virus, a computer virus begins with the infection of one individual, spreads quickly and results in some very sick networks. If your organization has been lucky enough not to fall victim to hackers, you have certainly heard about many that have. Firewalls can filter out such things as: • • • • • • • • • • Application backdoors that are either intentionally built into a program to allow remote access or bugs that allow hidden access Denial of service attacks that crash servers and websites E-mail bombs that bombard the recipient with messages until the computer crashes Macros, originally designed to simplify complicated procedures, that hackers create to destroy data or crash a system Operating system bugs that allow backdoor access Redirect bombs that enable hackers using Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) to redirect the information path potentially resulting in a denial of service Remote login that allows an unauthorized user to access files or run programs Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) hijacking that accesses e-mail addresses and sends thousands of unsolicited e-mails – “spasm” – to users Source routing that hackers employ to disguise a packet of information to look like it is coming from trusted source Spam, or unsolicited e-mail, can contain viruses and other malicious code It is important to remember that while a firewall will increase a network’s general security, it is also likely to mistakenly block some legitimate messages. Chapter 4 – Case Study Employee Bob Smith received an e-mail message from an address that he did not recognize. Because the subject of the message was “Business Opportunities” Bob opened the message. Shortly afterward, his computer crashed. He then noticed that his machine was acting sluggish and crashed Page 28 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 28 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government more than usual. Pop-up ads and offensive images filled his screen. Bob figured that it was just his computer acting up. By the time Bob recognized that something was seriously wrong with his computer, the virus had e-mailed copies of itself to many of his co-workers, crippling the network. What steps would you take to prevent this from happening to you? The surest way to prevent infection is to never open or forward e-mail messages from unknown senders and to remember that viruses can disguise themselves as being from a friend or family member. In addition, never open an e-mail attachment unless you know who the sender is and are expecting an attachment from them. In this case, with so many unrelated problems springing up, Bob should have assumed that the email message contained a virus and notified the IT team at the first sign of computer trouble. His IT team should be able to troubleshoot the problem and tell Bob if all computers on the network are running antivirus software and receive regular virus definition updates, which reduce the likelihood of infection. Computers can be unstable and it can be difficult for the average user to diagnose the cause of a computer problem. Users of your agency’s e-mail system should be made aware of the ease at which viruses are transmitted through the e-mail system and the steps that need to be taken to minimize the risk of e-mail viruses. Chapter 4 - Quiz 1. What are three reasons an organization should consider additional security procedures? The three reasons are to ensure the confidentiality of your agency’s information accessible to only authorized users; to ensure the integrity (the accuracy and completeness) of your agency’s information and processing methods; and to ensure the availability of agency information to authorized users so they can carry out their job duties. 2. Circle the types of controls that an organization can implement to address security concerns within e-mail communications. a. Lines of authority b. Passwords c. Spam filters d. Firewalls All should be circled. There are a number of measures mentioned in this chapter that will help your agency address security concerns. Some are very simple, such as not sharing passwords and some are more complex such as purchasing and implementing the use of encryption software. Decide which will work best for your agency and fit into its budget. 3. What are some security risks that firewalls can alleviate? Firewalls can help eliminate application backdoors that are either intentionally built into a program to allow remote access or bugs that allow hidden access; service attacks that crash servers and websites; e-mail bombs that bombard the recipient with messages until the computer crashes; macros that hackers create to destroy data or crash a system; operating system bugs that allow backdoor access; remote logins that allow unauthorized users to access files or run programs; source routing that hackers employ to disguise a packet of information to look like it is coming from trusted source; spam, or unsolicited e-mail, can contain viruses and other malicious code; and Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) hijacking that accesses e-mail Page 29 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 29 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government addresses and sends thousands of unsolicited e-mails – “spasm” – to users. In addition, firewalls can redirect bombs that enable hackers using Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) to redirect the information path potentially resulting in a denial of service It is important to remember that while a firewall will increase a network’s general security, it is also likely to mistakenly block some legitimate messages. 4. True or False: Public employees have no expectation of privacy when it relates to monitoring employee e-mail usage on agency computer systems. True. Public employees may have their e-mail usage as well as their computer usage monitored from time-to-time, by authorized personnel to ensure network integrity. Let users know that activity on the agency’s network is not private, regardless of whether it takes place during regular work hours or remotely from a dial-up connection. 5. You receive an e-mail from a co-worker, with an attachment and the subject line “THIS IS NOT A VIRUS!” You should: a. Ask your co-worker if he/she sent you an e-mail b. Notify the IT staff that you received an unusual e-mail with “virus” in the subject line c. Assume that the e-mail contains a virus. Wait to open the message until IT staff advises that it is safe to do so d. All of the above The correct answer is D. Part of what makes a virus so effective is that it is deceptive. If a message looks suspicious then it probably is, so don’t open it and notify your IT department at once. Sources E-Policy: How to Develop Computer, E-Mail, and Internet Guidelines to Protect Your Company and Its Assets, Michael R. Overly, AMACOM (NY, NY) 1999. E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000. “Acceptable Use Policies, ‘A framework for e-mail and Internet usage policies for your enterprise’” www.techrepublic.com http://www.howstuffworks.com How do digital signatures work How firewalls work How computer viruses work How do viruses and worms spread through e-mail? How encryption works “Electronic Mail Policy”, University of California (2003) www.ucop.edu/ucophome/policies “E-Mail Security”, www.msexchange.org/articles/Email_security “Vulnerability Management & the Security-Aware Organization by Visionael Corporation”, Vendor White Paper (2003) www.knowledgestorm.com/search/viewabstract/61684 Page 30 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 30 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government “Kansas Electronic Records Management Guidelines” – Kansas State Historical Society www.kshs.org/government/records/electronic/electronicrecordsguidelines “Electronic Records Management Handbook”, State of California, http://www.pd.dgs.ca.gov/recs/erm-toc.htm “Virus Protection Guidelines”, Financial Services Office, University of Arizona http://www.fso.arizona.edu/fso/computing/Virus_policy.htm “Information Technology Security Policy”, South Dakota State University http://www3.sdstate.edu/technologySupport/ “Establish a Bullet-Proof Security Policy”, Ferrarini, Networking and Communications, article (2001) http://networking.earthweb.com/netsecur/article.php/897881 “Privacy and Security Policy”, State of Texas Department of Information Resources http://www.dir.state.tx.us/general_info/privacy.htm Page 31 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 31 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 5 Technology Introduction We frequently integrate different forms of computer technology into our lives, even though we often lack a detailed knowledge of how it functions. We now rely on IT specialists when we have technical problems so that we can get our daily tasks accomplished on time. However, employees need to have a working knowledge of how their most frequently used technology functions. This chapter attempts to give an overview of several technological issues related to e-mail and other types of electronic messaging systems. Purpose This chapter presents reasons that agencies must stay current with technological developments in order to manage their e-mail systems. E-mail systems and storage software can require frequent upgrades. In addition, companies may refuse to support their outdated products. Most e-mail programs have certain system requirements and will work only with certain combinations of hardware and software. Internet-based technologies such as Instant Messaging can create serious records management concerns for your agency. With an eye to your agency’s needs and budget, this chapter can assist you in selecting technology that will help meet your office’s responsibilities to comply with records management statutes and the Public Records Law. E-mail Storage Software Your choice of technology will affect the efficiency of your office’s communications, your ability to retrieve e-mail messages and your office’s potential risk due to the retention and deletion of e-mail messages. Software applications can assist users by identifying and deleting junk mail, grouping and organizing e-mail messages and storing important e-mail messages for the long-term in a separate electronic system that meets the state’s legal requirements. Software can also help users comply with records retention requirements: • • • • Managing incoming and outgoing e-mail messages, including deletion of email that no longer serves a business purpose and the transfer of important messages to a separate electronic system Surveillance and flagging of incoming and outgoing e-mail message content Security and audit trail capabilities Storage of messages and attachments on stable storage media While the purchase of e-mail management software can be beneficial, agencies do not necessarily need to purchase one in order to organize and store e-mail messages. Most e-mail programs allow users to create and file e-mail messages in folders. Establishing folders that simplify filing (for example, by record series, retention period, or project) will help you place e-mail in the appropriate location and retrieve it at a later date. Folders or individual messages can be archived, which means that they are saved and managed at an alternate location (shared drive) or on backup removable media (CD-ROM, magnetic tape). Page 32 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 32 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Integration of Messaging Technologies E-mail can be sent and received on many types of devices: 1. E-mail-to-fax allows users to send faxes directly from their e-mail program, e-converted to a facsimile, arriving at the recipient’s fax machine. Similarly, fax communications can be converted to a digital image and transmitted via the e-mail system. 2. Radio communication, such as a pocket paging system, allows short e-mail addresses to be sent to pagers. In more advanced applications, providers may lease notebook sized systems that can send and receive e-mail messages through earth-satellite relay. 3. Voice-mail systems accept e-mail messages for their clients. This is also known as “e-mail reading.” The text in an e-mail message is funneled through a speech synthesizer to artificially read the e-mail message text into voice storage. Users can then listen to their email messages by accessing their voice-mail system. E-mail reading can assist visually impaired users. Storage and Preservation of E-mail Messages As discussed in Chapter 3, there are numerous retention strategies for e-mail messages. Several examples are: maintaining the message in electronic form on a reliable storage media; printing out paper copies; and a strategy that employs both of the previous strategies. It is important to remember that saving records to your hard drive is not a viable preservation strategy since all of your work can be wiped out in the event of virus, exposure to moisture or temperature extremes or disk defect. Backing up data on a network creates an extra copy in case your hard drive is erased. However, this type of backup is not acceptable either, because in addition to the same vulnerabilities of local hard drives, other users can easily delete data. Chapter 3 discusses options in the section titled, “Methods for Preserving E-mail.” A distinction should be made between security back-ups and long-term storage. Security back-up procedures do not constitute a long-term storage plan. Back-up tapes serve as a security copy in the event of disaster or large data loss, and do not provide a way to search records or to maintain complex links between records. Long-term storage takes into consideration records retention and scheduling, and creates an environment for easier retrieval. Back-ups are not a substitute for the long-term storage of records on reliable storage media. Technological obsolescence Technological obsolescence refers to problems related to outdated hardware and software. Electronic documents can gradually become unusable over time without regular maintenance such as software upgrades and patches. They are vulnerable to technological obsolescence due to the everchanging versions of software applications. This issue can arise with e-mail messages that are downloaded from one type of e-mail system and then the system is replaced by a different company’s product. Files stored on removable storage media (i.e. cd-rom, tapes, dvd, etc.) are even more vulnerable and should be periodically “refreshed,” or copied to new media. Most common office software is proprietary, which means that it is owned and controlled by a company. When using proprietary software, users are at the mercy of the company that created it. Support for a product may be discontinued if the company goes out of business or merges with another company. This adds another challenge to the long-term storage and access to records created using that software. Page 33 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 33 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Instant Messaging, PDAs, Chat Rooms and Alternative Communication Technologies When deciding which types of software to make available for employee use, it is important to consider whether they will be used for public business and whether their adoption justifies the recordkeeping obligation that comes with them. In addition to e-mail systems, other Internet technologies have become very popular in communicating electronically. Communication via Instant Messaging (IM) and chat rooms happens instantaneously. Other types of communication technologies include: web-conferencing, project management and meeting software, weblogs (BLOGS), listservs, text messaging, and videoconferencing. If any of the above technologies are currently being used by your office to conduct public business, then the information being transmitted may be subject to the Oregon Public Records Law for both access and retention. Just as with e-mail, policies need to be created for IM and chat rooms. This type of communication is difficult to retain due to its ephemeral nature and its web-based formats that are stored outside of your e-mail system. Oregon’s Public Records Law requires the capture of all information that is considered a public record, which can include IM and chat rooms. Unless these conditions are met, these technologies may not be appropriate for agency use. (See Chapter 2 -- Writing a Policy and Appendix A -- E-mail and Instant Messaging Policy template). Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) are also becoming very common workplace accessories. Just like paper files in your office, e-mail messages and other electronic files on your PDA may have records retention and access requirements. E-mail messages, calendars, notes, task lists and the like need to be downloaded from the PDA to the appropriate locations on the agency’s server on a regular basis. Your agency’s records officer should be contacted for further information on which types of files stored on your PDA are considered to be public records. There are many forms of technology available on the market. The key is to know your office’s needs, resources and limitations to identify the one most suitable for your agency. Chapter 5 - Case Study You supervise a staff of three food inspectors who spend most of their time out of the office. To facilitate note taking, the three food inspectors purchased their own portable computers: one food inspector uses a laptop, the second uses a Blackberry, and the third uses a Palm Pilot. When they complete a project in the field, they circulate the information directly from their portable machines, sometimes using Instant Messaging (IM) software. If a restaurant owner submitted a Public Records request for information on the handling of his case, how would you go about assembling the necessary records? How would you ensure that all the food inspectors’ work product was also accessible from your office’s network or e-mail system? How would you respond if a food inspector refused to comply with the request on the grounds that he owned the information on his machine because he had purchased it with his own money? The agency needs to have a written policy that clearly states to all employees that their work on behalf of the agency results in the creation of public records, regardless of who purchased the equipment or their work location. In addition, the agency would need to have scheduled required data backups from all portable equipment to their network or e-mail system. If both of these were in place, the request would be a routine public records request. However, and let’s assume since the employees are sharing information through Instant Messaging, the Page 34 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 34 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government agency does not have any policies or data downloads. The agency would then have to take each piece of equipment and try to reconstruct what took place. This action alone may compromise the integrity of the information. Without a means of tracking, storing, and retrieving public records communicated via Instant Messaging and chat rooms, their use should be expressly prohibited in a written policy. If you decide that portable computer technology will enhance communication, customer service and efficiency, you should specify its legitimate work uses on one particular hardware and software product. This helps to keep the collected work product consistent, and simplifies its retrieval, storage and migration to newer formats in the future. Chapter 5 - Quiz 1. In what ways can e-mail management software help you to manage e-mail? Software applications can assist users by identifying and deleting junk mail, grouping and organizing e-mail and storing important e-mail messages for the long-term in a separate electronic system that meets the state’s legal requirements. Software can also help users comply with records retention requirements by managing incoming and outgoing e-mail messages, including deletion of email that no longer serves a business purpose and the transfer of important messages to a separate electronic system; surveillance and flagging of incoming and outgoing e-mail message content; by providing security and audit trail capabilities and storing messages and attachments on stable storage media 2. What are some recent technologies available to e-mail users? a. E-mail to fax b. Pocket Paging System c. Voice-mail systems that accept e-mail messages d. All of the above The correct answer is D. In addition other technologies such as PDA’s and Blackberry’s are available for use in a mobile setting. 3. If a public employee sends e-mail message from a personal account on work time, could the e-mail be considered a public record? Yes, if the message is related to public business. 4. Is your computer hard drive a reliable media for long-term preservation of e-mail messages? No. It is important to remember that saving records to your hard drive is not a viable preservation strategy since all of your work can be wiped out in the event of virus, exposure to moisture or temperature extremes or disk defect. 5. Do Internet Chat Rooms, Instant Messaging, and other forms of electronic communication fall under Oregon’s Public Records Law and Public Meetings Law? They can. Remember, Oregon’s Public Records Law does not discriminate based on the medium used to transfer public information. If you do public business via these means, you may be creating public records (See Chapter 1 for the definition of a public record). Page 35 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 35 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Sources http://www.webopedia.com/ E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000. Page 36 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 36 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 6 Budget Introduction All agencies are familiar with cost constraints and e-mail management comes with a unique set of costs. Agencies can reduce their postal service expenses by utilizing an e-mail system, but this savings may be offset by increased spending on computer equipment and in the management of the system’s messages. It is important to keep in mind that vendor companies may require the purchase of annual software licenses or charge for technical support. With proper planning, you will be able to prioritize your needs and decide what solutions you can afford. The key to a successful budget is planning. Many shy away from planning and see it as an unnecessary use of time and expenses, but the planning process helps to ensure the success of your project. Budgets for e-mail management projects will vary by the size of the government entity and the objectives you are hoping to achieve. The following checklists should give agencies a basic knowledge of the types of costs they will encounter. Basic Costs • Staff Resources/Employee Time - evaluating and selecting a solution, policy development, installation and implementation • Infrastructure/Equipment - hardware, software, servers, telecommunications devices, temporary backup and long-term storage devices and removable storage media such as magnetic tape, CD-ROM, and microfilm • Maintenance and Upgrades - for hardware and software systems • Security Resources – firewalls and antivirus and spam-filtering software • Training - in-house or external employee training on the e-mail system • Disaster Recovery Planning - includes disaster preparedness and procedures to be followed in case of an emergency Optional Costs • Records Management Software - can automate filing, retention and deletion of messages • Customized Programming - makes software more useful to your organization • External Consultants and Trainers - can lend their experience and qualifications but the expense can be prohibitive • Off-site Storage – for e-mail system back-ups Ongoing Costs • Maintenance of Infrastructure/Equipment - hardware, software and peripherals such as printers, scanners and servers • Hardware and Software Upgrades • Data Migration – moves existing information to newer software versions or to different software products • Training - regularly scheduled employee training reviews on use of the system Page 37 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 37 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 6 - Case Study You are assigned to select a new e-mail system that complies with information security requirements and the requirements of access and retention under Oregon’s Public Records Law. You are given a budget of $50,000 to complete the project. What steps do you take? Which item or items do you prioritize above the others? If, in your opinion, the budget is insufficient to accomplish your goals, how would you justify the appropriation of more funds to the project? Although every office will have unique needs, the first step in every case should be planning. With proper planning, you will be able to prioritize your needs and decide what solutions you can afford. The key to a successful budget is planning. Many shy away from planning and see it as an unnecessary use of time and expenses, but the planning process helps to ensure the success of your project. Some of these planning steps would include meeting with IT staff early in the process to notify them of your project and to solicit their input; developing requirements for use and access; developing requirements for the way your office will search and retrieve e-mail messages (text and headers) and developing requirements for managing and disposing of email messages. These steps will help you to identify what items are a priority for the system, what can be purchased at a later time and what can be eliminated from the list. Priorities may include system size, back-up capabilities, networkability, basic security features, training and ease of use. Items to be purchased later may include additional storage, encryption software and an e-mail management system. In justifying a larger project budget, you should emphasize that the potential costs of piecing together and trying to maintain multiple e-mail systems or the hidden costs of using an email system that is insufficient, out of date or even obsolete. Stress your planning process and cost-benefit analysis that you have conducted as well as the agreed upon priority list. Finally, when developing your budget, be sure to leave room for the ongoing costs since expenses don’t end with the purchase of the equipment. Chapter 6 - Quiz True or False 1. Planning for the purchase of a new e-mail system can be minimal since the vendors will explain what their product will do for you. False. Although vendors are very versed in their product, they are not well-versed in your needs. Know what you want the system to do before you solicit vendors. Establish your budget and then a priority list what you need from the system now, what your ongoing costs will be, what you can purchase at a later date and finally, what you can live without. This will help to ensure that you get the product that will work best for you. 2. The costs of an e-mail system end with its purchase. False. There are many ongoing costs associated with any technology purchase. They include the maintenance of the infrastructure and the equipment - hardware, software and peripherals such as printers, scanners and servers; the need to periodically upgrade hardware and software (this may come as part of an annual licensing fee or may be a required extra purchase); migrating Page 38 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 38 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government data forward when new hardware and/or software is purchased and put into place and regularly scheduled employee training reviews on use of the system. 3. Training is an item that you can eliminate when trying to cut costs. False. Training employees on the proper use of the system will save the agency time and money because employees will know how to use the system efficiently which allows for better productivity. Instructing employees on the proper use of the e-mail system will also help to prevent misuse and abuse by employees and reduce potential agency liability in relation to email use. 4. Optional costs include records management systems and customized software. True. Although both may be nice, they are not required to be used. Establishing a useful file plan/structure that allows users to file messages according to their content and project is basic and low cost. A well-established file structure can be converted at a later date to an electronic records management system. Customizing your software to your organization may be useful but the cost to do so may far outweigh its benefit. 5. Regardless of size, all local governments will have to address the same items listed as “Basic Costs.” True. Regardless of size, each e-mail system will have to address the issues of staff resources/employee time, infrastructure/equipment, maintenance and upgrades of hardware and software systems, security resources, training and disaster recovery planning in order have an effective e-mail system. However, the size and scope of these issues may vary on agency size and complexity. Sources http://www.webopedia.com/ E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000. Page 39 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 39 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Chapter 7 E-mail etiquette Introduction The use of e-mail has become an important tool today for communicating as well as sharing and distributing information. As a communication tool, it is important to represent your agency in a professional manner, respond to e-mail clearly and efficiently and protect your agency from liability and unnecessary risk. Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to establish the expectations that your agency has for its employees when they are using agency e-mail systems. This chapter will provide email etiquette advice and rules to help employees become aware of their responsibilities when using the e-mail system. Why do you need e-mail etiquette? An agency should implement etiquette rules for the following reasons: • Professionalism - by using proper e-mail language your agency will convey a professional image. • Efficiency - e-mail messages that get to the point are much more effective than poorly worded e-mail messages. • Protection from liability - employee awareness of e-mail risks may protect your agency from costly lawsuits. What are the etiquette rules? There are many etiquette guides and many different etiquette rules. Some rules will differ according to the nature of your agency and its corporate culture. Listed below are e-mail etiquette rules that could be applied to nearly all government entities. E-mail cannot replace personal contact There is a tendency to be less formal or careful when communicating using e-mail and that can sometimes provoke anger. Remember that direct, person-to-person contact is best for handling sensitive, difficult, complex or emotional issues. E-mail is public Assume the messages you send and receive are permanent and public. Don’t say anything in an e-mail message that you would not want to be made public or forwarded to others. Do not use e-mail to discuss confidential information Sending an e-mail message is like sending a postcard. If you don’t want your message to be displayed on a bulletin board, don’t send it. Moreover, never make any libelous, sexist or racially discriminating comments in an e-mail message. Page 40 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 40 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Use proper spelling, grammar and punctuation This is not only important because improper spelling, grammar and punctuation give a bad impression of you and your agency, it is also important for conveying the message properly. Email messages with no full stops or commas are difficult to read and can sometimes even change the meaning of the text. If your program has a spell checking option, use it! Read the e-mail message before you send it A lot of people don’t bother to read an e-mail message before they send it out, as can be seen from the many spelling and grammatical mistakes contained in them. Apart from this, reading your e-mail message through the eyes of the recipient will help you send a more effective message and avoid misunderstandings and inappropriate comments. Use proper structure and layout Since reading from a screen is more difficult than reading from paper, the structure and lay- out is very important for e-mail messages. Use short paragraphs and blank lines between each paragraph. When making points, number them or mark each point as separate to keep the overview. Avoid long sentences Try to keep your sentences to a maximum of 15-20 words. E-mail is meant to be a quick medium and requires a different kind of writing than letters. Also take care not to send e-mail messages that are too long. If a person receives an e-mail message that looks like a dissertation, chances are that they will not even attempt to read it. Do not write in CAPITALS IF YOU WRITE IN CAPITALS IT SEEMS AS IF YOU ARE SHOUTING. This can be highly annoying and might trigger an unwanted response in the form of a flame mail. Be concise and to the point Do not make an e-mail message longer than it needs to be. Remember that reading an e-mail message is harder than reading printed communications. Don’t send or forward e-mails containing libelous, defamatory, offensive, racist or obscene remarks By sending or even just forwarding one libelous or offensive remark in an e-mail message, you and your agency can face legal charges resulting in multi-million dollar penalties. Answer swiftly Citizens and staff use an e-mail message because they wish to receive a quick response. Therefore, each e-mail message should be replied to within at least 24 hours, and preferably within the same working day. If the e-mail message is complicated, send a response that you have received their message and that you will get back to them. Flaming Avoid public “flames” – messages sent in anger. Wait and think about what you want to say before responding. Messages sent in anger only “fuel the flames” and are usually regretted later. Page 41 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 41 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Do not attach unnecessary files Wherever possible, only send attachments when they are productive and when necessary, compress the attachment. Large attachments can bring down an e-mail system. Do not overuse the high priority option We all know the story of the boy who cried wolf. If you overuse the high priority option, it will lose its function when you really need it. Moreover, even if an e-mail message has high priority, your message will come across as slightly aggressive if you flag it as ‘high priority’. Don’t leave out the message thread When replying to an e-mail message, include the original message in your reply--in other words click ‘Reply’, instead of ‘New Mail’. Do not overuse ‘Reply To All’ Only use ‘Reply to All’ if you really need your message to be seen by each person who received the original message. Take care with abbreviations and emoticons In business e-mail messages, try not to use abbreviations such as BTW (by the way) and LOL (laugh out loud). The recipient might not be aware of the meanings of the abbreviations and these are generally not appropriate in business e-mail message. The same goes for emoticons, such as the smiley :-). If you are not sure whether your recipient knows what it means, it is better not to use it. Be careful with formatting Remember that when you use formatting in your e-mail messages, the sender might not be able to view formatting or might see different fonts than you had intended. When using colors, use a color that is easy to read on the background. Take care with rich text and HTML messages Be aware that when you send an e-mail message in rich text or HTML format, the sender might only be able to receive plain text e-mails. If this is the case, the recipient will receive your message as a .txt attachment. Do not forward chain letters Do not ask to recall a message The chances are that your message has already been delivered and read. It is better to send a follow-up e-mail message to say that you have made a mistake. This will look much more honest than trying to recall a message. Do not copy a message or attachment without permission Do not copy a message or attachment belonging to another user without permission of the originator. If you do not ask permission first, you might be infringing on copyright laws. Use a meaningful subject line Try to use a subject line that is meaningful to the recipient as well as yourself. Often this is the only clue the recipient has about the contents when filing and searching for messages. Page 42 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 42 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Use active instead of passive voice Try to use the active voice wherever possible. For example, “Our department will contact you today” sounds better than “You will be contacted by our department today.” The first sounds more personal and assures the recipient that you are actively working to meet their needs. Avoid using URGENT and IMPORTANT Even more so than the high-priority option, you must at all times try to avoid these types of words in an e-mail message or subject line. Only use this if it is a really urgent or important message. Don’t reply to spam By replying to spam or by unsubscribing you are confirming that your e-mail address is ‘live’. Confirming this will only generate more spam. Therefore, just hit the delete button or use e-mail software to remove spam automatically. Use the “Cc:” field sparingly Try not to use the “cc:” field unless the recipient knows why they are receiving a copy of the message. When responding to a “cc:” message, decide if you should include recipients listed in the “cc:” field as well. Generally, you do not include the person in the “cc:” field unless you have a particular reason for wanting this person to see your response. Again, make sure that this person will know why they are receiving a copy. Signatures Use a signature if you can. Make sure it identifies who you are and includes alternative means of contacting you (phone and fax). Courtesy E-mail is all about communicating with other people and as such remembering basic courtesies is never a bad idea. If you’re asking for something, don’t forget to say “please” and if someone does something for you, make sure you say “thank you.” How do you enforce email etiquette? The first step is to create a written e-mail policy. This e-mail policy should include all of the do’s and don’ts concerning the use of the company’s e-mail system and should be distributed amongst all employees. Secondly, employees must be trained to fully understand the importance of e-mail etiquette. Finally, implementation of the rules can be monitored by using e-mail management software and e-mail response tools. Chapter 7 - Case Study As a city employee you have responsibilities for dealing with requests from the public. You are assigned to write a policy for content management of e-mail messages. What specific guidelines should you put in the policy? No two organizations have the same business needs or mandates, therefore a perfectly acceptable policy for one organization may not work for another. Page 43 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 43 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government General recommendations for any organization should include responding in a timely and helpful manner; maintaining a professional tone at all times; striving for conciseness; avoiding sending frivolous messages or using network resources unnecessarily; avoiding slang or abbreviations; including all quoted material in the response; and not using e-mail messages for discussing sensitive topics, for delivering bad news, or for urgent business requiring an immediate response. Finally, the policy should note that the law might see no distinction between e-mail sent from home or from work, and no distinction between the use of public equipment or private equipment when used for work purposes. Chapter 7 - Quiz True or False 1. E-mail should be used for all forms of communication. False. E-mail cannot replace personal contact. There is a tendency to be less formal or careful when communicating using e-mail and that can sometimes provoke anger. Remember that direct, person-to-person contact is best for handling sensitive, difficult, complex or emotional issues. In addition remember that e-mail is public. Don’t say anything in an e-mail message that you would not want to be made public or forwarded to others. Never make any libelous, sexist or racially discriminating comments in an e-mail message and finally, e-mail should not be used to discuss confidential information. Sending an e-mail message is like sending a postcard. If you don’t want your message to be displayed on a bulletin board, don’t send it. 2. The use of e-mail is considered “informal”; therefore it is acceptable to write in an informal style. False. Because it is a business communication tool it is important to represent your agency in a professional manner which will help to protect your agency from liability and unnecessary risk. 3. Because it is not on paper, it’s okay to say what you really think about a co-worker in an e-mail. False. It is never okay to use e-mail for libelous, sexist or racially discriminating comments about co-workers or any other individual for that matter. By sending or even just forwarding one libelous, or offensive remark in an e-mail message, you and your agency can face court cases resulting in multi-million dollar penalties. 4. You should clearly identify the subject contained in your e-mail. True. You should try to use a subject that is meaningful to the recipient as well as yourself. Often this is the only clue the recipient has about the contents when filing and searching for messages. 5. It’s not necessary to consider copyright laws when using attachments or forwarding messages. False. Some messages and/or their attachments may have been copyrighted by their creator. Therefore, do not copy a message or attachment belonging to another user without permission of the originator. If you do not ask permission first, you might be infringing on copyright laws. Page 44 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 44 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Sources Compiled from the following sources: www.Emailreplies.com, “Email Etiquette Rules For Effective Email Replies”, November 3, 2003 Radcliff Community Email Committee, May 14, 2001. Yale University Library, “Training & Staff Development Resources”, January 20, 1999 E-Mail Rules: A Business Guide to Managing Policies, Security, and Legal Issues for E-Mail and Digital Communication, Nancy Flynn and Randolph Kahn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2003. The E-Policy Handbook: Designing and Implementing Effective E-Mail, Internet, and Software Policies, Nancy Flynn, AMACOM (NY, NY) 2000 Page 45 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 45 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Appendix A E-mail Policy Template Note: Agencies should pick and choose from this sample policy to suit their situation [Agency Name] has established this policy with regard to the acceptable use of agency-provided electronic messaging systems, including but not limited to e-mail and instant messaging. E-mail and instant messaging are important and sensitive business tools. This policy applies to any and all electronic messages composed, sent or received by any employee or by any person using agencyprovided electronic messaging resources. Policies [Agency Name] sets forth the following policies, but reserves the right to change them at any time as may be appropriate or required under the circumstances. [Agency Name] provides electronic messaging resources to assist in conducting agency business. All messages composed and/or sent using agency-provided electronic messaging resources must comply with agency policies regarding acceptable communications. [Agency Name] prohibits discrimination based on age, race, gender, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability, sources of income, or religious or political beliefs. Use of electronic messaging resources to harass or discriminate for any or all of the aforementioned reasons is prohibited. The electronic messaging system(s) is (are) [Agency Name] property. All messages stored in agency-provided electronic messaging system(s) or composed, sent or received by any employee are the property of [Agency Name]. Furthermore, all messages composed, sent or received by any person using agency-provided equipment are the property of [Agency Name]. Electronic messages are NOT the property of any employee. Upon termination or separation from the agency, [Agency Name] will deny all access to electronic messaging resources, including the ability to download, forward, print or retrieve any message stored in the system, regardless of sender or recipient. Each employee will be assigned a unique e-mail address that is to be used while conducting agency business via e-mail. Accessing external e-mail systems from agency-provided equipment is prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to, Yahoo! Mail, Hotmail, MSN Mail, AOL, Earthlink, Comcast and other e-mail services offered by Internet service providers. Employees are prohibited from automatically forwarding electronic messages sent through agency-provided systems to external messaging systems. [Agency Name] reserves the right to intercept, monitor, review and/or disclose any and all messages composed, sent or received. The interception, monitoring and reviewing of messages may be performed with the assistance of content filtering software, or by designated agency employees and/or designated external entities. Employees designated to review messages may include, but is not limited to, an employee’s supervisor or manager and/or representatives from the Human Resources Department, Legal Department or IS Department. [Agency Name] reserves the right to alter, modify, re-route or block the delivery of messages as appropriate. This includes but is not limited to: Page 46 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 46 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government o Rejecting, quarantining or removing the attachments and/or malicious code from messages that may pose a threat to [Agency Name] resources. o Discarding attachments, such as music, considered to be of little business value and of significant resource cost. o Rejecting or quarantining messages with suspicious content. o Rejecting or quarantining messages containing offensive language. o Re-routing messages with suspicious content to designated [Agency Name] employees for manual review. o Rejecting or quarantining messages determined to be unsolicited commercial e-mail (spam). o Appending legal disclaimers to messages. Electronic messaging resources may be used infrequently and occasionally for personal use. Excessive personal use may result in disciplinary action, including but not limited to the loss of this privilege and/or termination. [Agency Name]-provided electronic messaging resources may not be used for the promotion or publication of one’s political or religious views, the operation of a business or for any undertaking for personal gain. [Agency Name] (does or does not) permit the use of instant messaging programs. The policies in this document apply equally to instant messages as well as e-mail. Employees authorized to use instant messaging programs will be advised specifically on which instant message program(s) are permissible and which ones are not. Employees authorized to use instant messaging programs will be assigned a unique instant messaging identifier, also known as a buddy name, handle or nickname. Employees are prohibited from conducting employee business from any non- [Agency Name] provided e-mail or instant messaging accounts. The unique e-mail addresses and/or instant messaging identifiers assigned to an employee are the property of [Agency Name]. Employees may use these identifiers only while employed by the [Agency Name]. The right to use these identifiers terminates upon termination or separation from the agency. [Agency Name] employs sophisticated anti-virus software. Employees are prohibited from disabling anti-virus software running on [Agency Name]-provided computer equipment. Any employee who discovers a violation of these policies should immediately notify a manager or the Human Resources Department. Any employee in violation of these policies is subject to disciplinary action, including but not necessarily limited to, termination. Practices and Procedures [Agency Name] employs certain practices and procedures in order to maintain the health and efficiency of electronic messaging resources, to achieve agency objectives and/or to meet various regulations. These practices and procedures are subject to change as appropriate or required under the circumstances: [Agency Name] treats relevant electronic messages as a business record. As with any business record, established practices and procedures for the safekeeping, retention and ultimate destruction of the business record must be followed. [Agency Name] serializes, archives and retains copies of all internal and external electronic messages in conformance with retention periods outlined in the Archives Division’s general records retention schedules. Page 47 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 47 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government It is recommended that e-mail be printed when it contains information pertinent to a case file or important issue. The e-mail will then take on the retention period of that record series. ________ days after electronic messages have been successfully and verifiably archived, electronic messages will be deleted from the local, online electronic messaging system(s). The [Agency Name] automatically and systematically destroys all archived messages when the record has reached the end of its retention period as outlined in the Archives Division’s general records retention schedule. In order to enforce the [Agency Name] retention schedules, employees are prohibited from copying or storing messages into any form of local message archive, including, but not limited to, PST (Outlook) files, public folders, personal folders and local file folders. Conflicts with guidance in chapter 3 Risks and Cautionary Advice While electronic messaging resources allow employees to conduct agency business efficiently, use of e-mail and instant messaging systems comes with some inherent risks. All employees should be aware of these risks and take precautions to mitigate them. Electronic messages are legally discoverable and permissible as evidence in a court of law. Messages sent electronically can be intercepted inside or outside the agency and as such there should never be an expectation of confidentiality. Do not disclose proprietary or confidential information through e-mail or instant messages. Electronic messages can never be unconditionally and unequivocally deleted. The remote possibility of discovery always exists. Use caution and judgment in determining whether a message should be delivered electronically instead of in person. Electronic messages are frequently inadequate in conveying mood and context. Carefully consider how the recipient might interpret a message before composing or sending it. Even though the agency employs anti-virus software, virus infected messages can could enter the agency’s messaging systems. Viruses, “worms” and other malicious code can spread quickly if appropriate precautions are not taken: o Be suspicious of messages sent by people not known by you. o Do not open attachments unless they were anticipated by you. o Disable features in electronic messaging programs that automatically preview messages before opening them. Do not forward chain letters. Simply delete them. [Agency Name] considers unsolicited commercial e-mail (spam) a nuisance and potential security threat. Do not attempt to remove yourself from future delivery of a message that you determine is spam. These “Remove Me” links often are used by unscrupulous mass junk emailers as a means to verify that you exist. Attempting to remove yourself will only ensure that you will receive ever increasing amounts of spam. Internet message boards are a fertile source from which mass junk e-mailers harvest e-mail addresses and e-mail domains. Do not use agency-provided e-mail addresses when posting to message boards. Page 48 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 48 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government The undersigned acknowledges that he/she has received, read and understands the policies, practices, procedures, risks and cautionary advice that apply to [Agency Name] ’s electronic messaging resources. Employee Signature Date Page 49 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 49 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government APPENDIX B GLOSSARY Access – The right of any citizen to use public records as defined by ORS 192. See Also Public Records law Address Book – A list of e-mail addresses compiled by a user, sometimes with help from an e-mail system itself. Administrative Value – The usefulness of a record to an organization in the conduct of its daily business. Archives (noun) – (1) A place in which records selected for permanent preservation are kept, such as the Oregon State Archives. (2) A group of documents created or received and set aside by an agency or person during the course of their official business. Archive (verb) – The practice of removing outdated information from and active environment to a remote storage environment. Archive, as a verb is essentially the action of managing electronic information. Attachment – Any computer file (word processing, database, image, etc.) intentionally associated with, and received as part of an e-mail message. Backup – A copy of electronic records and data that are retained to protect an organization against loss of the information. Backups can be stored on disks, tapes, or other machine-readable media. There are essentially two types of backups–security (See Backup, Security) and retention (See Backup, Retention). Backup, Retention – A copy of electronic records and data that are retained to satisfy the retention requirements of the agency’s records. Retention backups are kept for the entire length of the longest retention period specified for the information backed up. Backup, Security – A copy of electronic records and data that are retained to protect an organization against loss of the information. Security backups are done on a regularly scheduled basis, can be partial or full backups and the tapes are re-used at the end of the scheduled backup cycle. Chat Room – An online network discussion platform to encourage and manage online text discussions over a period of time among members of special interest groups or project teams. Classification – The systematic identification and arrangement of records into categories according to logically structured conventions, methods, and procedural rules, represented in a scheme or plan. Collaborative – Two or more people working together in real-time over a network or phone line using applications to share documents or videoconference. Convenience Copy – An unofficial copy of a record maintained for ease of access and reference. Correspondence – Records that: 1. document communications created or received by an agency AND 2. directly relate to an agency program or agency administration AND 3. are not otherwise Page 50 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 50 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government specified in the City General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-200), County and Special District General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-150) or in any agency special schedule or in ORS 192.170. Records may include but are not limited to letters, memoranda, notes and electronic messages that communicate formal approvals, directions for action, and information about contracts, purchases, grants, personnel and particular projects or programs. Disposition: File with the associated program or administrative records. Retentions for records can be found in the City General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-200) or the County and Special District General Records Retention Schedule (OAR 166-150). Communications not meeting the above criteria do not need to be filed and may be retained as needed. Data Management – A major function of operating systems that involves organizing, cataloging, locating, storing, retrieving, and maintaining data. Debug – To delete, locate and remove errors from a program or malfunctions from a computer. Delete – To remove but not necessarily destroy all or part of a computer file. Destruction – The process of eliminating or deleting data, documents, and records so that the recorded information no longer exists. Digital Signature – A type of electronic signature that transforms a message using an asymmetric cryptosystem such that a person having the initial message and the signer’s public key can accurately determine: (a) whether the transformation was created using the private key that corresponds to the signer’s public key and (b) whether the initial message has been altered since the transformation was made. See Also Electronic signature. (ORS 192.835(4)) Discovery – Compulsory disclosure of documents in the possession of the other party once a legal action has been initiated. Disposition – An action that occurs once a record’s retention period has expired. Possible actions include transfer to permanent storage at the State Archives or deletion (destruction). Disposition Date – The date on which the records retention period for a given records series expires and the records shall be disposed of by transferring to the State Archives for permanent storage or by deleting the records from the system. Download - The process of pulling information from one computer onto another. Electronic Mail (e-mail) – The physical computer system used to create, send, receive, and file messages electronically. The term may also refer to the messages transmitted through such a system. Electronic Mail (e-mail) Account – An individual e-mail user’s mailbox and associated rights to use that mailbox. Electronic Mail (e-mail) Address – The character string used to allow computer systems to route an e-mail to the intended recipient, usually consisting of a user name, the @ symbol, and a domain name (i.e. john.h.doe@state.or.us). Electronic Mail (e-mail) Administrator – The person responsible for maintaining an e-mail system, including all mailboxes on that system. Electronic Mail Message – See E-mail Messages Page 51 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 51 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Electronic Record – A record created, generated, sent, communicated, received, or stored by electronic means. (ORS 84.004(7)) Electronic signature – An electronic sound, symbol or process attached or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record. See Also Digital signature. (ORS 84.004(8)) Electronic Storage – See online, near-line, and off-line storage. E-mail Messages – Electronic documents created, received, or sent by a computer system. Applicable to the contents of the communication, the transactional information and any attachments associated to such communication. E-mail Servers – Change to Server and Mail Server – a computer or software program that supplies data and responds to requests from workstations over a network. E-mail Systems – The electronic mail system provides the means for creating messages, transmitting them through a network, and displaying the messages on the recipient’s workstation, personal computer (PC) or terminal. Encryption – A security method that encodes information into plainly unintelligible text making it impossible for anyone without a ‘key’ to decode the information. See also Public Key and Public Key Infrastructure End User – Anyone who uses an information system or the information it produces. Exempt – Certain public records that are in whole or in part restricted from public access. Exempt records and conditionally exempt records are listed in ORS 192. File – (noun) A collection of related records that are treated as a unit, sometimes used synonymously with “record series” and sometimes referring to the contents of one case or file folder. File – (verb) To arrange documents into a logical sequence. Filing System – A pre-defined plan using numbers, letters or keywords to identify and organize records in a systematic scheme. Filter – To select certain items from an electronic folder or database by determining how they fit specific criteria. Firewall – Hardware and software that control the flow of traffic in a computer network. They stop intruders and viruses, while allowing authorized users and applications to send data freely. Fiscal Value – The usefulness of a record in documenting an organization’s financial decisions and activities. Flame – An angry or rude e-mail message. Folder – An electronic receptacle used to store electronic files. Forward – To send a received e-mail message onto someone else. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) – A federal act that entitles citizens of the United States access to federal agency records and to information about themselves contained in federal Page 52 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 52 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government government files. FOIA is not applicable to state and local government records. See Public Records law Group List – A list of names and e-mail addresses organized into a group that enables the sender to enter only the group list name when sending a e-mail to the group of list members. Hard Copy – A printed or paper copy of an electronic document. Historical Value – The usefulness of a document in facilitating historical research. Hypermedia –Documents containing multiple forms of media including text, graphics, voice and sound that can be interactively searched. Inbox – The part of an e-mail system where a user’s incoming messages are received. Index – The process by which specific subject terms are associated or attached to records and information to facilitate its retrieval using search functions. May also refer to a list of subject terms for a particular body of records or information. Instant Messaging (IM) – Is the ability to chat remotely with an ongoing exchange of short sentences. In addition to “chatting,” IM allows for the direct transfer of data files; direct sending and receiving of messages to and from cell phones, pagers, telephones and fax machines; voice-over-IP (using your computer like a telephone); sending and receiving e-mail messages; web-conferencing, application sharing, and remote control of another computer; subscriptions to content channels (i.e. news, sports, weather, stocks, etc.); and monitoring when other parties are signed in to the IM system. Intelligent Agent – A special purpose knowledge based system that serves as a software surrogate to accomplish specific tasks for end users. Interface – A shared boundary between two systems. Internet – The vast network of computer systems that enables worldwide connectivity among users and computers. See also Worldwide Web Intranet – A closed network that uses technology to restrict web-based information to a group of authorized users. Legal Value – The usefulness of a record to support an organization’s business agreements and ownership rights, and to document the rights of citizens. Listserv – A discussion group that uses e-mail to allow subscribers with common interests to communicate about topics that interest them. Listservs usually require that its members subscribe to the service and abide by a set of rules in order to participate. Log-in – To begin a user session on a computer by authenticating one’s identity usually by using a username and it’s associated password. Local Area Network (LAN) – A network within a limited geographic area (usually under one mile) that allows personal computers to communicate directly with one another and share data. Page 53 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 53 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Magnetic Storage – A type of digital storage that includes magnetic disks and tapes that stores the programs and files used daily. Magnetic storage provides random (disk) or sequential (tape) access and are a common choice for long-term, high capacity storage. Mailbox – An area in an e-mail system where a single user stores messages received, sent, and trashed and composes outgoing messages. User may be able to transfer messages between the mailbox and additional message storage areas. Mailing List – An automated list of e-mail addresses used to distribute e-mail messages to a number of people at the same time. See also Group List. Mail Server – A computer that provides e-mail services to other computers in the network. Mass Storage – Applications, such as imaging and processing-intensive operating systems, that allow large amounts of information to be stored offline. Media – All tangible objects on which data are recorded. Message Retention – Method of storing and retaining incoming and outgoing e-mail messages. Message Store Management – Method of temporarily storing messages for later transmission to one or more recipients. Metadata – Data that describes data including subject, date, and recipients of an e-mail. Migration – The periodic transfer of data from one electronic system to another that retains the integrity of the data and allows used to continue to use the data despite technological advances in the hardware and software used to access the data. Mission-critical Information – Information critical to the survival of an organization, such as charters, council records, etc. Near-line Storage – The storage of e-mail messages, metadata, and attachments in an electronic record keeping system. This type of storage requires that the messages, metadata, and attachments be removed from the online email system and stored in an electronic format. Near-line storage allows the user to maintain a moderate amount of functionality, in that email messages stored near-line can be retrieved and referenced electronically. Needs Assessment – A report that systematically examines a records management problem, evaluates solutions, and recommends a solution. Netiquette – Network etiquette. The acceptable practices for online communications. Network – A system of computers and related devices interconnected so that they can communicate together. Off-line Storage – The storage of e-mail messages, metadata, and attachments of an electronic record keeping environment. The clearest example of this type of storage is to simply print out an email message to paper. Off-line storage reduces the functionality of the message in that it is no longer available electronically. On-line Storage – The storage of e-mail messages, metadata, and attachments in the e-mail system that is being used at an agency. Page 54 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 54 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Password – A character string usually selected by the user that is known to the computer system and used in conjunction with an associated user name to identify the user and allow access to the system. Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) – Hand-held microcomputer devices that enable you to manage information such as appointments, to-do lists, contacts, send and receive e-mail, access the Worldwide Web, and exchange such information with your personal computer or network server. Policy – A broad document that specifies a general rule for records and information management in an organization. A plan or course of action, as of a government, political party, or business, designed to influence and determine decisions and actions; a course of action, guiding principle, or procedure considered to be expedient, prudent, or advantageous. Procedure – A detailed document that specifies step-by-step rules for records and information management in an organization. Proprietary Software—Privately owned and controlled software. In the computer industry, proprietary is the opposite of open. It also implies that the company has not divulged specifications that would allow other companies to duplicate or customize the product. Protocol – The definition of specific rules two or more computers will follow when communicating. Public Record – Includes, but is not limited to, a document, book, paper, photograph, file, sound recording, or machine-readable electronic record, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made, received, filed, or recorded in pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of public business, whether or not confidential or restricted in use. Public record does not include: (a) records of the Legislative Assembly, its committees, officers, and employees; (b) library and museum materials made or acquired and preserved solely for reference or exhibition purposes; (c) records of information concerning the location of archaeological sites or objects…; (d) extra copies of a document, preserved only for convenience of reference; (e) a stock of publications; (f) messages on voice mail or on other telephone message storage and retrieval systems. (ORS 192.005(5)) Public Records law – Located within ORS 192, the law grants the public the right to inspect public records with the exception of certain records listed in the act. The law states “every person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.501 to 192.505.” (ORS 192.420) Queue – A structure that organizes e-mail messages in a predetermined order such as when they are received or who sent them. Realtime – Pertaining to the performance of data processing during the actual time a business or physical process transpired in order that results of the data processing can be used to support the completion process. Recipient – A person who receives an e-mail message. Record – See Public Record Record Series – Records arranged according to a filing system or kept together because they related to a particular subject or function or result from the same activity. Page 55 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 55 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Records Management – The planning, controlling, directing, organizing, training, promoting and other managerial activities relating to the creation, maintenance, use, access and disposition of records. Records Officer – An individual, designated by the agency to work directly with the State Archives on records related issues and to coordinate and implement sound records management principles and practice within their agency. Records Retention Period – The length of time that messages and attachments must be kept before they are destroyed or otherwise disposed of. Records Retention Schedule – A document that lists records and how long they should be kept. Recovery – How a computer system resumes operation after experiencing a problem with the hardware or software used to operate the system. Remote Access – Pertaining to communication with the data processing facility by one or more stations that are distant from that facility. Reply – To respond to an e-mail message. Retention – The length of time that messages and attachments must be kept before they are destroyed or otherwise disposed. See also Records Retention Period. Routing – The path used to transmit an e-mail message over a network. Security – The protection of records an information by controlling which users can access which documents and for what purpose. Sender – A person who transmits an e-mail message. Server – See Mail Server Signature Line – A set of usually four to eight lines of text placed automatically by an e-mail system at the end of an outgoing e-mail message to provide the reader with the sender’s contact information. Software – Programs that run operations on a computer Spam – An unsolicited e-mail message. Storing – Process in which information is recorded and retained for later retrieval. See Also Offline, Nearline, and Online Storage. Systems Administrator – The person responsible for maintaining a computer system such as a local area network (LAN) or an e-mail system. Technological Obsolescence – The tendency for any component of computer technology (hardware, software, and data formats) to become unusable as time goes on because all of the necessary components that allows the system to work together are no longer available in the new computing environments. Text File – A computer file that contains nothing but ASCII text and formatting and therefore can be read by many different types of computer programs. Page 56 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 56 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Transport Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) – The basic communications system that allows communication between computers via the Internet. Trojan Horse – An apparently harmless set of computer code that sneaks a virus onto a computer system. Uniform Resource Locator (URL) – The location or address of a resource on the Internet (i.e. http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us) Username – The name used to identify a user of a computer system, usually some abbreviation of the person’s name and used in conjunction with a password to verify the user’s identity. Virus – A program or piece of code loaded onto a computer without the user’s knowledge that runs against the user’s wishes. Many viruses quickly use all available memory and bring the system to a halt. An even more dangerous type of virus is one capable of transmitting itself across networks and bypassing security systems. Many antivirus programs are available. Also see “worm.” Vital/Essential Record – A record that is essential to the organization’s operation or to the reestablish business operations after a disaster. See also Mission Critical Information. World Wide Web (WWW) – The portion of the Internet that supports the presentations of information formatted in HTML, including hyperlinks so users can move quickly to other resources. Worm – A type of computer virus that spreads itself usually by creating copies of itself in each computer’s memory. Page 57 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 57 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Appendix C E-mail Policy Training Example from the City of Tigard Page 58 of 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 58 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government its ad Any individual using the e-mail system is subject to monitoring and all individuals using the system without authority or in excess of their authority are subject to having all their activities on this system monitored. recorded and examined by an authorized person. including law enforcement. as system personnel deem appropriate. The 1936 Electronic Communications Privacy Act allows employers to monitor employees? electronic information at their discretion. Users understand that the City may use automated software to monitor material created. stored. sent. or received on its computer network. Personal Use The personal use of City computers. with the exception ofe?maii and the internet. is permitted: - during an employee?s lunch period. - one hour before or after their normal work schedule begins or ends. and - the time between the end of the employees "work shift" and the beginning of an evening meeting that the City requires the employee to attend. Page59?f66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 59 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Personal use of the e?mail system and the Internet is not allowed at anytime. - Personal e-mail E?Mail The City?s e-mail system may not be used: TO BCCESS an employee?s personal internet e-mail account. The City of [city name] has Internet access computer stations available for use. Sign up to use a station during breaks, lunch, or after work hours. E-Mail (Cent) The City?s e-mail system may not be used: - To fonnyard another's email without the originator?s permission. Gain the permission of the originator before sending your e-mail on. Page 60 0f 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 60 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government E-Mail (Cont) The City?s e-mail system may not be used: 6 To send e-mail anonymously or under someone else?s name. Occasionally. an employee may need to use another employee?s e-mail {the I switchboard is a good I, example). Simply identify yourself at the beginning of the message. E?Mail (Cont) The City?s e-rnail system may not be used: 0 To support charitable, religious, or political activities or causes. Some examples are: United Way. Special Olympics. 7 Relay for Life. and Walk for Diabetes. E-Mail (Cont) The City?s e-mail system may not be used: To support other activities that are not related to the direct conduct of City business. Page 61 0f 66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 61 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government The Ctty that the UNION may utilize the Inter-o?lce e-mall system as another term of communication between employees. [Article 6, Section 3 oi the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Tigard and the SEIU Local 503FOPEU Local 1 99} The Union agrees that the e-mail system will not he used to discuss negotiations or to transmit confidential material such as grievance information. Employee Responsibility 1 If an employee receives an . inappropriate e-mail, respond to the sender with the warning message found in and notify your supervisor. Employee Responsibility (Cont) if an employee receives a personal e-mail. he or she must immediately respond to the sender with a message notifying the sender the employee may not receive personal e-mail at the City. An example is available at: I:tcitywidetpersonale-mail doc Page620?? EXHIBIT 10 Page 62 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Laws and License Compliance Users are required to comply with all software licenses. copyright laws, Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission's guidelines. and City policies when sending or receiving e-mail or accessing or downloading information from the Internet. System Security All employees have a responsibility to take reasonable precautions to protect the City's computer system. If an employee becomes aware of a virus or the threat of a virus. the employee should immediately contact Network Services with the information. Network Services will evaluate the risk. Electronic Mail Can Be a Public Record! Under Oregon?s public records law, most e-mail messages are clearly public records. The definition of public records "includes. but is not limited to. a document. book. paper. photograph. file. sound recording. machine readable electronic record regardless of physical form or characteristics. made. received. filed or recorded in pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of public business. whether or not confidential or restricted in use." Page63?f66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 63 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government If you don?t want it printed on the front page of the [Local Paper] You don't want to put it in an e-mail. A person need not have a "legitimate" need for public records to be entitled to inspect them. The City's Public Access to City of [city name] Records policy is available online at: tin-new c1 Elgard or Piease check with your supervisor. or Records. if you have a question on whether an electronic maii message shauid he released. City employees bearany responsibility that might arise from use of the computer system for personal or improper reasons. Page64?f66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 64 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government Retention and Disposition The retention of records stored in electronic records systems. including e-mail, is governed by the City's retention schedule. If you have a question on the retention of a message. please contact the Records Section. DOUBT, PRINT l'T An e-mail mailbox should not be used for storage. E- mails are deleted from your mailbox after six months by Network Services. If an e- mail has value it should be printed and put into the appropriate file. It is the responsibility of the holder of the official record to make sure the file is Lupdated. Archiving E-Mail E-mail can be sated for longer than six months if it is selected for arehh-ing. For instructions on archiving your e-mail go to the "Records" folder in the I Drix'e. Select the "Email" folder. select the ?Archived Email" folder. and open "Archive Instructions". Ll Page650?? EXHIBIT 10 Page 65 of 66 E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government E-mail related to a current project or issue may be retained on the system as a reference tool. Once the project is completed or the issue resolved the employee should verify all relevant e-mail is on the file and then deleted the e-mail from their e-mail box. Again, if your e-mail falls within the definition of a public record, you may not delete it except as provided in the City's retention schedule. This concludes the City?s Computer Use, E-mail, and Internet Policy Training Please sign the form at the back of your handout. This form is an acknowiedgment that you understand the City of [city name] policy. If you have other retention related questions. you may contact the Records Section at extension 359. Page66?f66 EXHIBIT 10 Page 66 of 66 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 I hereby certify that I served the foregoing DECLARATION OF BRAD S. 2 DANIELS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY 3 RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE on the following named 4 person(s) on the date indicated below by: 5  mailing with postage prepaid 6  hand delivery 7  facsimile transmission STOEL RIVES LLP 760 SW Ninth Avenue, Suite 3000, Portland, OR 97205 Main (503) 224-3380 Fax (503) 220-2480 8  overnight delivery 9  email 10  notice of electronic filing via the Odyssey File and 11 Serve system 12 to said person(s) a true copy thereof, contained in a sealed envelope, if by mail, addressed to 13 said person(s) at his or her last-known address(es) indicated below. 14 Benjamin Boyd Hostetter Law Group, LLP 203 E. Main Street, Suite 2 Enterprise, OR 97201 15 16 17 18 19 DATED: July 22, 2016. STOEL RIVES LLP 20 /s/ Brad S. Daniels BRAD S, DANIELS, OSB NO. 025178 brad.daniels@stoel.com Telephone: (503)-224-3380 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 87231772.1 0057220-00160