The opinion of the Court is that 1) and 2) is to be interpreted as an *or* and they provided the legal precedent req'd to have any case based upon *and* dismissed.
Of greater concern, in the wider scope of all this, is that municipalities have no legal right to have private arrangements w/ anybody -- anything your officials base their actions upon is *my* information, and *your* information, and it is req'd that they provide any informations requested under the Freedom of Information Act, unless they can argue that it endangers national security ... clearly, exposing their communications doesn't place anything at risk, other than their intentions:
Request under FOIA, and then take action against any that fail to comply w/ the law.
Of greater concern, in the wider scope of all this, is that municipalities have no legal right to have private arrangements w/ anybody -- anything your officials base their actions upon is *my* information, and *your* information, and it is req'd that they provide any informations requested under the Freedom of Information Act, unless they can argue that it endangers national security ... clearly, exposing their communications doesn't place anything at risk, other than their intentions:
Request under FOIA, and then take action against any that fail to comply w/ the law.