To fully understand this, one must read the blog post "Sheddidng Light on Sunshine Review" from 9/14/12 http://www.shawneeray.blogspot.com/2012/09/shedding-light-on-sunshine-review.html#links
Basically we know that on 9/10/12 the city council was to vote on returning the method of recording meeting minutes back to full minutes. One of the arguments for this was that the "action minutes" which were being used were less than transparent. Fortunately the council voted to go back to the older detailed format.
Earlier that day the Sunshine Review gave the city an A+ rating for transparency. As mentioned in the blog post, the info from their web site indicates that their ratings are based on info on the city's web site. Such as, are there links on the city's site to various sites? If yes, they consider that tranparency. In the case of the meeting minutes, they don't rate the transparency of the minutes style, rather just that they are there.
Something was strange, since the last review by that organization was on Friday, 9/7/12.
So I contacted Sunshine Review and apparently the city had requested the review.
A KORA request indicates that starting Tue, 9/4/12 there was a group of emails back and forth between the city and Sunshine Review. Information was exchanged as to what it would take to raise the city's previous rating from a B. On 9/6/12 the rating was changed to an A- and the Sunshine Review was prepared to issue a press release to that effect. They were asked to hold off while the city made some more adjustments to its website, and finally the city came up with the A+ rating.
After having a B rating for quite some time, it's just wonderful that the city put on a massive drive to raise the rating of the web site. And yes, it's just coincidence that all of this occurred within 6 days (4 if you eliminate Sat & Sun) before the action on the meeting minutes change.
