From Deseret News archives:

Government meetings may be taped

Published: Sunday, Oct. 23, 2005 11:10 p.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Government meetings held without recording equipment might become a relic of yesteryear.

Public meetings government boards could soon be required to record all discussions and transcribe minutes. Recording meetings are now an option for government bodies, but written minutes are considered the official record.

The new requirement for recording meetings was approved by the Government Operations Interim Committee this past week. Rep. Glenn Donnelson, R-North Ogden, the bill's sponsor, said that his main intent was to ensure that people feel like they have somewhere to turn if they dispute the written minutes — the digested, official record of a meeting — and to ease concerns about possible behind-the-scene shenanigans.

"There's a public perception that because there is only written minutes, we as a body can go in the back room and change those minutes," he said. "We want to change that perception."

Story continues below
A similar bill was proposed last year by Sen. Scott Jenkins, R-Plain City, but failed in the Senate because of concerns that the requirement was too burdensome, especially for small cities or special districts. Donnelson said requiring recording will not overwhelm the staff or budgets of any government entity, noting that a recorder costs $12.50 and is easy to operate.

Lincoln Shurtz, legislative analyst for the Utah League of Cities of Towns, said that their primary concern was making sure that there was an official record, whether it be the written or recorded minutes, for

cities involved in lawsuits.

"We want to make sure the minutes are accurate," Shurtz said. "But we need to have some finality for what is the final record, which has always been the written record."

The committee actually approved four bills relating to open meetings and election laws last week, all of which will now be drafted, numbered and most likely considered early in next year's general session:

• Anybody who illegally closes a meeting to the public could face a class B misdemeanor.

• All government bodies wanting electronic meetings, such as a member attending over a phone or video connection, would have to pass ordinances outlining rules for such meetings.

• Agenda item descriptions would have to be specific enough so the public understands what will be discussed.

• Early voting may be allowed during the two weeks prior to Election Day, although it would impact registrations for write-in candidates and voters, who would have to file 30 days before Election Day.

• Anyone who provides incorrect identification at the polling place could face a class B misdemeanor.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

Editorial: 10 years of TRAX

Sorry earlier I meant to say that tracks seems to travel at 35 miles an hour...

'Peter Frumhoff, the director of science and policy at the Union of...

The Non-BCS crowd ought to create their own title game...their own brand, and...

Letters: Democrats' ethics

That's the whole of your defense of GOP resistance to badly-needed ethics...

Your criticism should hardly be focused on Bennett alone. What about all the...

'Wired's Threat Level blog reported on November 20 that Gavin Schmidt, a...

The reality of climate change is supported by multiple lines of evidence and...

BYU professor remembered

I had the priviledge of staying in the LeBaron home on severl occasions as I...

Letters: Growing jobless rate

So the unemployment rate has dropped to "just" 10%, huh? I wonder what that...

Ahh for the love of money...what money can buy!!!

Advertisements