The local municipal council and its employee, the township clerk were taped at meetings with a resident of the town who was being sued by the town. At that meeting, statements were made by the officialswhich were admission of facts and / or denials. When the Housing Tribunal finally heard the case and the tape subsequently was played , it ruled against the town. Since that time any meetings in council have had recording devices posted and banned. Now , a new council is sitting, 3 old councilors and 2 new. The oldest serving councillor is the only one that voted to keep the total ban. To appease him they voted to allow recording devices only when council is notified at the start of the meeting. As regards to councils recording of the minutes of the meetings, it is minimal, contains no councillors' discussions and objections; only final disposition. So much for the highly touted "transparentcy" "openness" and "accountability".
Anyone else live in a community like this?
2007-02-19 05:44:31 · 2 answers · asked by reinformer 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
My local council does not allow recordings to be made. I suspect this is for the very good reason that councillors do not enjoy 'parliamentary' privilege, and would be held accountable for any injudicious comment they might make.
2007-02-19 05:51:37 · answer #1 · answered by langdonrjones 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...they are trying to avoid trouble, even if there isn't any by controlling all the minutes, etc...leaving everything out....and I'm sure for a public council shouldn't be happening. But people will try anything if they think they can get away with it.
It takes courage to stand up and speak out...find a way to do it ...the louder and more public, the better.... Maybe call O-Reilly on Fox Station....make it hot for them...and things will change.....it sounds Un-American to me.
2007-02-26 16:10:02 · answer #2 · answered by samantha 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋