Stanislaus County Grand Jury • 2013-2014 • Agency Response

Dear Judge Begen:*

Published: September 18, 2014 8 pages
Ver PDF original

Findings and Recommendations 2 findings

F2 Page 6
There is no legal requirement regarding when and how City Council minutes must be published or approved. The City clerk is only required to "keep a correct record of its proceedings." Government Code Section 36914. Roberts Rules of Order is not binding upon the City but can be a good resource for determining traditional meeting procedure. With regards to approving minutes, Roberts Rules of Order simply states, that, if minutes are not normally approved at the next meeting, the secretary should note the date that the minutes were approved at the end of the minutes. Roberts Rules of Order Revised, 4th, Article X, Section 60. Robert's Rules of Order does not require or suggest that meeting minutes should be approved at the next meeting. The City is committed to creating an accurate and informative record of the City's business. As a result, City staff must dedicate considerable time to drafting, reviewing and revising minutes. As such, City Council minutes may not be finalized immediately following a meeting. Additionally, the City Council must thoroughly review minutes to ensure their accuracy. This review also requires dedication of time. To avoid inaccuracies in the minutes, the approval process is not as fast as would be ideal. However, limited City resources curtail the City's ability to dedicate as much resources to the creation of the minutes as the City would like. Still, the City is committed to approving minutes as swiftly as possible. The fact that City Administration has had limited resources to dedicate to publishing minutes does not mean the City is not publishing and approving minutes as quickly as it is capable. D. Implementation. The City will partially implement
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 6
As discussed above, the City has limited resources to dedicate to drafting accurate and informative minutes quickly. The City will continue to endeavor towards improving and streamlining this process. Additionally, the City will follow up to see if improvements to information access have been made as discussed in greater detail in
F3 Page 7
There is no requirement in the Brown Act, or in any other state law, that the City post video recording of its City Council meetings online. The Brown Act does state that any audio or video recording that the City makes of an open public meeting is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The California Public Records Act does not require a City to create a record that does not exist. The CPRA only requires the City to make records available to the public, it does not require that the records be available online. There are no state laws which state that a recording of a meeting must be posted within two (2) business days of a meeting. Further, the City has contracted with an independent third party, Greg Barbosa, to provide video recordings of the City Council meetings. Mr. Barbosa records each meeting, broadcasts it on a local cable channel, and posts the video online. In the experience of City staff, Mr. Barbosa generally posts such videos within one (1) day of the City Council meeting. However, because Mr. Barbosa is an independent contractor, the City has little oversight regarding when the videos are posted. D. Implementation. The City will not implement the
No recommendations for this finding

Additional Recommendations 1

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.