HomeMy WebLinkAbout03. Consideration of changes to action summaries/minutes3.
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
March 31, 2015
TO: ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE CHAIR WILLIAMS
AND MEMBER MCGILL
FROM: ELAINE R. BOEHME, SECRETARY OF THE DISTRIC
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO MINUTE FORMAT AND OTHER
CHANGES
Issue
The Secretary of the District has been directed to look at options for streamlining and
expediting the production of Board meeting minutes, including an evaluation of whether
the continued production of Board meeting Action Summaries has any merit.
Background
The District is legally required to keep a formal record of Board meetings by way of
written minutes that record decisions made and action taken by the Board of Directors.
As stipulated in the District's Records Retention Schedule, minutes are kept
permanently. Audio recordings are made of the Board meetings, and these are
destroyed within 30 days of approval of the minutes.
Currently, the Board minutes are drafted, reviewed and scheduled for approval on the
Board agenda two meetings later (approximately one month later). The average
number of pages is 8 pages per Board meeting of single spaced paper.
In addition, Board meeting Action Summaries are prepared immediately following the
Board meeting for distribution to the Board and staff. The Action Summaries are
created from the Board agenda and show the action taken and votes of the Board.
They are posted to the District's website for the public, and also used by staff for follow -
up.
In order for the Board minutes to be drafted and reviewed and scheduled for approval
on the very next Board agenda, they would need to be drafted and reviewed within the
week immediately following the Board meeting. That week often has four Committee
meetings scheduled, with corresponding Action Summaries which need to be drafted
and reviewed for inclusion in the next Board agenda packet going out that same week.
There are several different styles of minutes commonly used in the public sector in
California: 1) Verbatim; 2) Summary; and 3) Action.
Although the law does not require the inclusion of details other than a record of the
official actions taken by the Board, the District's historic practice has been to utilize a
Detailed Summary style. These include the commentary and discussion by members of
the public, staff and Board Members. The comments range from a few sentences to a
few paragraphs. Summary minutes provide more of a flavor of what happened at the
meeting, but have some inherent difficulties. It can be challenging to distill 30 minutes
of commentary, questions and discussion. Further, the time it takes to prepare
summary minutes can be much longer than the original meeting.
If it is desired to have the minutes for approval on the next Board agenda, it is
recommended that Action minutes be prepared, which would allow for a faster
turnaround time. They could be formatted from the Board agenda and be similar in
style to the current Action Summary but with more detail. The minutes would include a
brief description of the item. As there would be limited information contained in the
minutes, it is recommended that a video recording be made of the Board meeting that
could be posted to the District's website. Many cities and public agencies have moved
to Action minutes paired with video recordings of the meetings. There are inexpensive
services that will upload the video and tag the agenda items for easy reference.
Attached is a comparison chart of Summary Minutes versus Action Minutes.
Video Recording
Currently, Board meetings are audio recorded and tapes destroyed once the minutes
are approved. They are available to the public upon request. Since the listener may
not know who is speaking, they are not generally useful other than to staff. Agencies
that prepare Action Minutes usually combine them with a video recording which is linked
to the agenda and tabbed so the viewer can select which portion of the meeting they
wish to listen to.
The options for videotaping the meetings range from posting a single- camera video on
YouTube to a multiple- camera setup operated by a videographer. The YouTube option
does not allow for indexing or tagging of agenda items, while all other options do. One-
time equipment costs range from $200 to $5,000. Ongoing monthly costs range from
zero (YouTube) to $700 (for outside hosting /tagging services).
Attached is a recap of ballpark costs associated with videotaping and the results of a
survey on the types of minutes prepared by various cities and special districts in
California. Staff will demonstrate sample meeting videos during the meeting.
Attachments:
1. Comparison of Summary vs Action Minutes
2. Recording and posting Board meeting video
3. Survey data
ATTACHMENT 1
COMPARISON OF
SUMMARY MINUTES VS ACTION MINUTES
N.IADMINSUPIADMIIVDIST- SECIMINUTESIComparison- Summary vAction Minutes. docx
3/26/15
iETAL�1rrl CAI'
A
VAT P�
Type of Minutes
DETAILED SUMMARY
ACTION
Includes summary of
Action minutes would be
discussion.
supplemented with indexed
(tagged) videotape available on
website within 24 -48 hours -
retained permanently.
Availability of
SKIPS ONE MEETING
NEXT MEETING
Minutes for Approval
The drafting and approval
Less preparation would enable
process makes it impossible to
staff to have action minutes
have ready at next Board
available for approval at next
meeting; must skip one
meeting.
meeting cle.
Responding to
Staff is able to create a CD
Because the recording is indexed
Public Records Act
with the pertinent portion of
(tagged) by Item number, video
requests
the audio recording upon
recordings of any particular
request. The summary
agenda item would be available
minutes, however, are not
on the website within 24 -48 hours
available to the public until the
of the meeting.
draft is published as part of the
agenda packet.
Who Said What?
Summary minutes include
Viewer would need to watch video
comments by Board Members,
clip.
staff and the public.
Expense
None other than extensive
Cost would depend on number
staff time to prepare minutes.
and quality of cameras and
system used to videotape /index,
including possible use of
video ra her.
Minutes as a
Keyword searches are
No keyword search is available,
Historical Reference
available in Laserfiche to
other than what would be in the
search summary minutes by
brief action minutes. Would
subject matter, name, etc.
require listening to videotaped
segments to obtain pertinent data.
N.IADMINSUPIADMIIVDIST- SECIMINUTESIComparison- Summary vAction Minutes. docx
3/26/15
ATTACHMENT 2
Recording and Posting Board Meeting Video
Ballpark Costs and Sample Agency Sites
SCENARIO 1 — One -time purchase, no recurring cost — Posting on YouTube, (no ability to jump to
an agenda item on the video)
One -time: $200 to purchase a webcam and software purchase
Ongoing: $0 because there is no video tagging and indexing
Dublin San Ramon Services District purchased a webcam and video recording software,
installed the webcam and laptop at the back of their board room to record two meetings per
month. District staff manually starts the recording on the laptop and stops it after the meeting
ends. District staff uploads and publishes the video file to YouTube and copies a link to
YouTube video to the Meetings Calendar page on their website.
SCENARIO 2 — One -time purchase, low monthly cost — Video tagging, indexing and hosting
services (with ability to jump to an agenda item on the video)
One -time: $4,000 45,000 to purchase video cameras and /or encoder
Ongoing: $400 -$700 monthly cost for video tagging, indexing, and hosting (depending on
number of meetings per month)
City of Galt - received a grant from their local cable company to broadcast their meetings on
TV. The cable company provided the equipment and after each meeting they give a video file
on DVD to the city. City staff sends the video file and agenda to PBTech. PBTech tags and
publishes the video indexed to the agenda (2 meetings per month at $450 per month.) City
staff pastes a link to the video onto their Meeting Agendas & Minutes page. Clicking on the link
opens the meeting on the PBTech- hosted website.
City of Concord — broadcasts their meetings on TV. They purchased an encoder that allows
Swagit to get the video from the broadcast (3 meetings per month at $700 per month.) Swagit
tags and publishes the video indexed to the agenda. Swagit adds a link to the video onto
Concord's City Council Agendas page. Clicking on the link opens the meeting on the Swagit-
hosted website.
City of Brea broadcasts their meetings on TV. They, like Concord purchased equipment that
allows Swagit to get the video from the broadcast but only hold 2 meetings per month at $400
per month. Swagit tags and hosts the video indexed to the agenda. Clicking on the link opens
the meeting on the Swagit- hosted website.
N:\ADMINSUP \ADMIN \DIST- SEC\MINUTES\Board Meeting Video Scenarios Demo.docx
Survey Data ATTACHMENT
city
Action Only
Brief Summary Detailed Summary
Agoura Hills
X
Atwater
X
Azusa
X
Berkeley
X
Brea
X
Burbank
X
.�....a . �.
�__ __- _......
....,,,�_
X
_...�_..._
Calistoga
_.�W._.... ,_ ... m_
X
� � w �.
Chowchilla
X
Coachella
X
�
�.. .._�._...._...�.__�..�..__.._�_
Dublin
µ
X
Emeryville
X
Fullerton
Galt..
X
Gilroy
X
Glendale
X
Glendora
X
Laguna Hills
X
Lemoore
X
Modesto_ ...................
X.....__
_....... ..
Oakldale
_ _.... __ _ wr ...-
. _.._._._
X
_
___...... _ .... _ ._ ........
Oroville
X
Oxnard
X
Pittsburg
X
Red Bluff
X
...
Riverside
X
Sacramento
X
San Jacinto
_...
X
San Juan Capistrano
.�
..
X
San Ramon
X
.......... __ ------- . -_... .......... . __ �_
.._ ...n .. _. _...
..
Sausalito
...._ . ,._...�
_......�,. -
X
�,
-�_., ,.�, ..� �w .,
._, �,... ,. _ ._ .�...._.
Temple City
X
Twenty -nine Palms
X
Ukiah
X
n_
Union City
X`
_.
Vallejo
X
Crescent City.
X
Daly City
X
Fillmore
X.._
_,..,,.
Ft Bra
Irwindale
X
La Canada Flintridge
_u.
X
.. . -.. ._ �, ....
Lake Forest
, _..._d ..._.
Larkspur .....x
111 of 122
Page 1 of 6
Survey Data
Lemon Grove _ _ I X
Livermore
TOTAL
Action Only
X
Detailed Summary
Loma Linda
I
1 29 1
X
Martinez
X
Millbrae
X_
Milpitas
i
X
Pico Rivera
X
Portola
X
Rancho Cucamonga
X
Ridgecrest �_..
X
San Bruno
X
San Diego Regional Airport Authority
_
...._
X
San Luis Obispo
.___.... _ .....
_�._
X
Sanger
..__w_
X
Santa Fe Springs
Tulare _ _.. ..
mX _...._
X
_.
Waterford
_ __.__. ...... __,
. _ ..._
X
Weed
X
Westlake Village
_
X
Westminster
_
X
Yountville
X
Carpinteria
X
Portola Valley
.._.,_ ._ _.._
X'
Pleasanton
_.. _ ..... _.. �Xr._,.�.._
Redwood City._
X
Rolling Hills _,.._,_..._
X
South San Francisco
_ .w......__.,_ ,. _...,,:,..... .............
_
.......w _....__
_._........__ _._
X
Susanville
....... __.,
_.._w....
_,.,.. _. __..... _.....,,._,._
_..
X
1111 . . m_
Woodside X
112 of 122
Page 2 of 6
TOTAL
Action Only
I Brief Summary I
Detailed Summary
36
1 29 1
8
112 of 122
Page 2 of 6