The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06.a. Format Change for Board Minutes and Videotaping of MeetingsSIm Central Contra _Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: May 21, 2015 Subject: CONSIDERATION OF FORMAT CHANGE FOR BOARD MINUTES AND VIDEOTAPING OF BOARD MEETINGS Submitted By. Elaine R. Boehme Secretary of the District Initiating Dept. /Div.: Secretary of the District REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: Roger S. Bailey General Mandger ISSUE: The Secretary of the District has been directed to look at options for expediting the production of Board meeting minutes so they can be scheduled for Board approval on the next Board agenda, and to review whether continued production of Board action summaries is worthwhile. RECOMMENDATION: Consider information and provide direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: If videotaping of Board meetings is desired, a single camera and encoder would cost approximately $3600. Installation of equipment and wiring would cost approximately $3,120, totaling $6,720 in one -time costs. The current monthly cost for an outside service to upload and tag the Board meetings is $150 per meeting, which would amount to $3,600 per year for two Board meetings per month. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Direct staff to make no changes to the current minute and action summary process. 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. There are several different styles of minutes commonly used in the public sector in California: 1) verbatim; 2) detailed summary; and 3) action. Currently, detailed summary minutes are drafted, reviewed and scheduled for approval on the Board agenda two meetings later (usually two meetings /one month later). The average number of pages is 8 pages per Board meeting of single- spaced print. 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 N:\ADMINSUP\ADMIN \DIST- SEC \MINUTES\Action v Summary Minutes (incl. videotaping) \PP - Videotaping of Board Meetings (05- 21-15) DRAFT.docx Page 1 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: May 21, 2015 subject. CONSIDERATION OF FORMAT CHANGE FOR BOARD MINUTES AND VIDEOTAPING OF BOARD MEETINGS Board agenda and show the action taken and votes of the Board. They are posted to the District's website and used by staff for follow -up action. Attached is a comparison chart of summary minutes versus action minutes. DISCUSSION: In order for the Board minutes to be drafted, reviewed by staff and scheduled for approval on the very next Board agenda, they would need to be drafted, reviewed and finalized within the week immediately following the Board meeting. That week often has four Committee meetings scheduled, with corresponding Committee action summaries which need to be drafted and reviewed for inclusion in the next draft Board agenda packet going out that same week. 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 action minutes would include a brief description of the item, key discussion points and Board action. Preparation of action summaries could be eliminated. As there would be limited information contained in the action minutes, it is advisable that a recording of the meeting be made available to complement the action minutes. This could be posted to the District website and tagged to correspond to the relevant agenda item. 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. 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 that is linked to the agenda and tabbed so the viewer can easily select which portion of the meeting they wish to view. The link also pulls up the related staff report. 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. It is recommended that, if movement to action minutes and videotaping of Board meetings is desired, the single- camera setup be selected as this has a lower cost and does not require a videographer to operate multiple cameras. N:\ADMINSUP\ADMIN \DIST- SEC \MINUTES\Action v Summary Minutes (incl. videotaping) \PP - Videotaping of Board Meetings (05- 21-15) DRAFT.docx Page 2 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: May 21, 2015 subject: CONSIDERATION OF FORMAT CHANGE FOR BOARD MINUTES AND VIDEOTAPING OF BOARD MEETINGS Attached is a survey on the types of minutes prepared by various cities and special districts in California. Staff will be available to show a sample meeting video during the Board meeting. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Administration Committee reviewed the information and recommended moving to action minutes and videotaping the Board meetings. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Provide direction to staff on one of the following options: 1. Direct staff to move to the preparation of action minutes and implement single- camera video recording and tagging /uploading to the District's website. This would allow the minutes to be on the next Board agenda for approval and would eliminate the need for action summaries 2. Change nothing, leave the current process as is. 3. Provide some other direction to staff. Attached Supportinq Documents: 1. Comparison of Summary vs Action Minutes 2. Survey data N:\ADMINSUP\ADMIN \DIST- SEC \MINUTES\Action v Summary Minutes (incl. videotaping) \PP - Videotaping of Board Meetings (05- 21-15) DRAFT.docx Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT 1 COMPARISON OF SUMMARY MINUTES VS ACTION MINUTES N.IADMINSUPIADM INIDIST- SECIMINUTESIAction v Summary Minutes (incl. videotaping)IComparison- Summary v Action Minutes.docx 5/8/15 DETAILED SUMMARY ACT10N tIINUTESiVI ?EEC MITES., DETAILED SUMMARY ACTION Type of Minutes Includes summary of Action minutes would be discussion. supplemented with indexed (tagged) video or audio tape available on website within 24 -48 hours - retained permanently. Availability of SKIPS ONE MEETING NEXT MEETING Minutes for Approval The lengthy drafting and Less preparation would enable approval process makes it staff to have action minutes impossible to have ready at available for approval at next next Board meeting; must skip meeting. one meeting cycle. Responding to The minutes are not available Because the recording is indexed Public Records Act to the public until the draft is (tagged) by Item number, requests published as part of the recordings of any particular agenda packet one month agenda item would be available after the meeting. on the website within 24 -48 hours Staff is able to create a CD of the meeting, with the pertinent portion of the audio recording upon request but listener may not know who is speaking. Who Said What? Summary minutes include Minutes would capture limited comments by Board Members, comments /vote. Viewer would staff and the public. need to watch video clip or listen to audio. May be difficult to tell who is speaking on audio recording. Expense None other than extensive Cost would depend on number staff time to prepare minutes. and quality of video camera(s) and equipment, and service to tag and upload recording. Possible need for a videographer in multi- camera setup. 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 need subject matter, name, etc. to review taped segments to obtain pertinent data. Access for Staff Staff needs to attend the Staff could review the relevant meeting to hear Board portion of the video tape the next N.IADMINSUPIADM INIDIST- SECIMINUTESIAction v Summary Minutes (incl. videotaping)IComparison- Summary v Action Minutes.docx 5/8/15 discussion. day. Transparency Content is subjective. Minutes Minutes would be available more not available for one month. quickly. Viewer would see actual speakers on video. Action Summaries Action summaries are also No action summaries needed. prepared and distributed N:\ 4DMINSUPI4DMINI DIST- SECIMINUTES1Action v Summary Minutes (ind videotaping)IComparison- Summary vAction Minutes. docx 5/8/15 Survey of Special Districts re Videotaping of Board Meetings March 2015 Survey: Are your Board meetings videotaped? Castro Valley Sanitary District No Contra Costa Water District No Delta Diablo No Dublin San Ramon Services District Yes East Bay Municipal Utility District I No Single camera video uploaded to YouTube Planning to put audio files on EBMUD web page Fairfield- Suisun Sewer District No Inland Empire Utilities Agency No Ironhouse Sanitary District No Mt. View Sanitary District No Napa Sanitation District No Oro Loma Sanitary District No Union Sanitary District No Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District No West County Wastewater District No N. IADMI NSUPIADMINIDIST- SECIMINUTESIAction v Summary Minutes (inct videotaping)1Survey -Do you Videotape your Bd Mtgs.docx 5/6/15 Survey Data City Action Only Brief Summary Detailed Summary Agoura Hills X Atwater X Azusa X Berkeley ,._ _ X Brea X Burbank X Caiipatria X Calistoga X Chowchilla X Coachella X Dublin X Emeryville X Fullerton X _ ..... Galt X Gilroy � X _ _ _..._� _ . _ _ Glendale X Glendora X Laguna Hills X Lemoore X Modesto X..__ Oakldale X Oroville ` X Oxnard__..... X, Pittsburg _ x Red Bluff X Riverside X Sacramento X San Jacinto X San Juan Capistrano San Ramon X Sausalito X Twenty-nine Palms„ X Ukiah _ i X Union City X }} Vallejo X Crescent City X Daly City _� _ _.__.. _ .__.. __:.. .. .: __. _ X _.. , _ �Fillmore ,._ ,. _ ........E X ......._, . _ __.. Ft Bragg _. . _ . X Irwindale X - La Canada Flintridge _. X Lake Forest ( X Larkspur .,_ . �_.. _ �� _ . _ _,. _X i Survey Data Lemon Grove ITOTAL jAction Only X IDetailed Summary Livermore 1 29 1 8 X Loma Linda X Martinez X Millbrae X . Milpitas._ X Pico Rivera X {{ X Rancho Cucamonga. � X Ridgecrest X San Bruno B _.. n Br San biego Regional Airport Authority ,�,. �,..�.w�.—��.�.._..:�_�. .. X San L uis Obisp �o x Sanger - Santa Fe Spnngs X Tulare X r.. Waterford .. , . _ ..... X Weed X Westlake Village w _..,.._ �....w_�._ X N Westminster _ ,.. ... ... �...� .,. ._ ... X _� . ........... _.., ............. _ Yountville �...w ..�. ��_ X ... �...�_�._�...�.�._.�.....,�__�. Carinter i p_ a _..._� Portola Valley X Pleasanton X Redwood City_ X Rolling Hills . .....__ X South San Francisco ....... ... .. X Susanville - _ _ �_ �.. .� .. _ _... X Woodside ITOTAL jAction Only 113rief summary IDetailed Summary 36 1 29 1 8