Thank you for a thoughtful reply Brian.

-----Original Message-----
From:   Brian Masschaele [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Tuesday, May 07, 2002 9:05 AM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        Re: Audio-Visual Records of Public Bodies' Meetings

Doug, I agree that you should be very wary of those who selectively records
proceedings and use it as evidence. However, it may prove difficult to stop
people from exercising their right of personal freedom to record a "public"
meeting.  It likely could never be used as evidence anyway.  The definitive
record is the minutes as you well know.  To me, any excerpted recording
could be over-ridden by personal testimony of the councillor that the
excerpt was taken out of context.  In other words, even if the recording
were used against somebody, it likely would not stand up in court unless it
was followed up by personal testimony.

On the whole, therefore, I would say that there is probably little council
can do to stop this activity except to appeal to people's sense of decency
and request that any recording be cleared in advance.  To me, the right of
this fellow's wife to hear the people's business even thought she cannot
attend in person is one that must be respected and this fellow has come up
with a creative way to tell her what went on.  Just my two cents, Brian.

Brian Masschaele, Archivist
Elgin County Archives
450 Sunset Drive
St. Thomas ON  N5R 5V1  Canada
Phone:  519-631-1460 ext. 138  Fax:  519-631-9209
E-mail:  [log in to unmask]



>>> Doug Rozell <[log in to unmask]> 05/03/02 10:28AM >>>
        The Secretary of our Land Division Committee (LDC) has asked me to
comment
on the following scenario.

        At its last meeting, the Chair of the LDC discovered that an
applicant for
a severance had turned on a VCR recorder under his coat on the chair beside
him.  He was not taping the visual portion of the meeting, only the vocal
input.  He explained that his wife was unable to attend the meeting and
wanted to know what was said, so he wanted to tape the portion of the
meeting relevant to their application.

        One of the Committee members was understandably miffed that the
applicant
did not ask permission first, but the Chair let him continue recording the
portion of the meeting dealing with his application, and then he left.

        I wonder if any members' institutions have policies.  If there are,
would
you please let me know, off-list if you prefer.

        I think there are various considerations at play here.  Who makes
the
record determines who has custody and control of the record.  A local
council has its meetings taped by Rogers for local broadcast.  This differs
from a recording made by a private citizen.  The integrity of a Rogers
recording can be safely assumed, since it is made for a commercial purpose,
and Rogers has an interest in maintaining public confidence in the
integrity and accuracy of the record.  Similarly if the creator of the
record is the Council itself.  But a private citizen's recording is not in
the custody or control of the public institution so recorded, and the
person has no prima facie claim on our confidence in the continuing
integrity, accuracy and completeness of the record.  That brings up the
technological distinction of analogue versus digital sound or visual
recordings.  The latter can be amended with ease, the former only with
great difficulty.

        So what's a public body to do?

        Doug Rozell,
        Records Management Coordinator
        County of Oxford