Search the ArchivesNavigation Contact InformationThe Citizen Newspapers For Advertising Information Email us your news! For technical difficulties |
Let’s see a higher level of official accountability I make a it habit to sit on the front row at every public meeting I attend if a seat is available. The reason for this is simple, at least for me. It is vastly easier to see and hear, and subsequently report on, the proceedings of the meeting. For someone reporting the news, seeing can be optional; hearing is not. Over the years I’ve attended hundreds of meetings, in rooms large and small, where many in attendance could not hear, unless you were sitting in a board member’s lap. All this brings me to the Fayette County Commission, where I filled in for a coworker at the May 22 meeting. There has been a dramatic and very positive change in the commission chambers. Gone are the days of not being able to hear or see. The room is now outfitted with multiple large-screen monitors along both walls, above the commission table and one on the table-side of the podium. A new multi-position camera operated from the staff table provides a view on the monitors from all directions, including a front view of those at the podium. Other improvements come by way of the sound system. There are still other improvements for staff and the media, but the overriding benefit is to the public that attends the meetings. It’s your county, so you should be able to see and hear what is going on in meetings held by people you elected, so commissioners should be commended for the upgrades. Incidentally, the commission had budgeted $40,000 for the make-over and it came about $17,000 under budget. The city of Fayetteville upgraded its sound system a couple of years ago so that residents could hear better in a beautiful room that suffered from terrible acoustics. That, too, was a noteworthy move to benefit the public. Something happened at the commission meeting last week that directly relates to hearing and seeing the meeting, any meeting. Commissioner Peter Pfeifer made a motion (that was eventually defeated 1-4) that the recently instituted meeting minutes summary be replaced with something akin to the former version, with minutes more exhaustive in their detail, so that people could get a clearer understanding of what transpired at the meeting. Others on the board said the old way was not the best way, with the very best way requiring a court reporter to transcribe the proceedings. Some form of summary minutes would still be required they said, due to the time-frame involved in transcribing a court reporter’s work. And, of course, those of us in the peanut gallery were reminded that Fayette is 100 percent legal in the way it documents meetings. How many times have I heard that one? Legality is one thing, enhanced accountability and transparency is another. Well, I’m sitting there at the new media table, listening to the conversation and appreciating the upgrades that will benefit citizens. Then an old thought occurs to me: Televise the meetings! Why not use the Comcast local access capability to televise meetings of the county commission, school board and local municipalities? That way, people could see the meetings at home if they’d like, not to mention being able to tape the proceedings or possibly view re-plays of the meetings at other times during the month. This would provide much greater access to the meetings being conducted by those we’ve elected. I know this comes with a cost, something that would have to be addressed as funds permit. But at least it’s another piece of a the communications pie that all local governments should be willing to address. The bottom line is that the citizens of Georgia’s highest per capita income county, not to mention the citizens of every county, deserve to be able to witness their government in action. Yes, a potential downside of televising meetings is the grandstanding by some that might go before the camera. But that potential downside pales in comparison to the obvious advantages. The customarily brief summary called “meeting minutes” are one thing, and an important one. Transcripts are exceedingly better but are labor-intensive and expensive. Broadcasts add an additional feature not previously offered. Actually, an even better idea in addition to public access broadcasts, and one that many in elected office might not be willing to support, would be to have public meetings videoed and stored for viewing at any time on that government entity’s website. Bottom line, enhanced access to the meetings of local government can only provide a higher level of government accountability. login to post comments | Ben Nelms's blog
|
Copyright 2010 - Fayette Publishing, Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use Policy
Server 4
