Note: This is a work of creative writing. Any similarities any of the characters or events of this story have with real life people is merely random and of no significance. There is nothing to see here. This is merely a story made up by Matt Ready with no agenda of any sort whatsoever.

M:  Hi Brad, thanks for taking the time to talk with us today on short notice. 

B:  No problem Mike.  Great to talk to you guys anytime.

M:  So, to get to the point.  Our newly elected commissioner has emailed myself and all the other commissioners saying he intends to record all future meetings and share the recording with the public.

B:  I see.

M:  So our question to you is:  Can he do this without consent of the board?  And if he can legally do this, do we have any recourse if the majority of the board feels this action is not in the best interests of the hospital district?

45 Minutes Later

M:  So after the meeting starts, if Maverick is recording the meeting, I’ll have the board chair turn over the discussion to me and I’ll explain that the municipal lawyer advises against an elected official recording one of the meetings independently and that it should really be left up to the full board to decide.

B:  Hmm…  Well, I suppose you could try that.

M:  You don’t think that is the best course of action?

B:  Well, I think the cleanest choices you have are to either adjourn the meeting so you can negotiate over this issue outside of a public meeting or do nothing and allow the official to record the meeting without much comment.  I believe you could say, “the municipal lawyer advises against this and says you are putting the municipal corporation in potential legal and financial jeopardy by opening this can of worms.”  But I would stop at that point and not attempt to pressure or coerce compliance from the official.  That might appear as of questionable ethical viability.  If he doesn’t turn it off, and the board feels they are in jeopardy, then adjourn the meeting and talk about it offline.  I’m sure you can find a resolution.

M:  I see your point Bigley, but I’m pretty sure this can be quickly resolved with me just saying we have a legal opinion that strongly discourages him recording the meeting.

B:  Well, I’m not going to give you a legal opinion that says anything more than, “If an official records a meeting, I strongly encourage the municipal corporation to also record the meeting.”

M:  Yes, but I’m not going to show an actual written legal opinion.  I’m just going to say we spoke with a lawyer and then I’m going to confidently wave my hands at compliance with my wishes as the best course of action.  Everyone should fall in line after that.

B:  What if that doesn’t work?

M:  I don’t understand what you mean.  Why wouldn’t me mentioning a lawyer and telling everyone what to do in a convoluted and plausibly accurate way work?

B:  Well, what if this official refuses to back down, records the full meeting, records all your clever arguments citing a legal opinion that doesn’t exist, and then people listen to the recording and start fact checking it?

M:  I think youre really starting to speculate here.  This is a first time elected official in his second month of public office.  You think he is going to just refuse to abide and comply with the policies and procedures of the full board and ignore the advice of counsel for the municipal corporation?

B:  Again, you don’t actually have the advice of counsel backing up your position that the only solution is for the official to just obey your command to turn off his recorder.

M:  I know, I know, but I can just say I have the backing of counsel and the law.  He will take my word for it.

B:  Why do you think he will simply take your word for what his legal rights are regarding recording the meeting?

M:  Because this is not about his legal rights.  This is about the interests of the municipal corporation that he is sworn to abide and comply with.

B:  What do you mean he is sworn to abide and comply with the municipal corporation?  He is an elected official who swore an oath to uphold the constitution while serving as an elected official.  If the constitution grants him the right to record, then recording is serving his oath.

M:  It’s about the interests of the organization.  He cannot betray the interests of the organization in order to serve his own interests, even if they are masked behind some supposed right.

B:  Who gets to determine whether recording is in the interests of the organization?

M:  The majority of the board.

B:  Then what does the minority of the board do?  Just sit there and look pretty?

M:  The minority can voice their opinion during discussion and try to persuade others to follow their lead.

B:  What if the minority believes the board is not accurately tracking what they do and say in their meetings and decide to record the meetings in order to have a rock solid accurate record?

M:  In that case, they can beg the majority to agree with them.

B:  And if the majority doesn’t want to be recorded, they can just keep on doing whatever they want without accountability?

M:  Look, we keep minutes of these meetings that record the important details.

B:  I see.  Well, I’m not sure you’ve thought this strategy through.  If this official doesn’t just back down to you and the majority of the board, then the recordings made of the confrontation over this issue could go down in history as one of the most accurately and thoroughly documented true stories of municipal corporate abuse of power in US history.

M:  This kid doesn’t have the stamina for that kind of fight.  He will buckle or face the consequences.