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.