Comments on: ACLU weighs public’s, press’ right to record government meetings http://minnesotaindependent.com/28924/aclu-house-online-media-rules News. Politics. Media. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:43:11 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Chris Steller http://minnesotaindependent.com/28924/aclu-house-online-media-rules/comment-page-1#comment-26782 Chris Steller Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:37:51 +0000 http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=28924#comment-26782 Valuable comments, jonerik and Marty. My post should have included the question of whether the open meeting law applies to the Legislature. ACLU-MN Director Chuck Samuelson told me it did not, but ACLU attorney Teresa Nelson said that wasn't quite so. Your comments suggest why I heard both things. Valuable comments, jonerik and Marty. My post should have included the question of whether the open meeting law applies to the Legislature. ACLU-MN Director Chuck Samuelson told me it did not, but ACLU attorney Teresa Nelson said that wasn’t quite so. Your comments suggest why I heard both things.

]]> By: Marty Owings http://minnesotaindependent.com/28924/aclu-house-online-media-rules/comment-page-1#comment-26781 Marty Owings Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:29:57 +0000 http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=28924#comment-26781 Jonerik - In my research I found that the Legislature in 1990 adopted even more liberal rules regarding Open Meetings and that they do apply to public meetings held by the Legislative body. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your point. At any rate, I agree with you to Regulate yes, Ban no. Just a side note that while I was researching this, I ran across an item that deals with Officials who violate the Open Meeting Statutes: "Violation by any person shall be subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $300 for a single occurrence, which may not be paid by the public body. Upon a third violation by the same person connected with the same governing body, such person shall forfeit any further right to serve on such governing body or in any other capacity with such public body for a period of time equal to the term of offices such person was then serving." Here is a link to more: http://www.pact.charter.k12.mn.us/Page1/Pactinfo/minutes/OML.htm Jonerik – In my research I found that the Legislature in 1990 adopted even more liberal rules regarding Open Meetings and that they do apply to public meetings held by the Legislative body. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your point.

At any rate, I agree with you to Regulate yes, Ban no.

Just a side note that while I was researching this, I ran across an item that deals with Officials who violate the Open Meeting Statutes:

“Violation by any person shall be subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $300 for a single occurrence, which may not be paid by the public body. Upon a third violation by the same person connected with the same governing body, such person shall forfeit any further right to serve on such governing body or in any other capacity with such public body for a period of time equal to the term of offices such person was then serving.”

Here is a link to more:
http://www.pact.charter.k12.mn.us/Page1/Pactinfo/minutes/OML.htm

]]> By: jonerik http://minnesotaindependent.com/28924/aclu-house-online-media-rules/comment-page-1#comment-26774 jonerik Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:37:51 +0000 http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=28924#comment-26774 Another difference is that the Minnesota Open Meeting Law does not apply to the Legislature. This is unlike Wisconsin where the open Meeting Law was held in the 1970's to apply to meetings of the majority (then Democratic) caucus since these meetings often determined the vote on major public issues. I think the majority in the Minnesota Legislature decided for a reason that was not what they wanted. The Committees in the Legislature actually do work but I find it hard to believe that people don't have a right to record audio or video these meetings or that the Legislature thinks it can prevent it. Regulate yes, ban no. Another difference is that the Minnesota Open Meeting Law does not apply to the Legislature. This is unlike Wisconsin where the open Meeting Law was held in the 1970’s to apply to meetings of the majority (then Democratic) caucus since these meetings often determined the vote on major public issues. I think the majority in the Minnesota Legislature decided for a reason that was not what they wanted. The Committees in the Legislature actually do work but I find it hard to believe that people don’t have a right to record audio or video these meetings or that the Legislature thinks it can prevent it. Regulate yes, ban no.

]]>