Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> February 27,2023 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> minimum requirements. Summary versus almost transcript is, of course,up to the Council. But they are <br /> intended to be a summary-type document. <br /> Benson said everything you said makes sense. I'm not interested in creating a make-work program.As the <br /> person who did watch many,many hours of the videotape and check that against the written record in the <br /> minutes, this is why this has come before us a few times. In addition to the inaccuracies, I didn't feel that <br /> the flavor at times on the interactions during these meeting notes was being captured accurately in the <br /> minutes. The reason I'm bringing this up, again, is that it's fair to say that for other cities, perhaps a <br /> summative expression in the minutes is going to be sufficient. I would put forth that other cities perhaps <br /> are not struggling with some of the issues that this City is. This is why I'm interested in capturing an <br /> accurate reflection of not just the information,but also flavor of certain exchanges, especially as it relates <br /> to public hearing,public comment,or debate amongst Council in these meeting minutes. We do have <br /> video, but as Mr. Mayor just indicated, it is tedious to watch video, and I know because I've done it. We <br /> don't have closed captioning. And I know having talked to a number of people in the community, not <br /> everybody sits down and watches video.What is possible is for anybody to access minutes from the City <br /> of Orono, download those, do keyword searches and get information a lot more easily than they would <br /> through video capture. So the video is okay. However, it's really not as useful as having accurate minutes. <br /> As it relates to the minutes that are before us today, I'm prepared to approve some of those but not all of <br /> them. So I also want to introduce the idea that with regard to the transcriptionist service that we are <br /> currently utilizing,without an accurate or almost verbatim capture,we are essentially requiring that a <br /> transcriptionist who may or may not know the issues of our City is tasked with the responsibility of <br /> summarizing information that maybe they're not even familiar with. What I'm really trying to work <br /> towards here is an agreement between us about how we feel about accurate capture, reflecting for our <br /> citizens and ease with which they can search through the minutes find the information they need. Also if <br /> they weren't at a meeting, or they weren't able to watch the video,they're able to understand the flavor of <br /> the interactions that are happening in these meetings. I do think that other cities do a great job of some of <br /> their meeting minutes. I think we've used this vendor for quite a few years. Perhaps there's room for <br /> finding a vendor that's either more cost effective if we have to pay for extra pages, or is going to have less <br /> errors because it is tedious. And I'm not looking for more to do any more than staff is with this, but I feel <br /> deeply committed to having accurate records for the benefit of the public. <br /> Seals asked what Benson means by flavor. Are you saying you want the emotion of the room? <br /> Benson said without verbatim you lose a lot. So for example, in the public comment in the February 13 <br /> meeting there was a citizen who gave quite a bit of public comment,but it was summarized in about four <br /> sentences.And given the length of that interaction,I didn't feel that the flavor of that interaction of those <br /> comments was accurately reflected in the minutes. <br /> Johnson said he was comfortable with the current arrangement. I think we should always be open if <br /> there's a more cost-effective way or a different vendor. I have no problems looking into different vendors. <br /> But we do have our meetings live,we do put a record of those videos. From a Council person's <br /> perspective trying to approve what another Council member's interpretation of a meeting was,that doesn't <br /> seem like a very effective way to go. I think it's very important to have a third party do it because they're <br /> just recording the infoiiiiation;they are not putting a spin on it. So the first question is, as a Council, are <br /> Page 4 of 22 <br />