Council spends an hour chewing up minutes

537

At Monday evening’s meeting, Eureka Springs city council finally approved the minutes for the past three meetings, but it was a struggle. Deliberating on how to record minutes going forward was even tougher, so aldermen took a five-minute time-out midway through the wrangling.

When approval of previous minutes came up, alderman Kristi Kendrick again objected to how City Clerk/Treasurer Ann Armstrong had recorded the minutes because they were not written according to procedure spelled out in Robert’s Rules of Order. Kendrick read from a well-prepared list of objections based not only on RRO, but also State Code.

She also objected to comments, such as those of City Attorney Tim Weaver, that were noted more completely in the minutes than hers. She claimed the June 12 minutes, for example, as presented were one-sided and an inaccurate record of what had happened. Kendrick said she had watched the video of the meeting several times and submitted her version of how minutes should have been written, then moved to approve her version.

Alderman Bob Thomas commented Kendrick had asked for minutes to record what had happened, not what was said, yet at a previous meeting she had complained the minutes did not contain enough of what Bob Jasinski had said during Public Comments. Thomas saw an inconsistency. Kendrick responded that if the comments were going to be recorded, they should be recorded correctly.

Alderman Mickey Schneider pointed out RRO was written before there were tapes and videos, and maintained if people want more information they can get it, and again council was wasting time arguing about this.

Alderman Peg Adamson reported she had spoken with Municipal League attorney David Schoen who had said regarding minutes’ taking, “Keep them simple.”

Mayor Butch Berry pointed out the matter before them was not about how to take minutes but whether or not to approve the minutes for the previous meetings. Kendrick’s motion to approve her version of the minutes of the June 12 meeting was voted down 4–2, Thomas, Schneider, Adamson and alderman Terry McClung voting No.

McClung then moved to approve the minutes of the June 12 meeting as submitted by Armstrong, and vote to approve his motion was 4-2, Kendrick and alderman David Mitchell voting No. McClung moved for approval of the June 26 minutes as submitted, and vote was the same, as it was for approval of the July 10 minutes.

Later in the meeting, the topic of how council wanted minutes to be taken came up on the agenda. Alderman David Mitchell said he had talked with Weaver, who had mentioned not all councils approve meeting minutes at the very next meeting. Sometimes they wait until the second meeting to allow time for perusal and discussion with the city clerk. He also noted council meetings are videoed, and suggested they could refer to the video to alleviate some of the differences of opinions.

Weaver agreed it would be appropriate to refer to the video, but in his experience written minutes are the documents a court refers to. In addition, videos of meetings go back only so far and deteriorate over time. He said there is no perfect system.

Kendrick held fast that minutes should record what happened, and recording what was said would go on far too long.

Mitchell insisted the DVD recording would add to the minutes and allow for a reduced narrative. He moved to include the DVD recording of the meeting with the minutes.

Armstrong raised her hand to speak and Berry called on her. As she was explaining her process of writing minutes, Kendrick called a point of order because Armstrong was not an alderman and should not be allowed to speak in a council discussion. A brief kerfuffle ensued, and Berry admitted Kendrick was correct even though he had called on Armstrong. Schneider then moved to allow Armstrong to speak, and the vote on her motion was 4-1-1, Kendrick voting No and Mitchell abstaining. But before Armstrong had a chance to speak, Mitchell moved to have a five-minute recess. Vote to approve the recess was 4-2, Schneider and Adamson voting No.

After the break, Armstrong explained records of the meetings are kept in minutes kept in her office, on DVDs, and are posted on the city website.

Weaver urged aldermen not to go totally bare bones with their minutes. Even though the city has video evidence of meetings, some topics go on for six or seven meetings, and it would be useful finding where discussions are on the videos by searching a couple key words in the minutes rather than viewing all the videos.

“We agreed to follow Robert’s Rules of Order,” Kendrick insisted, stating what Weaver suggested was a departure from RRO, and aiding research was not a good enough reason.

Adamson noticed the city has plenty of checks and balances for its minutes. They are kept in four places, and although she understood the point about following RRO, she considered Kendrick’s redacted version of the minutes “too bare bones. The way the clerk is doing it is okay by me.”

“I move we approve the minutes, the DVD of the meeting, and any pertinent topics would reference the DVD,” Mitchell stated.

“What?” McClung responded.

Thomas observed the conversation had started because of the perception of too much subjectivity, and, in his view, they were back to it again.

Berry said he had also spoken with Schoen, and Schoen liked simple. “Minutes are not a novel; they are minutes,” Berry commented.

Mitchell remarked simpler minutes would eliminate subjectivity, but he wanted to include Weaver’s comment about referencing the video, so his motion was for council to move for approval of minutes and the DVD of council meetings, and for topics of discussion the DVD may be referred to. Schneider seconded the motion. Vote to approve the motion was 5-1, Adamson voting No.