April 20: Letters to the editor

Transparency?

At the RSF Association Board of Directors meeting on April 6, item six on the agenda was Resolution #2017-XXX RESOLUTION FOR RULES RELATING TO MINUTES OF THE ASSOCIATION BOARD AND COMMITTEES. “RESOLVED FURTHER, there shall be neither audio nor video recording of any meeting by a Member or anyone else, without the express prior approval of the Board or its President or a Committee or its Chair.” It was unanimously approved.

For the past three years, I’ve recorded meetings to be able to listen to them so I can fully understand and be clear on each of the agenda items. I’ve also lent my recorder to other members who, for whatever reasons, could not attend but were interested to hear the policy, actions and discussions of those meetings. It has been a helpful tool to keep interested members informed and make sure the information they are hearing is accurate.

I then requested “prior approval” to record the next two open meetings, the Finance committee and RSF Association board meeting. Both those requests were denied. Let me be clear, it was not the manager who denied my request. When I asked the manager why my request was denied, he said that “he was given no reason for denying my request.” If it isn’t the manager, who can I go to explain my denial?

The definition of a transparent government: “openness, accountability, honesty define a government transparency. In a free society, transparency is government’s obligation to share information with citizens. It is at the heart of how citizens hold their public officials accountable.”

I’m still puzzled as to why the RSF Association board is denying this form of communication.

Suzy Schaefer

Rancho Santa Fe