KM has the chance to do the right thing: recording all meetings

 
The Kasson-Mantorville School Board on Monday will be discussing the topic of recording school board meetings.
Currently, the board records its regular meetings, but it is unclear whether the board also wishes to record work sessions and special meetings. The issue isn’t new. In fact, this newspaper reached out to the board in January asking for clarification or a change in policy, without a single response.
It came up again during the July 14 school board meeting.
As a Dodge County Independent reporter watched the video of the meeting, the reporter noticed that, at the end of the regular business meeting and with one regular meeting agenda item remaining, a district employee stopped the recording.
The item, which board members had decided to delay, was “Strategic Roadmap Final & School Board 3-Year Work Plan.”
Confused as to what happened, the reporter reached out to KM Superintendent Beth Giese, who was equally confused.
She had been on the job for less than a month, so she asked the staff member what happened. The staff member’s response, sent via email, was:
“I intentionally turned off the recording when (consultant) Ray (Queener) started his portion of the meeting. Our three-hour strategic planning meetings are not usually recorded, similar to our special meetings/work sessions, which is by the wishes of the board, so I didn’t think this one needed to be.”
It is important here to understand the difference between work sessions, special meetings, and regular meetings.
During a work session, a government body may gather information, hear from consultants or staff members, discuss items, direct staff to take certain actions—but they cannot take votes or make formal decisions.
The only real difference between regular meetings and special meetings is the notice required. A calendar of regular meetings is published at the beginning of the year; special meetings require posting notice three days in advance.
Officials can vote and make formal decisions that affect residents and taxpayers at both special and regular meetings. Both require a quorum to be present.
Which begs the question, why would Kasson-Mantorville School Board only record regular meetings?
On multiple occasions, the KM School Board has had action items on special meeting agendas that qualify in our estimation as controversial and certainly of interest to community members unable to attend. An example of this came earlier this year, when the Board was set to have a special meeting regarding the potential removal of a board member.
The meeting was canceled, but do school board members really think that essentially overriding the will of the people in an election is something that shouldn’t be recorded? Why not make it as transparent as possible, so the public can hear what all sides have to say?
While we are aware many public bodies do not record work sessions, we do not agree with that policy. A body can make plenty of important decisions without taking a vote.
For example, a superintendent, city manager, or an administrator may ask a board to come up with a consensus on policy or give guidance about what actions to take. That’s as much decision-making as any formal vote.
Labeling a meeting as a “work session” has the potential to lead the public to think officials aren’t doing anything important. More relevant to this issue, it gives the government entities a free pass to avoid recording the meeting.
We’ve heard arguments for not recording work sessions. Officials often say being off camera allows them to speak more freely. But to us, that argument seems weak.
What happens if a crowd of people show up to the meeting room? Would officials also watch their language then? Also, anyone these days can record a public meeting. If someone started recording on their smart phone, would officials restrict their conversation—or cancel the meeting altogether?
If an elected official is afraid to say something because a camera is on, then they shouldn’t be saying it in a meeting room, period.
Also consider this:
It is not uncommon during meetings for board members to talk about who may be at what event, workshop, conference, or other gathering, in order to avoid a quorum, which under Minnesota law would trigger an open meeting.
Officials obviously know the reason for this law. Anywhere there is a quorum, decisions can be made, and those decisions shouldn’t be made in the dark, without accountability.
So for elected officials to say that decisions aren’t being made (or all but made) during work sessions is like saying a team down by 100 points with a second to go hasn’t lost, because there is still a second on the clock.
The July 14 recording incident, however, is even more complicated. Meeting minutes show that the regular meeting was still open when the school staffer shut off the recorder—officials had not voted to adjourn.
Their discussion began at 5:48 p.m.; the meeting did not close until 7:37 p.m., nearly two hours later. So any conversations the board had during the last two hours of their regular meeting would remain in the dark for anyone who wasn’t in the room.
Some will make the argument that people interested in items on the published agenda should attend the meetings, which is fair.
But what about working families, homebound seniors, or people who simply don’t want to give up their weeknight to drive to a city hall or school, when they could simply watch a meeting online?
To be perfectly clear, this newspaper is not blaming current members of the Kasson-Mantorville School Board for this issue. A previous board in February of 2024 approved the purchase of recording equipment and a plan to record only regular meetings.
Now, under the leadership of new superintendent Beth Giese, the new KM School Board has a chance to make some changes. We applaud Giese for already showing she is on the side of public transparency.
In response to this newspaper’s inquiry, she told her staffer there is no policy against recording work sessions. “Policies don’t prevent us from recording the work sessions, we will get an external drive so that we can record the entire thing,” she wrote.
Giese went even further, saying, “I didn’t know they stopped recording prior to work sessions, otherwise I would have advised against it.”
On Monday, Giese said, the School Board is expected to have a discussion about recording meetings.
“The board would like to discuss the recording of work sessions. Since it’s uncommon to record them, they want to ensure they understand where everyone stands on the matter,” Giese wrote. “Because our work sessions often follow a regular or special board meeting, we’re simply seeking clarity. As new superintendent, I just want to be sure I’m doing things as the board intended.”
Based on what Giese has told the newspaper, we expect she will be advocating for transparency and for all meetings to be recorded.
In a direct email last month, she wrote, “In the future, we will make sure that we do not stop recording in the middle of any sessions. I know this was unintentional, but if people want to watch our board work sessions we are extremely proud of the great work that we are doing.”
In an email Monday, Giese, who is paid north of $180,000 a year and is the de facto CEO of the school district, made her stance even more clear, while acknowledging the decision isn’t up to her.
“I have stressed that I believe everything should be recorded,” she wrote. “We believe that we should have the entire board vote on this, it is not a Supt decision, I follow the directives given to me by the school board, and I support their decisions.”
Now, the KM School Board has a choice to make.
In this newspaper’s view, officials can decide they aren’t afraid for the public to see, in person or at home, what they discuss at every meeting. They can show the rest of the county and the state that there is no reason to hide what they’re doing from the public.
Or they can go back to the default position, limiting what citizens see unless they attend meetings in person.
For the sake of an informed public, this newspaper hopes the KM School Board will follow Giese’s lead and land on the side of transparency.