Home » Content / Articles » COUNCIL VIDEO QUEST : ALL

10 Years Of Blowing Smoke? Or Just Camera Shy ?

Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 2010-03-22 13:03.

For 10 years now Imperial Beach City Officials (City Council, City Attorney, & Staff) have been playing games when it comes to broadcasting IB City Council Meetings.  After looking at the information below one has to wonder why, in 2010, Imperial Beach City Council Meetings are still not being televised.At the May 31, 2000 IB City Council Meeting Diane Rose is on record endorsing the televising of Council Meeting, “as it is a great outreach to the community.”

http://web.archive.org/web/20040616164711/www.cityofib.com/00-05-31-cc-minutes.htm

However, despite this endorsement, at the “Special Council Meeting” on June 1, 2000 a discussion regarding the taping of Council Meetings is TABLED.

http://web.archive.org/web/20040616083218/www.cityofib.com/00-06-01-cc-minutes.htm

At the December 6, 2006 IB City Council Meeting Mayda Winter states for the record that the “League of CA Cities recommends public participation and keeping the public informed by LIVE or TAPED broadcasting.”

http://www.cityofib.com/vertical/Sites/%7B6283CA4C-E2BD-4DFA-A7F7-8D4ECD543E0F%7D/uploads/%7BA95C606D-3DFB-4119-8362-B0416EF0FC9E%7D.PDF 

    Mayda Winter Comments Council Minutes 12-6-06


  • Council Minutes 11-15-06

  • Staff Report 11-15-06 (Item 7.1 Chamber Renovation)

  • CIP Projects F05-201.docx

  • Minutes 9-21-05.pdf

  • Minutes 10-4-05.pdf

  • Minutes 1-18-06 (Item 7.7- Chamber Renovation Subcommittee)

  • http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-159078448.htmlhttp://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-159078448.html

    • ---------------------------------------------------------------

    No provision of law dictates that a city must keep data in a specific electronic format; rather, the choice lies within the discretion of the city. But once such a format has been selected, the material must be made available for public inspection, and copies of the data, in the electronic format in which it is held, must be provided upon request. Section 6253.9 asks only whether a public agency has information constituting a public record “in an electronic format” -- not whether a statute dictates the use of such a format.

    If the request is for a copy in an electronic format that the city has used to create copies for its own use or for providing copies to other public agencies, the fee that may be charged is “limited to the direct cost of producing a copy of [the] record in [the] electronic format.” (§ 6253.8, subd. (a)(2); see North County Parents Organization v. Department of Education (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 144, 148 [“ „Direct cost? does not include the ancillary tasks necessarily associated with the retrieval, inspection and handling of the file from which the copy is extracted”]; 85 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 225, 227-229 (2002).)

    While the requester can try to persuade the public agency to do a customized search, there is no provision requiring the agency to provide electronic information other than in a format in which it normally keeps the information or in a format that has been used by the agency to create copies for its own use or for use by other agencies. Cal. Gov?t Code § 6253.9(a). Moreover, an agency is not required to reconstruct a record in an electronic format if the agency no longer has the record available in an electronic format. Cal. Gov?t Code § 6253.9(c). However, an agency arguably cannot deny access to public information because the request would require it to "compile data, write programming language or a computer program, or to construct a computer report to extract data." These are legitimate reasons for allowing the agency to extend the time necessary to comply with a Public Records Act request, but not for denying access altogether. See Cal. Gov?t Code § 6253(c)(4).