BONNYVILLE - A decision as to whether the MD of Bonnyville will continue to record its council meetings and archive them for public viewing on its YouTube channel is expected to be made at the upcoming Oct. 10 council meeting. This comes after a discussion last month that showed council is clearly divided on this issue.
CAO Al Hoggan described the recordings as “the last remaining remnant of the impact of the Covid pandemic on our organization.” He also said the process of recording and placing the videos online requires “significant staff time.”
Ward 2 Coun. Darcy Skarsen was not onside with stopping the practice, suggesting the recordings provide an important option to members of the public who are interested in council discussions but are unable to attend the council meeting in person.
“There was definitely a few people in this room that ran on transparency and said that we were being too closed-door and now we are closing more doors,” Skarsen said.
However, Reeve Barry Kalinski said “I don’t think we speak as freely as we used to. You are always watching exactly what you say. Myself, I would like to stop recording.”
The MD discontinued the practice of livestreaming its public council meetings in July 2021, once pandemic restrictions were lifted, and council chambers were reopened to the public. However, it did continue to record the meetings and post them online two to three days after each meeting. Currently, those archived videos date back to July 2021.
An initial motion to recommend to council to discontinue the recordings of council meetings effective immediately was made by Coun. Don Slipchuk, following a behind closed doors session at a Committee of the Whole meeting Sept. 19. The motion passed and the discussion was brought forward to the council table on Sept. 26.
“I see no reason why we would stop except that we have something to hide, I guess. I’m not sure what the discussion was around this,” Skarsen said.
“I don’t think we have nothing to hide,” Kalinski responded, asking for information on the number of people that view the recordings.
The average number of views in the first two weeks of a video being posted on YouTube specifically range between 50 and 60, Hogan advised council. “Videos that have been up six months or longer, there are some that have reached as high as 175 over the long term.” He said those numbers would also include staff members.
Skarsen noted, “that’s 50 or 60 people that weren’t able to make it here today. As soon as this came up and people were reviewing the minutes, I had a few phone calls asking why we were doing that?”
Deputy Reeve Ben Fadeyiw sought clarification from administration as to the staff time spent on preparing and posting of the videos.
“I couldn’t put a number to it but it’s probably three to four to five hours of actual staff time to get these videos out and, of course, the staff time during a council meeting where we are constantly monitoring to make sure that the video is going out, audio is going out with it. It’s a fairly complicated system,” Hogan said.
“I can honestly say I speak what I feel is necessary no matter if there is a camera on me or not. The public should be aware of what we are talking about at all times,” Skarsen said, adding such a move to stop recording would be a step in the wrong direction. In addressing the Reeve, Skarsen added, “I just remind you, your words exactly when you ran was transparency in this council, right? That is exactly what YouTube does for us.”
Ward 3 Coun. Mike Krywiak said he believes the “numbers are fairly high” for people watching on YouTube. “It doesn’t matter to me” that the meeting is recorded.
Ward 1 Coun. Josh Crick saw advantages both ways stating council members need to “be able to speak freely without being concerned about some legal issues arising from it. It has potential to cost a lot of money to the municipality. I also see the need for transparency, that being said the council chambers is open all the time.”
“There is some protection afforded an individual councillor in terms of defamation etc., etc., based on things that are said at the council table. However, not everything is protected speech,” Hogan informed council.
Crick asked the discussion be tabled to later in the meeting “until after we have our in camera session . . . there’s a little bit I’d like to speak to in camera on this item.”
“Mr. Reeve are you saying you want to discuss this in camera,” Krywiak asked.
“There’s a little bit more information that I think needs to be said about it, but it can’t be shared publicly, that’s why,” Crick explained.
Later in the meeting, council again tabled the discussion, this time to the Oct. 10 council meeting.
MGA addresses liability
Section 535(2) of the Municipal Government Act (MGA), which addresses liability of councillors states: “Councillors, council committee members, municipal officers and volunteer workers are not liable for loss or damage caused by anything said or done or omitted to be done in good faith in the performance or intended performance of their functions, duties or powers under this Act or any other enactment.” However, 535(3) notes: “Subsection (2) is not a defence if the cause of action is defamation.”
In a news item on the Alberta Municipalities website published in November 2022, Andrew Skeith, Reynolds Mirth Richards Farmer LLP, wrote: “Even if a councillor is sued for defamation, their statements may be protected by the defence of qualified privilege. Even if a statement is otherwise defamatory, the councillor will not be held liable for the statement if it is found to be on a ‘privileged’ occasion, except where the councillor made the statement maliciously or with an intent to harm the subject of the statement. The defence of qualified privilege generally applies to all statements made by councillors during a council meeting.”
Around the region
In the Lakeland region, the City of Cold Lake livestreams and provides public access to a YouTube archive of recorded meetings; the County of St. Paul livestreams only; the Town of Bonnyville livestreams and maintains a current archive of recorded meetings on YouTube, dating back to April of this year; Lac La Biche County livestreams and has an online archive of recorded meetings; and the Town of St. Paul livestreams and maintains an archive of online meetings for a three-month period.
