On Recording Rights and Governance

On RM of Springfield's Video Recording Ban and Freedom of Expression - Special Meeting Mar 28, 2025

Estimated read time: 1:20

Summary

In a special RM of Springfield meeting on March 28, 2025, a heated discussion unfolded around the ban on audio and video recordings by residents during meetings. The debate centered around a letter from Charter Advocates Canada, which claimed the ban infringed on citizens' rights to freedom of expression under Section 2B of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The meeting emphasized long-standing issues with governance transparency, public participation, and the accuracy of council meeting documentation. Numerous council members and residents voiced their concerns, leading to a broader discourse on legal and democratic principles.

Highlights

Dan Dagel voiced concerns over inaccurate meeting documentation. 📄
Charter Advocates Canada highlighted the council's ban as unconstitutional. 📢
The debate showcased a clash between tradition and the modern need for transparency. 🕵️
Council members passionately argued over citizens' participation rights. 🙋‍♀️
The meeting underscored the importance of recording rights to uphold democratic values. 🇨🇦
An emotional and intense discussion unfolded over governance processes. 🔥

Key Takeaways

Freedom of expression under Section 2B of the Charter was a focal point of debate in Springfield's council meeting. 📽️
The council's refusal to allow resident recordings sparked concerns about transparency and open governance. 🔍
Arguments at the meeting highlighted procedural issues and the potential for legal ramifications. ⚖️
Public participation was a crucial aspect under threat due to restrictive council practices. 🤝
The discussion drew attention to the need for clear guidelines on citizen recording rights in council meetings. 📰

Overview

The RM of Springfield held a special meeting on March 28, 2025, primarily focusing on a newly implemented ban on audio and video recordings during public meetings. This ban, according to Charter Advocates Canada, potentially infringes on citizens' rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by curtailing their ability to record and document public meetings.

Council members and the public weighed in heavily, exposing underlying tensions and discontent with the current administration’s approach to public engagement. Vocal disputes highlighted discrepancies in documented minutes and procedural mishaps, which have historically led to mistrust among residents.

The meeting reignited discussions on fundamental freedoms, emphasizing the importance of balancing traditional governance methods with the need for modern transparency and citizen involvement. As emotions ran high, the discourse demonstrated the critical need for reevaluating recording policies to foster an inclusive and democratic environment.

Chapters

00:00 - 00:30: Introduction and Background Dr. Dagle Page, who prefers to be called Dan or Daniel, is on-site at the Arma Springfield administrative office on March 28th, 2025. The purpose of his visit is to document a special meeting about a ban on audio and video recording for the residents at Arma Springfield. The meeting follows a letter issued by Charter Advocates Canada on March 20th, 2025.
00:30 - 03:00: Meeting Process and Minutes Issues The chapter discusses concerns over a potential ban in Springfield, which may be seen as unconstitutional because it would infringe on the residents' rights, particularly their expressive rights to record, document, or broadcast meetings. It highlights existing problems in Springfield, such as issues related to the minutes of meetings.
03:00 - 10:00: Public Recording and Freedom of Expression The chapter titled 'Public Recording and Freedom of Expression' discusses issues related to documentation accuracy in public meetings. An observer has been documenting meetings for several months and notes recurring errors in meeting minutes, highlighting a specific instance from a planning meeting. The observer expresses confusion regarding the process followed in a recent meeting, referencing the approved minutes from January 23rd that mention a public hearing.
10:00 - 18:30: Debate on Public's Right to Record The chapter titled 'Debate on Public's Right to Record' discusses a meeting where the evidentiary portion was closed and minutes from a previous meeting in January were addressed. It was noted that the public hearing did not occur as the public was not allowed to comment, and the development officer read his report.
18:30 - 30:30: Charter Advocates Canada Letter The chapter discusses an applicant's request to defer a meeting. The chair had previously closed the evidentiary portion, which was documented in the minutes. However, a new hearing was scheduled, essentially restarting the public hearing process. This allowed people to still have the opportunity to speak, which was not a typical practice once the evidentiary portion had been closed.
30:30 - 37:00: Debate on Council's Transparency and Public Rights The chapter focuses on a contentious debate regarding the transparency of the council and the public's rights. A participant, presumably Colleen, is challenged on changing the established procedures or rules in a council meeting. The suggestion is made to review the audio recordings to verify the correctness of the minutes. It is emphasized that the council members present on January 23rd must vote based on what they heard during the meeting, indicating a crucial decision-making moment.
37:00 - 46:30: Resolution Proposal on Public Recording The transcript pertains to a hearing concerning the proposal on public recording. There seems to be a procedural issue at hand, with a challenge arising from the fact that there should not be two hearings on the same issue without a vote. Despite this, the recommendation is to continue with the hearing as advertised, and allow public input. There is a note of procedural adherence as per notes and a segment where the chair is referenced regarding the evidence portion.
46:30 - 57:00: Voting and Reactions During a council meeting, the development officer presented a report, following which the Council voted to defer an application at the request of the applicant. The public hearing remained open to allow future amendments to the minutes after reviewing the audio. The process emphasized adherence to legal procedures, insisting that the minutes could not be altered or the process continued without proper review and confirmation of the audio.
57:00 - 71:00: Conclusion and Meeting Adjournment In this chapter, the focus is on the conclusion and adjournment of a meeting. The transcript highlights discussions about the importance of accurate reporting, especially in the context of legal procedures under the planning act. There is an emphasis on the necessity for clear and precise minutes as a written record of the meeting. The conversation suggests a level of dissatisfaction or apology towards an applicant, acknowledging any shortcomings in the documentation process. The chapter closes with an understanding that to address any inaccuracies, the current process must be halted and corrected.

On RM of Springfield's Video Recording Ban and Freedom of Expression - Special Meeting Mar 28, 2025 Transcription

00:00 - 00:30 good morning everybody my name is Dr dagle page we can just call me Dan or Daniel I'm here on site at the Arma Springfield administrative office or building uh today is March 28th 2025 I'm here to help document a special meeting in regard to an audio and video recording ban that is in place for residents at the Arma Springfield now on March 20th uh 2025 uh Charter Advocates Canada uh had issued a letter uh to the
00:30 - 01:00 arm of Springfield saying that this ban may be deemed unconstitutional and will violate section 2B rights of the residents namely the expressive ability to record and document or broadcast uh a meeting now you might ask Dan why does this matter well there's been a compounding number of issues in the armor Springfield ranging from issues with minutes uh so there's poor
01:00 - 01:30 documentation many times of these meetings and I've been observing and documenting this for a number of months in fact last night I was here for a planning meeting and in fact minutes were incorrect there too upon approval and that is involving a planning matter um I'm confused about the process you're following tonight um I read in the uh your minutes your approved minutes of January 23rd that a public hearing had been
01:30 - 02:00 held and that the chair had closed the evidentiary portion of the meeting so the minutes are what happened at the January meeting uh so nothing was opened up to the public for comments so the public hearing did not take place in the respect that we heard from any of the public um only the development officer read his report out and then the
02:00 - 02:30 applicant asked to defer did the chair not close the evidentiary portion of the meeting that's in your minutes yes in January did and then this new hearing tonight was read vertis like a new public hearing so people still have the opportunity to speak tonight so the public hearing is you the public evidentiary hearing you've never allowed the before once it's been closed that's
02:30 - 03:00 the end of it you you can't change the rules Colleen it it's I I I mean my suggestion to you right now is to go back to the audio and check if the minutes are correct but if the minutes are correct this hearing is substantially over and you Council has to vote the four members of council that were present have to vote on what was heard on the 23rd of January
03:00 - 03:30 because we've advertised the hearing as a new hearing tonight um my recommendation is a council can go ahead with this tonight and we'll be hearing from um any of the public that has anything to add at the hearing well there'll be a challenge Colleen you can't have two hearings on the same issue without a vote so my written notes in my book do not um have that the chair Clos the evident portion uh it says the
03:30 - 04:00 development officer read the report and then Council voted to defer the application at the request of the applicant so we did not close the public hearing so we can amend those minutes in the future and confirm that audio but um no you can't proceed with this until you review the audio and you go through the process to amend your minutes like this is a legal process you can't like the minutes are
04:00 - 04:30 the written record we've had a lot of discussion lately that this is what it is and you are reporting verbatim What happens and and so if that happened and I'm I'm sorry for for the applicant here but there's this this is a a legal procedure under the planning act and your minutes are clear now I'm not saying they're not wrong but the to remedy that then now you have to stop
04:30 - 05:00 this hearing review your audio then go through a process to amend your minutes and then res resume the hearing if that's the case you can't just say that you can go ahead tonight that would be unfair because that any decision tonight would be subject to challenge so I did listen to the recording um so the development officer provided his rep court and then
05:00 - 05:30 the applicant um asked to defer and Council agreed to defer um and the evidentiary portion of the hearing was not closed um so the minutes are inaccurate so it must be stressed that residents should they not participate in meetings they need reliable information and documentation of these meetings and what happened was on February 4th 2025 a resident
05:30 - 06:00 uh was trying to document actually one of my public delegations in the public chamber and mayor Patrick teron had targeted this residence saying that she could not record as for the misinformation it's it's rampant today social media apps allow people to to say things on there and uh some anonymously now I understand and often proliferate to miss and disinformation so it's uh a sign of the times there Karen are you uh videotaping this
06:00 - 06:30 you can't you can't videotape this it's in our proced byw so you have to put your your cell phone down uh can I ask for clarity from point of order just just just one minute Karen are you videotaping this um I'm watching something yeah put it you have to put your cell phone down you can't videotape in here whoa I'm just talking to Karen Karen can you put it down please
06:30 - 07:00 thank you okay go ahead deark thank you Mr just some clarity from the C thank you Mr Mayor just some clarity from the co is the procedure bylaw prohibit people from using uh cell phones for videotaping uh you're required to have 48 hours in advance permission to videotape or audio tape uh meetings and how can we change and that's for the media though isn't it yes that's exactly right and she's not media she's not media so I don't think it applies to any Resident to be frank yes so and on
07:00 - 07:30 February 11th it was communicated effectively that they would that residents would not be allowed to record in the chamber um and uh I just have to do a little bit of uh uh work here as no cell phones are allowed uh in the uh council chambers for videotaping um Place cell phones un vibrate and the hats off please um so if that's all understood there um I'll get the call of order uh made there mark
07:30 - 08:00 chair Mr chair I noticed you uh indicated that those Sal phones are allowed to be in this chamber I don't know where you get that uh can you be very specific about that for reporting purposes it's in our procedural bylaw it's only only Med not actually section 11 the 15 rather
08:00 - 08:30 the media may not video record two days yeah the public aren't to have vide tapes it's disruptive to the uh uh to the council here do you understand law Mr chair I don't take personal tax slly but go ahead it's not a personal tax is it is it's for information and it's for your knowledge my knowledge okay everything which is not prohibited is
08:30 - 09:00 allow allowed everything is legal but default unless there are common laws or statuary Provisions for claiming it you sound like you're reading it are you reading for something I am because I did research before I came to this meeting okay and do you realize that in the law you need to have prohibitions you don't have to have requirements of what is allowed we don't have a Prohibition on video recording by public citizens we have by the media and that's
09:00 - 09:30 allowed when they have two days notice but it has nothing to do with the public and for you to in incite or for you to put in your own laws is unjust and unright it's not in the procedures by law well it is it states uh there only the media are allowed and they have to have 48 hours notice and have to be approved it doesn't say that Mr well it does I'm trying to find May audio video recorded if they ask and seek permission
09:30 - 10:00 two days in advance it doesn't say the public so don't read into the procedure bylaw something that's not there well we have for two and a half years now because you've done it wrong for two and a half years doesn't make it right well it's uh I understand the um the person who had videotaped last time we were here I guess this was on uh online I heard there is online um if we have 40 people with cell phones it's just common sense uh this is going to look like a concert
10:00 - 10:30 hall here uh lifting up cell phones there's disruptive uh there uh and that's the way uh I interpret it there and I don't think anybody would interpret it otherwise uh I I stand to reason if somebody else has a comment there that's the way we've interpreted since I've been here so I don't see why may it's not no because I've always said we should allow the public to report it any time because there procedures byla specifically does not prohibit the public the media it says requires permission it does not say the public
10:30 - 11:00 don't pretend it does and just because you've done it wrong for two years doesn't make it right you've never objected at any other time objected you know I've objected very clearly no you made comment about it that we should change it it's it's implicit in what you're saying there is that the public is not allowed to videotape otherwise it's disruptive unless the law do you not understand the law you're a police officer for how many years you don't understand the law you're making you're making it personal again you know how to enforce the law but you don't know how to read the law do you oh well yeah
11:00 - 11:30 that's right I only enforced the law I never had to read it there that makes sense well thank you for that CL so I challenge you and I still stand that the public is allowed to record it yes they are totally disagree show me where it says it isn't I just told you what it was you told me something that's not there now this is a compounding issue as I said ranging from the minutes to the push away or desistance or perhaps perhaps even antagonistic uh Behavior or push back against residents the participate which
11:30 - 12:00 is a key and important aspect of public governance um yeah so the question would be to the chair who's busy writing um what two things can you pick out of M out of Mr Pig's um delegation I'm not gonna answer that you're just you're just looking you just answered my question you just EX L I'm looking for a response I'm
12:00 - 12:30 looking for a response question is how many things what did Mr P talk answering that ma'am I think you're out of line you're trying you're trying to make a point with with the audience that's all you're trying to do no I want to know if you listen to the people who actually there's Mark Miller there laughing what what are you laughing about Mark this is cutting time sir what are you laughing about Mark oh sorry Mr just want to point it out
12:30 - 13:00 you're being very inconvenient to the mayor right now because he has question because he was writing and he constantly writing something not listening to the people what people saying and that's why we have this problem right now nobody listen Council doesn't listen to the people it's like predetermine everything people come and talk and talk and talk even procedural BOS anything how how many people in the last meeting in Googled po their opposition they said change
13:00 - 13:30 this place change this place this nothing it's in it I've heard Mr fuel say that in the last two years question period has degraded there's a common denominator there and he's sitting in that chair that's say that's true you need to change your tone of voice when you talk you have to be a little bit you're rude you're rude Mr Mayor that was very respectful that's
13:30 - 14:00 enough we've had a resid point of order point of order time time is up 15 minutes is up 15 minutes up ma'am point of order I ask I would ask Mr Mayor respectfully that you apologize to miss sinair I will not apologize to Mrs sinair I will not apologize to her so what we're going to be doing here today is I'm hoping that we'll be able to see what happens here today at the armor Springfield office this meeting starts at 10:00 in the morning and my hope is that we'll see freedom of expression is
14:00 - 14:30 something that this Council will appreciate in value because this is not just something that belongs to a few it's not a special interest right it is a right that belongs to every Canadian freedom of speech freedom of expression many of its different forms is a key aspect of what makes a liberal democracy work in many societies and my concern ranging from the desistence to push back to the elimination of public participation is that once residents are targeted or
14:30 - 15:00 perhaps told that they're not allowed to document meetings or they've been put into extreme lengths uh to document meetings uh this creates communication gaps and I've communicated this several times now to the armor Springfield Council and unfortunately that has not been reciprocated very well so my hope is that residents will understand that this is not just a small issue this is one involving their rights their freedom of expression rights and again this belongs to everybody so what we're going
15:00 - 15:30 to be doing here is if I have anybody who wants to talk to me they'll come talk to me if not uh we'll be seeing what happens here at the meeting today
15:30 - 16:00 thank you uh we will start the meeting this is the RM of spring fill the meeting agenda for March the 28th of
16:00 - 16:30 2025 a special meeting and we're starting at 10:00 a.m. exactly I'd like to introduce uh counselors to I am mayor Patrick terion um Deputy Mayor W one is Glenn fuel to my right and descending order is W two Andy kazinski uh next uh is w three counselor Mark Miller Next is award for counselor Melinda Warren um then if we're prepared to go and see that we are um uh adoption of
16:30 - 17:00 the agenda can I get a mover and a second or for the special meeting mover in seconder Mark and Andy be it resolved that the special meeting agenda for March 28th be approved additions uh to the agenda as written and I see none can I get a show hands adoption of the
17:00 - 17:30 agenda as unanimous and it is carried um we will get uh we got two items on the uh the agenda here 4.1 is the public recordings of council and the committee of meetings and the public hearings uh there um I guess we'll get a mover and a seconder for that oh okay sure if you could take your hat off in
17:30 - 18:00 the chambers as well please thank you um okay uh why don't we start off then this is a discussion uh amongst uh Council here um anybody like to lead us off Mark well thank you very much uh mayor and Council and for members of the public uh councelor kachinsky and I called this special meeting because we think that there's a fundamental freedom
18:00 - 18:30 of expression and right here for Citizens not only in our municipality but fundamentally across Canada and this is echoed by a letter by a group of uh authorities under the charter Advocates Canada who are uh in the legal field but beyond that uh I just first off want to say that we're thankful that the meeting has been called and it needed to be called because under procedures bylaw it's required ired when any two counselors request a special meeting
18:30 - 19:00 it's absolutely essential and necessary what I'm kind of uh disappointed in is we didn't really have an opportunity to decide when that meeting would take place so here we are Friday morning when most people don't have the opportunity to participate despite the inclement weather schools are canceled right across our Province and those people who have children probably would have to stay home for that reason simple enough those
19:00 - 19:30 people who have an 8:30 to 4:30 job cannot participate if you remember it's the excuse might be said well they can zoom in but you know what when they're on an hourly clock they can't zoom in or their doc pay today and I I know the role I took as counselor I'm taking off time from work from my day job and that's fine that's my responsibility to do that I'm not arguing that fast but what I am arguing is that Joe
19:30 - 20:00 citizen that does have a a regular 9 to5 job on a weekday cannot be here today and I Echo that because I was several people have expressed to me their concern with how this chamber since our election has watered away whittel away and continue to erode democracy for the public you know we can show primary examples with that with the
20:00 - 20:30 exclusion and the elimination of question period that was a fundamental opportunity for the public to engage with res with our Council that has been Stripped Away it's taken away one might say it's democracy a majority of council supported that proposition but I will not sit here and say that I supported it because I didn't record will show councelor kachinsky was
20:30 - 21:00 adamantly opposed to eliminating the opportunity for the public to speak before us prior to question period years ago count uh reev bner scy uh McCarthy Holland and I'm sure there's been others allowed the public to engage throughout Council meetings on point BYO matters we
21:00 - 21:30 don't even have that any longer we thought I think a previous Council thought that taking that away maybe more of a format to allow for a question period of 20 minutes or whatever was allowed to engage and I think that was a good move I think that was a smart move what was wrong about that was that it was at the beginning of the agenda items and so people couldn't speak through throughout the agenda on particular
21:30 - 22:00 topics and items so we learned from that that that wasn't really the most effective way to do things but now 2025 2025 we've eliminated the Public's ability to speak to council and the argument is you can call us you can email us you can text us but you know what that is that's called censorship that's called muzzling that's called suppressing information that could be publicly understood shared and
22:00 - 22:30 dealt with and so I Echo with counc councelor kachinsky I want to read very specifically what the charter Advocates Canada has said they just challenged they just challenged the Prime Minister the parliament of Canada about proroguing Parliament this is not some flimsy ad hoc ridiculous organization that just picks on democracy there are a organization made up of of lawyers that
22:30 - 23:00 uh that actually uh are fighting for freedoms and fre freedom of expression so if I may read this I will March 20 25th from Darren Lang and it's to uh the Council of the regional Municipality of Springfield dear mayor and counselors of the RM of Springfield regarding policy at public meetings of the RM Council as you know from our previous correspondent stated setember 16th 2024 chartered Advocates
23:00 - 23:30 Canada is a charity and Civil Society organization registered with the Law Society of Ontario our purpose is toot promote constitutional freedoms and human rights across Canada CAC is dedicated to defending Canada's fundamental freedoms including freedom of expression background here they point out Miss Karen Insley who's in the
23:30 - 24:00 audience today in the chamber is a resident of Springfield Manitoba and attended a public meeting of the arm of uh Springfield February 4th 2025 during the public meeting of the arm Council Miss Insley recorded a delegation in council chambers on her cell phone uh cellular phone Miss Insley was s uh sitting quietly with her phone appointed at Council to record the proceedings at some point mayor tyon asked whether she was recording and asked her to stop he
24:00 - 24:30 stated that it was against the new bylaw rules of procedure 2410 the CEO then added that vla 2410 permitted media to record meetings if they made arrangements with the CEO 48 hours prior to public meeting of RM Council she also stated that RM Council would post audio recordings of the meetings within two days of the meeting with notwithstanding unforeseen circumstances maror tyon then added that it was simply find for people watching remotely to record the zoom
24:30 - 25:00 broadcast and here they go on to say and bold points there is no Authority Under the bylaws or the municipal act to prohibit members of the public from recording meetings very very bluntly and specifically as a statutory delegate RM council's Powers must be Prov grounded by the act the ACT States a coun may only act through resolution resolution
25:00 - 25:30 or bylaw there is no bylaw this is underlined there is no bylaw which prohibits members of the public from recording public meetings of RM Council so this is aside from their letter councelor kachinsky and I saw that there was a notice outside this chamber door saying that recordings aren't permitted subsequent to that counselor kachinsky asked the COO to to take down that inappropriate unlawful notice I see
25:30 - 26:00 that it's no longer there thank you section 1510 of the bylaw 2410 speaks to Arrangements that media must undertake with CEO hir to public meetings there may or may not be a good basis to have specific Arrangements related to Media attendance and recording however this does not speak to any parameters related to the public recording public meetings they attend as Miss Insley was only quietly sitting and recording
26:00 - 26:30 the meeting on February 4th 25 it cannot be said nor was it alleged that she was in any way disruptive or engaging in improper conduct contrary to section 16 of bylaw 2410 further improper Behavior must have legal standards it must be Behavior which disrupts RM Council meetings to the extent it negatively affects otherwise it would be a Freer ranging
26:30 - 27:00 power for the chair to expel anyone acting in a way he or she dislikes and never never should that ever happen the chair cannot arbitrarily declare lawful activities prohibited absent a duly passed resolution or bylaw as there is no bylaw or resolution currently prohibiting recording of public meetings no nor was there improper in
27:00 - 27:30 conduct as a result there is no authority to prohibit this otherwise legal exercise by a member of the public my own comment amen as the Manitoba court of appeal held regarding RM councils and bylaws and a rule of the Law Society such as ours attention is due process and fundamental rights can never be forgotten or taken for granted and here
27:30 - 28:00 we must emphasize that not our Council not the legislature of Manitoba no democratically elected body can take these expressions of freedoms away whether they want to or not there's a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and there's higher levels that we must be accountable to rm's council duty to respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms I can't this is a side I cannot believe that I'm sitting here and
28:00 - 28:30 we have to deal with this we should be dealing with fundamental local issues whether it be the recre center or or uh road conditions or a whole host of things and here and now we've elevated it to a national issue again going back to the law the letter if a bylaw or res resolution were to exist now we in the future which completely bans the public from recording meetings quote it would be
28:30 - 29:00 unconstitutional that is truthful and fact recording and broadcasting has been held to be expressive activity protected by section 2B of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms government-owned property which we are on is often required to allow free expression on its premises so long as expression serves to enhance one Democratic discourse two truth finding
29:00 - 29:30 and three self-fulfillment recording a meeting of RM Council clearly supports all three purposes a ban on recording diminishes these purposes rather than supporting them RM Council meetings are by their virtue or by their nature sory public the RM is a public institution and when it holds a public meeting the free engagement of residents with their RM is
29:30 - 30:00 a fundamental component of democracy where limitations must be carefully constructed to invite public engagement rather than to constrain it although the RM publishes its own recordings through its own processes there is no reason reasonable basis to prevent the public from recording meetings except where such activity is coupled with disruptive or improper conduct already prohibited furthermore the ACT highlights the importance of public uh nature of such meetings where
30:00 - 30:30 it requires all meetings of council to be conducted in public subject to limited exceptions just a few more paragraphs RM Council meetings are not forums where Witnesses testify where quality of evidence could be impacted by public attending attendance recordings such as in a court proceeding however the importance of what takes place in an RM council meeting is similar to a court proceeding where the public has a sign ific interest to know what takes place it is
30:30 - 31:00 perfectly reasonable for the public to obtain such information from the recordings published by the arm Council itself with all its limitations uh and as you know when we do have recordings there's sometimes issues with uh muting lack of video technical difficulties we saw that last night we saw that last night where people on Zoom couldn't uh well again it was because of perhaps air or uh technical difficulties it wasn't intention but uh it it becomes U uh
31:00 - 31:30 extinct from the from the recordings or by other attendees who may publish their own recordings to bring awareness to specific issues addressed at the RM meeting if the mayor supports the public to record the council's own broadcast with its limitations as he stated on February 4th 2025 then there is no reason that the public should not record the meeting directly unless the mayor's intention is to control public ation of the meeting subject to the limitations inherent in
31:30 - 32:00 the council's publication of the meeting so here's the conclusion all actions of the arm Council must have legal Authority in either the ACT bylaw or resolution so long as members of the public record in a non-isr disruptive manner such as in Miss iny's case the RM Council and chair have no legal basis to prohibit recordings at their meetings we invite the arm Council to consider our concerns cautiously and to
32:00 - 32:30 conduct meetings in a way respectful to Charter rights we hear and demand that the chair forth with cease denying Miss Insley or any other resident who attends a public meeting in person from recording the meetings so long as it is done in a non-disruptive manner Yours Truly Char charer Advocates of Canada again this is a recent letter just about a a week old and uh it's gaining national attention on media and I'm sure
32:30 - 33:00 if we don't do the right thing we don't take the um High bar on this it'll gain National and perhaps International attention we need to absolutely encourage transparency openness and engagement by the public always and forever thank you Mr Mayor thank you counselor Miller anybody else councelor kazinski
33:00 - 33:30 yes not our phone not at our end I cannot hear Mr Kinski
33:30 - 34:00 yes yeah I did not mute myself I'm sorry okay so I want to say that we as a council when I was uh running for Council I never expected that we're going to be U fighting for the rights for the residents of this community and the rights was trample over and over again and I think we have to put stop to it and we should have more rights for the citizen you know because we here representing our citizens we not
34:00 - 34:30 representing ourselves so I I I have small presentations here as a council we should be open and transparent as possible with the resident we represent someon Council even campaign for open transparent and accountable government the subject of today meeting is section 1510 of the procedure of bylaw section 1510 is clear to me and it that it does not restrict the public from recording
34:30 - 35:00 meetings unfortunately some council member Administration do not have the same understanding the letter we are presented from the chart Advocates should should clearly clarify and any confusion among Council and administration however that it's still not the case Dr paig make a request for permission to record here today and he will was denied and I don't know
35:00 - 35:30 why the charter Advocate letter warned us that if a byw or resolution were to exist now or in the future which completely bans the public from recording meetings it would be unconstitutional Bor page denied request demonstrate that our byw does not in effect ban the public from recording also mearian ordering people in audience not to record proceeding exceeding his
35:30 - 36:00 authority because there is no restriction in a procedural bylaw that authoriz him to do that this is not in line with the charter rights I recommend we change this section 1510 of the procedural bylaw so that it does not violate the charter rights we would not want the charter Advocate to decide to take action on this issue which will lead lead to unnecessary legal fees
36:00 - 36:30 which come out of the bucket of the hardworking Springfield rate payers Council we should embrace the public rights and we should not fear an open and transparent government thank you thank you counselor anybody else before I sum it all up Deputy Mayor so I'll speak towards the uh um
36:30 - 37:00 question period for a sec I just want to reiterate that that's not true with what was said um we do have delegations um members uh residents can come forward with a delegation we changed all that we even have questions that can be answered through uh sending them in so I believe everybody has opportunity to submit as we noticed in the last few meetings delegations are even filling up we've had like one or
37:00 - 37:30 two delegations there's not eight delegations on every meeting so again if people want to come in as delegations they're open um having said that um going towards the um media May again I'll bring up 15.10 um I believe that the public should be able to record but they have to again do it in a proper way we don't need every person in the in the in the a in the chamber taping with their cell
37:30 - 38:00 phone so again there has to be ways of doing this properly so I recommend on passing a resolution that on 15.1 that we state public and media May audio videotape meetings proceedings including public hearings providing that the arrangements are made with the CAO at least 2 days 48 hours prior to the meeting or public hearings and I so move that motion
38:00 - 38:30 councelor okay uh then I'll Su no I get an opportunity go ahead I've done a lot of Melinda is muted you're Beed Melinda sorry about that um so I've done a lot of research as well on this issue
38:30 - 39:00 and um reading the all the all the information about recording in the public and you're in a public area you know I've read all that but it still comes back to uh Daniel page may not want to be audio or videoed and honestly if you're here in Council
39:00 - 39:30 chamber and you get permission I'm okay with that um because you still have to respect somebody else's privacy and yes they came to a meeting they didn't come to a meeting to be on your video and they came for information people come to council chambers for information that's why they come and so I had also looked at a couple different well not more than a couple different municipalities out there and West St
39:30 - 40:00 Paul uh allows people to and the media public and the media to audio video with permission um eain Paul also allows people with permission um the RM of Lac deani does not allow and unless you have a issue where where you need to be audio like you need
40:00 - 40:30 to have the audio um the city of Winnipeg does not allow you to audio in their gallery or video sorry um so I am in agreement that you know if you're coming to council and you're videoing it for informational purposes and it is it is in factual truthful information I don't see the issue um I
40:30 - 41:00 don't want to see people that just come to a council Mee and you wonder why people don't come to a council meeting is because they don't they may not want to have their face out there because they might not agree with you so I would respect that person's ethical choice to not be and we should all be understanding of people that don't want to be on your video um but if you come
41:00 - 41:30 and you get permission uh a few days before that you're that you're concerned and you want to video I don't see the major issue uh just to just to you know I don't want to see everybody there with their phones up be respectful and that's all I'm asking cuz if if somebody comes and they have their children in the audience we have to
41:30 - 42:00 respect that because you are not to audio or video sorry uh children without their parents consent uh Glenn uh did you make a resolution uh there and you seconded it there there so then we could uh proceed with a resolution but I have a a narrative first so I like to everybody's had a turn except for myself um what what I'll do here is um because of the
42:00 - 42:30 special meeting um I've got all the my notes down here scrambled we've been elected on Council for two and a half years approximately not till the last month has cameras in the chambers been an issue at all at all uh we as elected officials question period and invocation in December of 2024 uh we we uh we as elected officials uh uh turned it down um past uh resolution of that question period was to be uh um taken off
42:30 - 43:00 procedural bylaw um there was a mention there about the national media disruptions and so on like that um it's it's disruptions in in the local governance has gotten totally out of hand uh and cell phones uh uh in my understanding are main portion with regards to that um we as elected officials have to respect the people's privacy uh and uh let's not get anything wrong here today this is all about
43:00 - 43:30 question period short and simple um so we as Council have to move forward and we are consumed and putting out fires uh which slows our our governance on major issues ba bylaws on our communities um uh only are applicable to our 1100 square miles of our beautiful um RM here uh we as we as we as Council take an O to conduct ourselves and the best and uh interests of the RO Municipality of
43:30 - 44:00 Springfield section 1510 of the procedural bylaw States media are allowed uh to record if 48 hours prior application is done uh again we have uh adhered to this for two and a half years but since December now we have to interpret it or are being asked to interpret it otherwise um are we to put everything possible every variance Nuance when it comes to stating uh uh who media is there to say it doesn't uh say this uh in short and sweet there
44:00 - 44:30 it's it's for uh good governance there to allow cell phones in here uh would be an absolute disruption this is why I I feel that uh having the recordings uh um is is counterproductive and counterproductive to good governance it's disruptive uh when you could have 43 video cameras in the chambers at any one time potentially 43 when a camera uh decorum will often deteriorate uh we we've seen it there when cameras uh um are present uh there
44:30 - 45:00 um when you ex exponentially increase out to 43 it's going to heighten everybody's uh you know sensitivities and arousals um I didn't sign up here nor anybody in in uh uh the audience uh to to be on YouTube Facebook or social media uh might much like a crowd mentality cameras change people in groups uh people act and the in different ways uh they can do so by uh
45:00 - 45:30 recording off of Zoom that's I've said that repeatedly the public are hesitant to attend Chambers especially if they have uh a different view uh from a group or people present uh we want to attract people into the the chambers here not uh we want to attract uh uh people that are not always present we want to attract a wide V variety of people into the uh to the RM uh having people now have to worry about being on Facebook and social media uh to some some person's uh
45:30 - 46:00 website is counterproductive to allow for a better environment uh to bring people back uh uh they should not have to worry about uh stuff like social media um I think coun or deputy mayor has basically said other comments that are uh uh basically been repeated uh um if you give me one moment um thank you um uh councelor
46:00 - 46:30 Miller uh thank you Mr Mayor I just want to rebut what councelor fuel said he made allegations that uh uh people have the opportunity to speak as delegations yes you did make that statement only moments ago Dr Daniel paage made a request to be a delegation today he was denied so you cannot say to me no one can say that because we have
46:30 - 47:00 question period people can come as delegations when there's an individual in our chamber specifically right now who is denied other people wanted to speak as delegations have come forward to me but they said Unfortunately they did not have 48 hours notice as required so they're not able to participate they're not able to share their concerns with Council today so the delegation approach while I know counsel fuel had good intention for it it is
47:00 - 47:30 ineffective it's censoring the public it's giving them the inability and prohibiting them to come forward to our Council because often often and you know this we get the agenda on Friday at 4:30 or 4 o'clock people actually have lives outside of this Council chamber and on the weekends they probably don't T stay tuned and they don't at 4:30 tune into the website of the arm of Springfield and say oh yeah this is on the agenda
47:30 - 48:00 and then all of a sudden it comes about on Monday and they don't have the opportunity the 48 hours notice to to speak as a delegation so that whole element of the procedures bylaw is ineffective and it again is a mechanism where we've watered down the ability of the public to speak I would love and I would make a motion here and now and I'm sure it would be seconded for the public to engage with us at this special meeting here today so I will make that res resolution as well that the public have the opportunity to today speak to
48:00 - 48:30 us as Council on this emergency very critical National Charter of Rights fundamental issue to speak to us here and now and I would need somebody to second can I just clarify there was no request for a delegation that was denied for this meeting so I'm not sure well I believe there was and request to record the meeting not to come as a delegation
48:30 - 49:00 so you could clarify that okay to to go further then I have had requests but people knew they couldn't meet the 48 hours notice so regardless um people do not have the ability to speak to us I'm giving them right now the opportunity to speak to us what's wrong with that is this Council not want to hear from the people and just on the point of counselor Warren just because others are doing it inappropriately or wrong doesn't make it right and you know what
49:00 - 49:30 fundamentally this is a public chamber and do you realize that if you're in a public chamber you're allowed to be video recorded and if you bring your children in here that is an authorization to allow that child to be video recorded you don't need approval show me any specific evidence that shows that you cannot record in a public chamber you can't do it it's not possible because it doesn't exist and it's against the freedoms of Rights and the charter so we are we are positioning oursel whatever
49:30 - 50:00 happens in your resolution Mr councelor fuel this is going to go to a higher level and it's becoming a national issue it's not going to be smothered and dealt with it's going to be raised up higher higher higher and make us look like goons goons well National I don't I don't quite understand the this that's that's just one lawyer company that's one lawyer we have we have many lawyers that would say
50:00 - 50:30 otherwise I I was wellow no that's this is just one this is just this is just one person's opinion this is just one person's opinion it's a group of lawyers there is your opinion it doesn't it doesn't this is one lawyer's opinion you're you're putting everything put your hand down Mr Page uh this is just one lawyer's opinion there and there's other lawyers there if this lawyer uh this here wants to make an issue about that tell them to take it to the uh to the manator court
50:30 - 51:00 of appeals and make a a Kings bench application and then then go ahead but this is this is something that all RMS have to deal with and a vast majority do not allow cameras in here and there's a reason for that the vast majority do not allow question period we are not doing anything wrong here we're not quelling anybody we're not stomping on anybody's rights uh for you to be uh you know to to say stuff like that that's that's being overly I am talking I am talking
51:00 - 51:30 to say to say excuse me please stop interrupting in the chamber stop dis stop dis being disrespectful okay Mr Akin you are I'm trying to talk here and you're trying to override me here so so the fact the fact is is that you got one uh lawyer uh company here where why we're putting everything on the one I don't understand this we have got uh many different opinions on this U
51:30 - 52:00 so to say that everything is is on one uh letter here is is beyond me why why we're we're putting everything on this this hasn't been tested in court if they want to test this in court please do so but we're allowed on a municipal act we're required to have a procedural bylaw we've addressed that and there's not been an issue since question period was taken away plain and simple so let let's handle the resolution there of Deputy Mayor first two two resolutions so let's
52:00 - 52:30 handle the first one first he doesn't get it uh councilor Miller Mr Mayor I don't know why you continue dis discredit Charter Advocates Canada I'm not discrediting them I'm just saying this is this is just one he's not to speak make a note he's not he's interrupting me now so he wants respect but nobody else can have respect right this is how this guy acts this is how our mayor conducts Council meetings since day one I'm frustrated you can see
52:30 - 53:00 my frustration and you want us to he he doesn't want people to see who he is excuse me can I just remind Council that we do have a procedure bylaw and if I could read that members of the public may not interrupt any any speaker or action of the council and behave in a disorderly matter manner including engaging in debate or conversation that's clearly a rule on the table now
53:00 - 53:30 just be respectful so I was speaking Mr Mayor um in terms of respect well obviously we don't have any of that we haven't had it for a long time you've called me names you've done other intimidating kinds of things I'm sick of it I'm tired of it and this is going to go to the human rights this sorry the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because now now the public uh has has drawn a wall you've
53:30 - 54:00 drawn a wall between you as an elected official and the public as the people out there who need to abide by every bloody law that we have and a new one that they want to Institute today to even further restrict you to even further restrict the public how much erosion of democracy are we going to see in the next one and the three4 year until you you and I and others face the electorate and judge you this has been
54:00 - 54:30 the a notorious erosion this has been a legacy that is atrocious for every member of this Council why are we seen in such a bad light because we're eroding The public's ability to engage and to democratically dialogue they don't have that in other municipalities because frankly people are allowed to dialogue and engage and and have a good report it's it's important for us to have a difference of opinion that absolutely is true but it
54:30 - 55:00 is never ever right to go against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the public and that's exactly the path the roadway you're going do you not see that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was brought in by prime minister Pierre Trudeau to make sure that the people had the ability to continuously dialogue with the elected officials not because your opinion is that people are disrespectful you know what people don't always like your opinion or mine and they have the
55:00 - 55:30 ability they should have the right to express their disappointment with councelor Miller councelor fuel councelor Warren councelor kachinsky and and mayor tyon absolutely that's a fundamental that's enough you're a disruptive here you know what kind of an attitude is that so let's do the resolution let's do the
55:30 - 56:00 resolution fundamental rights of freedoms and people is is really what we're fighting for as Canada as a nation we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which is unique within the Democratic elected world and for you and any member who's going to vote against the public to to go against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms I will stand firm I'll go on social media I'll go on national news I'll go wherever it takes to ensure the public in our municipality have a continued right to speak to us
56:00 - 56:30 this is how ridiculous it is and this is where it's going Deputy Mayor I totally agree with you they will have a right in in an organized matter and that's how it'll be done in my opinion and that's why I put through this motion thank you okay can we have the resolution a wording for the resolution uh
56:30 - 57:00 so there is a moved by counselor Fuel and seconded by councelor Warren uh be it resolved that bylaw 24-10 section 15.10 be amended at the first available time to the public and the media May audio video tape meeting
57:00 - 57:30 proceedings including public hearings providing that arrangements are made with the CAO at least two days 48 hours prior to the meeting or public hearing with our resolution uh being read uh those in support from Council wait we can speak to the resolution first go ahead thank you Mr Mayor again this is another barrier to exclude the public as Council fuel says yes it gives them the but it puts up such barriers that people just won't do it in fact they'll there'll be even less people who
57:30 - 58:00 are intend to come to speak to council because they'll see it as some sort of a authoritarian type of an institution that prohibits and restricts and and uh makes allegations and and Mr Mayor I just heard you say to Mr Macky that take your comments outside this Cham chamber so in other words throwing out people is the way that you're you did say it it's on the record but so this is the kind of attitud why would I as a resident want to come to this chamber if I was in your seat an un elected official I would say
58:00 - 58:30 the heck with it my what's going to count is next election when I throw the people who have prohibited me and restricted me those are the people we're going to get out of this this seat and that's going to be a fundamental election uh priority and it's going to be well well presented those who support the public and those who put up barriers restrictions and say yes yes you can come to to talk to us but you have to meet all this criteria and by the way
58:30 - 59:00 the CEO can say yes or no so you don't even get past that poll no democracy's eroded is gone this is uh beyond belief okay we ready to vote uh then with that resolution being read uh maybe we'll read it again just for clarity there okay and I just want to clarify that the rules are quite clear that in the bylaw that Council set under 2410 on why delegations can be denied so it's
59:00 - 59:30 not just me being willy-nilly on when I deny delegations so I just I want that to be clear thank you just being disruptive Mr Ain be it resolved that bylaw 24-10 section 15.10 be amended at the first available time to the public and the media May audio videotape meeting proceedings including public hearings providing that arrangements are made with the CAO at
59:30 - 60:00 least 2 days 48 hours prior to the meeting or public hearing those in support of uh the reading as specified there show hands that be Council uh Warren and uh fuel uh those uh opposed mayor tyon um Miller and the kazinski
60:00 - 60:30 what did I I got to read that again I'm going to remind so I'm just going to remind Council about public decorum at meeting where you
60:30 - 61:00 going just don't worry about it it's fine I'm just going to remind the public what's written in the procedure bylaw regarding engaging in debate in the council chambers during a meeting
61:00 - 61:30 that's that's this the way it's it's written here I'll say it again beat resolve that the bylaw 2410 1510 be amended that the public and the media be May audio video proceedings hearings providing that arrangements are made with the CEO at least two days prior to that so essentially allowing uh people to uh to video and
61:30 - 62:00 and audio tape and I'm I'm opposed uh to that that's not what you voted did I V us okay I'm good there second uh resolution
62:00 - 62:30 I will read the second resolution and um I hope councelor Miller going to be here maybe we can ask him to come back are you moving this resolution yes I will we have Quorum so the meeting can
62:30 - 63:00 proceed thank you yeah I'm going to present the our resolution be resolved that the Council of rural Municipality of spring approved section 5.10 of byw number 24 10 be amended to the public and the media May audio videotape or digitally recorded meeting
63:00 - 63:30 proceedings including public hearings second one is that not just the resolution we already voted on so can I get a copy of that please thank
63:30 - 64:00 you okay seems like the same resolution to me but I will read it out again uh moved by counselor kazinski and seconded by counselor Miller be it resolv that Council of the arm of Springfield approve section 15.10 of bylaw number 2410 be amended to the public and media
64:00 - 64:30 May audio video tape or digitally record meeting proceedings including public hearings no what sorry okay okay can I get a show hands of those in support of that that's councelor Miller and councelor kazinski those opposed that's councelor Warren
64:30 - 65:00 councelor Fuel and the mayor terion point point point of order there was no debate on this discussion I rule it uh the vote not we've been debating it uh it doesn't matter how long you debate it when the resolution is made Mr Mayor if you knew you knew Robert called procedure you don't see you're interrupting me he's not again giving me the ability to speak why is that that he interjects because he wants his point of view it was unconstitutional it was not
65:00 - 65:30 according to Robert's Rules of Order and I know you're going to discredit it because you're going to say it's not but you know what there is procedure and any legislative body elected body has to go by procedure otherwise again it's a Banana Republic it is not we we just voted on it there what what was the the vote he do the mayor doesn't even know what he did wrong call Miss we just voted a second time here what was the vote no discussion so okay banana Court we've been talking for the last hour on
65:30 - 66:00 this did you get the vote there the matter is defeated it's the same resolution and this one is defeated it is defeated go ahead go ahead it it
66:00 - 66:30 is okay you're you're being disrup disruptive record will show itless the second resolution was the same as the first they butcher the minutes last night we saw that the minutes were inaccurate wrong and changed so if this is the kind of municipality we work in shameful absolutely shameful
66:30 - 67:00 okay then I'll uh I'll make a motion to adjourn can I get a move in a second or please2 we have we have done 4.2 we've been talking about 4.1 and 4.2 4.1 was dealt with 4.2 isn't uh this is you know what sometimes you just cave and get so frustrated you say exactly all right go ahead you've been
67:00 - 67:30 talking about chart Advocates the whole time here Mark now all of a sudden we're going to go back into the chartered Advocates you've been talking about 4.1 and 4.2 Mr Mayor counc kachinsky and I made another motion that the public have the ability to speak at this meeting here and now and why do you just evade it and say the meeting's done because it's not in what you want to do okay well let's uh what's what's your wording uh there for the resolution dad have everybody talk as a delegation I think the CEO had that resolution and it's in
67:30 - 68:00 a recording I can't verbatim remember 105 minutes ago what I said but was to the extent that I move that the public have the ability to speak here and now to us regarding these issues and that okay enough this isn't a dialogue this is just with Council here you need a lot of help see he's multing back to the public I think that's irresponsible and inappropriate oh whatever Mark it's whatever and it's
68:00 - 68:30 a code of conduct I'm gonna so I apologize councelor kazinsky do you have a motion on the floor that hasn't been voted on enough let us talk here and stop disrupting so Council voted on that it was defeated two to three so now the second motion now is to allow the public but councelor Miller have a motion allow people to speak and I second that but kind of was lost nobody react to it yeah we'll do it
68:30 - 69:00 now this is yeah this is what we deal with Mark again harassment of comment it is not you make a comment and I can make a comment so smart up disrespectful I'm make that note to the human resources department disrespect in Council I'm getting tired
69:00 - 69:30 of it I'm frustrated by it and I think it's insulting and demeaning thank you Mr Mayor for being so courteous so respectful to your fellow council members shameful absolutely despicable so I'm just wondering does council actually want to enforce their procedure bylaw and public decorum at meetings or just ignore that it
69:30 - 70:00 exists go ahead Deputy Mayor yes we have a bylaw in place for a reason I believe that that's what it should be so hopefully without being interrupted I can read the motion that's on the table ready to be voted on please do moved by councelor Miller seconded by councelor kazinski be it resolved that the public be allowed to speak about the agenda items on March 28 2025 those in support councelors Miller and kazinski
70:00 - 70:30 those opposed C was Warren Fuel and terion so denied so that should be it there is there any other motions that we're not aware of there's none then I get a move in a second or to a juring please councilors kazinsky and fuel and the matters adjourned at 10:54 thank
70:30 - 71:00 you record will show that's the good news