In answer to your letter of September 25th NO! I do not agree that a two week period is a "reasonable time" to produce a copy of an audiotape. In 1969 [the year we landed on the moon], the Borough government would have had a hard time defending the need to take two weeks to copy an audiotape--in 2003 there is absolutely no reasonable defense for such a delay. Council Meetings are an integral part of the function of Local Government, and the issues debated and decided affect the lives and welfare of residents. These facts impose on local government a "common law" obligation to afford the general public timely access to the record of such meetings. It is not an unanticipatable circumstance that a resident with a vital interest might, for reasons beyond their control, be unable to attend a given (or any) public council meeting. Evening employment and disability are not recent social developments, and the fair "right" of individuals in such a circumstance "to know" (with certainty) should be, by reason of courtesy alone, respected --the fact that law requires the town to expend the minimum effort (in light of even 20th-century technology) required to, in a timely manner, provide an audio copy of a council meeting should not be an argument I should be obligated to make. In your letter of September 25th you use the word "within". It seems curious that in the September 24th response by Ms. Jones the word "within" is absent, as the text reads, "copies of audio tapes will be provided two (2) weeks after the date of the meeting." I suppose it is just a coincidence that it takes the town as long to copy a tape, as it takes the council to approve its minutes. In light of your, and the clerks, insistence that we communicate in formal written form, this misleading, and apparently sloppy verbiage, really has no excuse, and makes your letter smell of insincere contrivance. I reiterate my intention to pursue legal resolution, if you will not permit reasonable resolution of our disputes regarding fair and timely access to public records. As yet I have received no response to the formal letter sent with my September 13th OPRA request. Beyond what is proposed in that letter, in a telephone conversation with Ms. Jones, I (one of America's poorest citizens) offer to buy the town of Mendham (one of the country’s richest communities) a dubbing cassette recorder. The offer still stands (with the provision that the equipment be returned to me when the town upgrades its equipment or that provision is made for my reimbursement in the 2004 budget) Regarding the "technical problems" it is my understanding that "tape speed" is the impeding issue. I am certain variable speed dubbing recorders are available, and if the town is willing to guarantee my future reimbursement I will put up the money to procure one. As alternative solution, I am willing to accept copies of the tapes at the original accelerated speed and will provide my own means of speed translation.
Signed,
|