Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Meeting Technology Audio topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Taos County schedules camera replacement and mock test after citizens cite Open Meetings Act audio problems

2693685 · March 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Taos County meeting staff agreed to a mock meeting to test audio/video and to a camera replacement after citizens alleged the county was not complying with the Open Meetings Act because of poor audio.

Taos County staff agreed to schedule a mock meeting to test audio and to proceed with a camera replacement after citizens raised complaints that the county’s meeting audio did not meet Open Meetings Act requirements.

County staff said the steps are intended to improve live meeting sound and public access ahead of a joint meeting scheduled for the 27th. "There are citizens that are trying to bring a legal act against the county for not having good audio in here, and they're claiming that it oh, what is it again? What are they saying, Anissa? ... Open Meetings Act, and you're not being compliant with the Open Meetings Act," a staff member said during the discussion.

Meeting participants discussed options for smaller-scale tests before the joint meeting. One speaker suggested a director-level test and the group agreed to try a mock meeting with recruited attendees to recreate live conditions and evaluate the system.

Jimmy, identified in the meeting as a staff member, confirmed a date to replace the camera and to test connectivity: "On the 25th, is that the day for me to go up and replace the camera? ... I'll get up there by between about 9 and 10:00 depending on traffic," Jimmy said. Meeting participants said they would make someone available to assist with networking or controller setup and try a larger live test before the 27th.

Participants also noted factors that had affected audio quality, including wind during earlier sessions. Staff said they would report back after the live test to determine whether further changes are needed.

The discussion recorded no formal vote; organizers treated the plans as operational steps to address the audio concerns and to reduce the risk of further Open Meetings Act complaints.