Board hears concerns about AI‑generated meeting transcripts; solicitor to draft recording policy

Saucon Valley directors discussed the growing use of automated recordings and AI transcription services after Director Bruhn shared an example of an AI‑generated article he said mischaracterized a recent meeting.

Bruhn told members he received an AI‑generated story that he described as "erroneous, stupid, totally misleading" and urged the board to consider how to protect the public record and prevent misinformation. Solicitor Fitzgerald told the board Pennsylvania is a two‑party consent state only when there is an expectation of privacy, and that public meetings generally carry a low expectation of privacy; however he said policies could govern time, place and manner for recordings in board spaces.

Fitzgerald suggested a practical step districts have used: a press table where people who wish to record place their equipment so the district can ensure a high‑quality, single source recording and limit audience‑side recording that might capture private conversations. He said policy drafting is feasible and offered to prepare a draft policy on recording and AI transcription for future board consideration.

Directors asked for a short, implementable policy that distinguishes board/committee expectations and preserves public access while discouraging misleading third‑party transcripts. Several directors expressed concern about automated stories reaching citizens; one said the district should educate the public about reliable sources and emphasize the official record (board minutes and posted presentations). No binding prohibition on recording in public spaces was adopted; staff and solicitor will draft proposed language for a future meeting.