For the last few years, the City of Stuart had been live streaming their meetings and then had the video available on their website for later viewing. All that stopped a few months ago when the City received a letter from someone purporting to be from South Florida stating that he was hearing impaired. In response, the City quickly removed all videos and no longer streams meetings live.

Many of Stuart’s citizens, and even people apparently outside the City, would watch the meetings via the live stream or videos. I think it was an important service and provided transparency for Stuart’s public meetings. When the City started streaming and having the recordings on their website, it allowed government to be closer to the people.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II, which pertains to local and state government, reasonable accommodations must be made. The then City Manager made the decision to remove the videos and discontinue live streaming. It was, in my opinion under the circumstances, the right move. But where does the City go from here?

David Dyess, the new Interim Manager, is fairly technologically proficient. If anyone can find a solution to this dilemma, it is Dyess. It will require spending some resources. The question will become how much a municipality spends to be able to communicate with its citizens. In my cursory research it didn’t seem that a solution would be beyond the City’s budget.

I understand the purpose and intent of the ADA, and most Americans support its implementation. But does it make sense to penalize every Stuart citizen, resident and interested party because of one letter and the intended fear of a lawsuit? I don’t know the answer to that question, but I suspect it is a justifiable fear.

I do know that currently the City Commission has a problem with the perception of transparency. Citizens not being able to see how this local government operates doesn’t help that perception. Perhaps some may even like it that way.