For public boards of education and local government councils, livestreamed meetings are a powerful tool for engaging the community and building trust. They are also, increasingly, a legal requirement for public-facing boards.
At the federal level, the Open Meetings Act requires disclosure of records and meetings. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) stipulates detailed requirements for in-person and virtual accessibility, from captions to sign language interpretation.
At the state and local levels, however, policies vary widely, with a mosaic of jurisdictional norms and requirements that seem to change by the day.
An overview follows of livestreaming regulations in the U.S., diving deeper into:
Legal compliance is just one of many reasons your board should embrace livestreamed public meetings.
Importantly, livestreaming provides the transparency and accountability that build community trust. It allows the public to participate in meetings and events even if they cannot attend in person, making meetings accessible to individuals with disabilities, those who live far from the meeting location or those who have scheduling conflicts.
After the fact, video archives provide a digital record that can be accessed for future reference. This means that members of your community can see how decisions are being made on their behalf, with an openly available record of who said what.
"Embracing livestreamed meetings is not merely about compliance; it’s about cultivating transparency and trust within our communities. As regulations continue to evolve, school boards and local governments must adapt to ensure accessibility and engagement for all. By doing so, we not only meet legal requirements but also strengthen community engagement and encourage greater participation." - Kristin Karel, Sales Director for Public Sector Governance at Diligent Corporation
Get our latest public sector regulations outlook report and avoid costly surprises with expert-backed, actionable guidance.
Legal requirements for livestreaming public meetings vary widely from state to state, with more and more states requiring this practice or entertaining proposals for such a mandate.
Live meeting feeds and archived recordings are increasingly becoming the rule of law across the United States. The following states now have active requirements:
Indiana now requires elected school boards, state agencies, county commissions and city, town and township councils to livestream public meetings and archive recordings for at least 90 days. The requirement, under Indiana's Open Door Law (IC 5-14-1.5-2.9), took effect on July 1, 2025. Note: The requirement applies to boards with elected members. Unelected school boards, state universities and committee-only meetings are exempt. Meeting notices must include the URL for the livestream.
Colorado enacted HB 24-1168 (Equal Access to Public Meetings), which has been in force since July 1, 2025. The law requires state and local public bodies to livestream any meeting at which public business is discussed, formal action may be taken or public comment will be heard. Remote public testimony must also be accommodated. Exceptions apply for meetings held in areas without broadband access. Smaller communities (under 1,000 eligible electors) face less stringent requirements.
Maryland's Local Boards of Elections Transparency Act (HB 412) was signed into law on May 6, 2025 and took effect June 1, 2025. It requires local boards of elections to livestream all open meetings and maintain complete archived recordings for five years. Note: This law applies specifically to local boards of elections, not public boards generally.
Montana government boards are required to record public meetings. The core requirement (MCA 2-3-214) covers major state boards including the Board of Investments, Public Employees' Retirement Board, Teachers' Retirement Board, Board of Public Education and Board of Regents of Higher Education, as well as county and city governing boards and school district boards of trustees. A 2025 amendment (HB 393) extended the requirement to towns with populations over 300, in audio format, with recordings posted within 14 business days.
Vermont's Act 133 (2024) is a permanent amendment to the Open Meeting Law, in force since July 1, 2024. State nonadvisory public bodies must hold hybrid meetings and electronically record all meetings. Local nonadvisory bodies must record meetings in audio or video and post recordings in a designated electronic location for at least 30 days after official minutes are posted. A 2025 amendment (Act 51) further requires recordings to be posted when minutes are posted, rather than when they are approved.
Arizona city government requires a live audio feed if in-person meeting attendance spills into overflow rooms beyond the original facility.
Arkansas gives public boards options: A sound-only recording, a video recording with sound and picture or digital or analog broadcast capable of being recorded.
Iowa requires access "by telephone or fiber optics."
Oregon requires school and education service districts and community colleges to video record meetings and post recordings online within seven days. An audio recording is permitted where broadband internet access is unavailable.
Washington State requires all school districts to save audio recordings of school board meetings for at least one year.
California enacted SB 707 (signed October 3, 2025), which modernises the Brown Act, the state's foundational open meetings law. From January 1, 2026, eligible legislative body members may participate by teleconference as a disability accommodation. From July 1, 2026, eligible bodies must offer the public the ability to attend all open meetings via a two-way telephonic or audiovisual platform. The law runs until January 1, 2030.
Watch the landscape closely. A state may currently have no official requirements for meeting recordings, but this situation could change quickly with new technologies, shifting norms and public sentiment.
Look at what other municipal and public education boards are doing to engage their stakeholders and build transparency in their work. Draw from their examples to shape your own activities.
Finally, keep a close eye on the fine details related to virtual participation and recordings. Some of these can be very specific, as the following examples demonstrate.
“Livestreaming has become a staple of local government and public education — citizens and community members expect to have access to meetings and conversations among their elected leaders. Livestreaming gives leaders a chance to display transparency and foster trust among their constituents. And in today’s digital world, people rely on the ability to be able to watch a stream for a meeting they might not be able to attend live.” - Brian Lee, VP of Sales + Customer Success, BoxCast
With more and more members of the public carrying a portable video device in the form of their smartphone, you'll need to be aware of these rules. In Alabama and Pennsylvania, meeting attendees are allowed to record a public meeting as long as their actions are not disruptive.
Idaho authorises audio conference calls if at least one member of the governing body is present at the physical meeting location and if the meeting is audible to all members in attendance. Tennessee similarly allows "internet forums," as long as they don't "act as a substitute for decision making by a governing body at a meeting held in accordance with the Tennessee Open Meetings Act."
In Washington State, all school districts must save audio recordings of school board meetings for at least one year. In Oregon, school and education service districts and community colleges must video record meetings and post recordings online within seven days, with an audio recording allowed if broadband internet access is unavailable.
Florida rules for virtual meetings prioritise accessibility: "Enable closed caption if available especially if conducting a live stream video via Facebook or YouTube." West Virginia allows speaker phone or a computer with audio or video feed in a city council meeting room, but with the caveat that "steps should be taken to ensure that members of the public and press are able to hear meeting participants." Texas' rules for city council meetings require that "each participant's face in the videoconference call, while speaking, must be clearly visible and audible to each other participant and, during the open portion of the meeting, to the members of the public in attendance."
Avoid compliance pitfalls and public frustration with livestreaming that is open, interactive and easy to follow, no matter where your audience is.
As a board secretary or clerk, it’s your job to know the rules of the road, from data privacy concerns and copyright issues to public notifications and beyond. And even if your official job title isn’t AV manager, you’re responsible for technical details like the quality of the stream, the reliability of the platform, and the security of the data transmitted.
How do you make sure your livestreamed meetings meet the compliance requirements of regulators and the needs of your community?
After checking overall livestreaming requirements at the federal, state and local levels, delve deeper into details like:
Your house rules may need to adapt to livestreaming technologies and virtual participation. This means you’ll need to take a look at things like:
As the regulatory landscape continues to take shape, execution matters. Don't let connectivity and IT glitches annoy your community, weaken your credibility and threaten public trust.
Before you start livestreaming, go through a technical walk-through with your IT and AV teammates to review:
After each meeting, consider gathering feedback from community members and meeting participants about their experiences. Also look at audience engagement metrics such as viewership numbers to guide future efforts.
You've read about the trends. You have the tools and tactics. Now it's time to bring technology into the equation.
It may be tempting to turn to a general-use videoconferencing service or social media streaming platform. For security and compliance reasons alone, resist this temptation.
A specialised livestreaming platform, integrated into a comprehensive governance platform, will deliver the quality, scalability and confidence you need, along with seamless administration.
Diligent Community delivers all of these benefits and more, combining super-reliable live HD video backed by best-in-class provider BoxCast with Livestream Manager into a meeting experience that pleases regulators, board members and your community, now and as the landscape evolves. Schedule a demo today.
Schedule a demo today.
Title II‑ready meeting video, all in one place in Diligent Community
Discover how Livestream Manager for Diligent Community revolutionizes public meeting recordings by ensuring compliance with ADA Title II and WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards. With a single, accessible platform that seamlessly links agendas, livestreams, and transcripts, teams can enhance transparency while simplifying the management of meeting content. Experience a streamlined, governed approach to public records that ensures accuracy and accessibility for all.
