San Juan Bautista officials are maintaining that the city posted
a separate agenda notice regarding its town hall meeting last
Saturday other than a flyer announcing an open discussion, and they
contended Thursday that the second document complies with the
state’s open meetings law.
San Juan Bautista officials are maintaining that the city posted a separate agenda notice regarding its town hall meeting last Saturday other than a flyer announcing an open discussion, and they contended Thursday that the second document complies with the state’s open meetings law.
But the document – labeled as a “notice to the public” and obtained Thursday by the Free Lance through a public records request – did not list off any specific discussion topics. It included the same statement as the flyer divulged before the meeting – calling for a “free exchange of information on issues of community-wide importance” – and it noted how no action will be taken and nothing will be discussed that is pending before the council or planning commission.
The Brown Act, the state’s open meetings law for all legislative bodies, requires that an agenda posted before all public meetings include descriptions of each discussion topic or proposed action at the meeting. It relates to all matters under their city jurisdiction, according to the law. The act’s goal is to allow citizens to have the opportunity to speak on topics of personal interest, and to give the general public an idea of what to expect. An open meetings expert, California Newspaper Publishers Association legal adviser Jim Ewert, explained how there is a lot of “mischief that the Brown Act was designed to stop.”
San Juan council members at Saturday’s meeting openly discussed an array of local issues that were not posted on an agenda – such as an idea to become a charter city, installing traffic cameras or using other speed-control methods, and giving businesses a 5 percent break on water bills if they allow public use of their bathrooms, a scarcity in the Mission City. They also talked openly with the 10 or so residents in attendance – along with the city manager, a public works employee and a sheriff’s deputy – about an increase of graffiti in the city and how the historical building codes are potentially too restrictive, along with other matters. Council members did not take any votes during the meeting, but did direct the city manager to look into a couple of matters, including the idea for a 5 percent break to businesses.
San Juan City Attorney George Thatcher said the agenda notice for a “special meeting” – which is labeled on the document released to the newspaper Thursday, four days after the town hall – is compliant with the law and that it was sent to everyone who receives the city council’s regular agenda. The Free Lance customarily receives San Juan agendas and did get the flyer by e-mail, but did not receive the alternatively formatted notice before the meeting.
The Brown Act also requires legislative bodies to send an agenda for all special meetings, with 24 hours notice, to all residents who have requested to receive such materials.
Thatcher on Monday initially acknowledged the council violated the Brown Act by not posting a compliant agenda, but called the newspaper back that afternoon to explain how City Manager Steve Julian informed him there was a separate agenda notice. Thatcher on Monday had said he would respond by e-mail if the notice and agenda were compliant with the law, but did not do so and later acknowledged sending it to the wrong address. Afterward, he said, he determined it was too late to send the document to the paper.
Two days prior to the meeting, Julian described the format as following the Brown Act and legal under the city’s municipal code. Julian noted that a notice been sent out and that the meeting was compliant with the city attorney’s wishes, but he did not mention before the town hall that there had been a “special meeting” agenda. Before the gathering, Julian called it a “study session” and an open meeting where the citizens can present discussion topics.
“It’s open to the public. It is up to them to say whatever they want,” Julian said at the time, stressing how the city takes steps to prevent violating the Brown Act, which carries possible penalties of a misdemeanor and having all actions at meetings voided.
He noted that the city attorney gave council members a list of “pretty good ground rules” on how to run the town hall meeting. When asked for the list, Julian recommended reading the city’s municipal code.
At the meeting, copies of the flyer had been placed on chairs in the community center, but the other notice to the public was not made available.
After Free Lance editor Kollin Kosmicki announced on the record the meeting was in “clear violation” of the Brown Act and how residents have a right to know what is up for discussion, council members and Julian denied any wrongdoing and pointed to the flyer as a sufficient agenda.
“There is no specific topic,” Julian said holding the flyer. “It’s up to any individual to bring up whatever the heck they want to bring up to the council. It’s up to any council member to bring it up.”
Julian said the town hall format has been in the city’s municipal code for years.
During the meeting, Councilman Tony Boch said officials didn’t set an agenda, and Julian added at the time, “There is no agenda.” Councilwoman Jolene Cosio also made an online comment on a Free Lance story and noted there was no “formal agenda.”
“This meeting was posted as required and the all of the public (including you) was invited,” she wrote in part of the statement, and later confirmed it was her comment. “It was a Town Hall Meeting, which is why there is no formal agenda, (sic) the purpose of the meeting is exactly as the Brown Act suggests, to facilitate public participation in local government decisions.”
In a phone interview Thursday, Cosio said she meant there was no “specific agenda.”
“They mean the same thing,” she said. ” I used specific agenda because that’s how you described it. Right?”
Cosio described the meeting’s agenda as “non-formal.”
The councilwoman on Thursday she had not seen the separate special meeting notice before the town hall.
“I didn’t go around and look for an agenda,” she said.
Below is video from the meeting.
